# "Real Thanksgiving," a "poem" by billcihak



## elder999 (May 7, 2011)

So, I was inspired by Make the Pie Higher for this, 

I know you'll be sad, but Darth was a dem. not a republican. 
I would suggest you engage in heavy drinking 
Just want to say I am not trying to turn this into an abortion thing
It is just that it is not only the womans body, 
there is the other body inside.
No more for me on the abortion thing
I would suggest you engage in heavy drinking 

There are numerous checks on who gets sent to gitmo
If he is captured and they know he has info. 
waterboard him
THIS IS NOT THE WAY THE C.I.A. CONDUCTED WATERBOARDING
I support cutting flesh, filling stomachs with water and jumping on them, 
pulling fingernails, using electrodes and other types of actual torture 
Let me try. 
See how that works out there? 
I would suggest you engage in heavy drinking 

Would you march with the Klan?
Please, let me have it granfire, I can't wait. 
National socialists are in fact socialists as are 
communists who are international socialists. 
Chicken.
I would suggest you engage in heavy drinking 

Did the unions help kill the soap opera? 
college course, does it teach union thuggery?
Some dare call it rationing,
Real thanksgiving

The mythical nature of early peoples is the problem. Treat them like people, not saints
The Truth About the First Thanksgiving.. remember an account that I read
communal efforts rarely succeed
communal efforts rarely succeed
communal efforts rarely succeed
Yeah, communal efforts rarely succeed
I would suggest you engage in heavy drinking 

Again, National socialists are socialists
communism, fascism, and national socialism are all socialism
I would suggest you engage in heavy drinking 
Real thanksgiving



[


----------



## billc (May 7, 2011)

By jove, I think you've got it Elder.  And here I didn't think you were paying attention.  Nice job.


----------



## billc (May 7, 2011)

You didn't put anything in the poem about liberals in hollywood, I think that would have helped round out the poem.  You could mention some of the people I disagree with, that might make it more interesting to some of the people I have had the longest debates with.  


****The fact that you didn't once mention Blade 96 is really a travesty.  If there is one poster that should get recognition it is her.  She at least recongnizes my humor, if not my genius.  You could also mention long suffering Tez.  She doesn't like me much but mentioning her would round out the poem and give it a touch of seriousness.*****

****Yeah, you really need to mention Blade 96******

****Now they may not agree with me but I think Big Don,  Twin fist, Crushing, Cryozombie and lucky boxer could use a mention as well.  ****

***Elder, you and Bill Mattocks, should also be mentioned.  A man should be measured by his opponents as well as his friends.  And the also long suffering Bob the man who really made that poem possible deserves some kudos as well, don't you think.

It may be unwieldly with all the extra material, but you could pull it off if you tried.

Thanks Elder, nice work.


----------



## Tez3 (May 8, 2011)

Like doesn't come into it I'm afraid, as Canuck did I lost family in the Nazi camps, all my mother's family, she was the only survivor so I grew up with no maternal relatives. This makes the socialist/facist/nazi thing very real for me and not at all amusing. What I do appreciate from you however is that you don't make it into a personal argument, I have enough with one hatemonger chasing me and it's tiresome. I do wish you'd study your history though


----------



## Cryozombie (May 8, 2011)

Dude, thats awesome.  Do me next!


----------



## granfire (May 8, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Like doesn't come into it I'm afraid, as Canuck did I lost family in the Nazi camps, all my mother's family, she was the only survivor so I grew up with no maternal relatives. This makes the socialist/facist/nazi thing very real for me and not at all amusing. What I do appreciate from you however is that you don't make it into a personal argument, I have enough with one hatemonger chasing me and it's tiresome. I do wish you'd study your history though



It is seemingly an impossible concept to grasp for some that to a lot of people, still, this is not a mere footnote in a history book, but very much close to home and part of the family history.


----------



## Tez3 (May 8, 2011)

granfire said:


> It is seemingly an impossible concept to grasp for some that to a lot of people, still, this is not a mere footnote in a history book, but very much close to home and part of the family history.


 
Indeed, you are correct, only a couple of days ago one of the last surviving servicemen of the First World War died. It's easy to forget that there are a great many people still alive who witnessed at first hand what some just think of as 'history'. That's why statements should be made with great care, for every starement Bill makes on socialism etc there are hundreds of thousands of people who lived through and knew intimately the actual circumstances. It's why it's worth reading and listening to eye witness statements rather than media pundits.


----------



## granfire (May 8, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Indeed, you are correct, only a couple of days ago one of the last surviving servicemen of the First World War died. It's easy to forget that there are a great many people still alive who witnessed at first hand what some just think of as 'history'. That's why statements should be made with great care, for every starement Bill makes on socialism etc there are hundreds of thousands of people who lived through and knew intimately the actual circumstances. It's why it's worth reading and listening to eye witness statements rather than media pundits.




Indeed. History books have always been subject to interpretation. The sources are pure tho.
To get to the actual events you have to sift your way through what the people of the time left behind! (and the Nazis left A LOT behind!)

And frankly, socialists and communists were in pretty much the same boat as Jews 'back then', so calling Hitler a socialist is like spitting on a few mass graves!


----------



## billc (May 8, 2011)

Hitler killed communists because they were his direct competition for the socialists in germany.  Many german socialists went with hitler because he didn't believe in the international model of socialism.  He wanted to be in charge of germany.  He didn't care about spreading socialism to the larger world.  You could ask some polish survivors how the communists behaved before worldwar 2 and then after the communists drove out the national socialists.   The stories are virtually the same.


----------



## granfire (May 8, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Hitler killed communists because they were his direct competition for the socialists in germany.  Many german socialists went with hitler because he didn't believe in the international model of socialism.  He wanted to be in charge of germany.  He didn't care about spreading socialism to the larger world.  You could ask some polish survivors how the communists behaved before worldwar 2 and then after the communists drove out the national socialists.   The stories are virtually the same.



billi

do not talk of tings you have no knowledge.

Socialists: poor people
national socialist: poor middle class and upper class

polish survivors: leave them out of this. A slavic ethnicity they were deemed lesser beings. Good for working but nothing else...

in other terms: shush, you know nothing and what's worse, you don't care to learn anything...


----------



## billc (May 8, 2011)

The polish people suffered under the socialists of germany and russia.  You might want to crack a history book yourself.


----------



## CanuckMA (May 8, 2011)

granfire said:


> It is seemingly an impossible concept to grasp for some that to a lot of people, still, this is not a mere footnote in a history book, but very much close to home and part of the family history.


 
Indeed. A few weeks ago we observed Passover. The entire family gathered for the Seder. All 10 of us. my mother, sister ane one nephew could not join us. That would have made 14. Sum total of the extended family because my parents and my wife's parents were all that survived the Nazis. History is very much alive, and will be for some generarions to come.


----------



## billc (May 8, 2011)

Hmmmm...Perhaps the nobel prize winning economist Friedrich August von Hayek, who was there when hitler was coming into power can explain to you why hitler was a socialist...from 1933:

http://www.brookesnews.com/091910hayeknazis.html

From nobel prize winning economist Friedrich Hayek:


*Nazism is Socialism**


Friedrich August von Hayek
BrookesNews.Com
Monday 19 October 2009 _Published in the spring of 1933_ 

The persecution of the Marxists, and of democrats in general, tends to obscure the fundamental fact that National "Socialism" is a genuine socialist movement, whose leading ideas are the final fruit of the anti-liberal tendencies which have been steadily gaining ground in Germany since the later part of the Bismarckian era, and which led the majority of the German intelligentsia first to "socialism of the chair" and later to Marxism in its social-democratic or communist form.

One of the main reasons why the socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized, is, no doubt, its alliance with the nationalist groups which represent the great industries and the great landowners. But this merely proves that these groups too, as they have since learnt to their bitter disappointment, have, at least partly, been mistaken as to the nature of the movement. But only partly because, and this is the most characteristic feature of modern Germany, many capitalists are themselves strongly influenced by socialistic ideas, and have not sufficient belief in capitalism to defend it with a clear conscience.


But, in spite of this, the German entrepreneur class have manifested almost incredible short-sightedness in allying themselves with a movement of whose strong anti-capitalistic tendencies there should never have been any doubt. A careful observer must always have been aware that the opposition of the Nazis to the established socialist parties, which gained them the sympathy of the entrepreneur, was only to a very small extent directed against their economic policy. What the Nazis mainly objected to was their internationalism and all the aspects of their cultural programme which were still influenced by liberal ideas. But the accusations against the social-democrats and the communists which were most effective in their propaganda were not so much directed against their programme as against their supposed practice &#8212; their corruption and nepotism, and even their alleged alliance with "the golden International of Jewish Capitalism."

******It would, indeed, hardly have been possible for the Nationalists to advance fundamental objections to the economic policy of the other socialist parties when their own published programme differed from these only in that its socialism was much cruder and less rational. The famous 25 points drawn up by Herr Feder, one of Hitler's early allies, repeatedly endorsed by Hitler and recognized by the by-laws of the National-Socialist party as the immutable basis of all its actions, which together with an extensive commentary is circulating throughout Germany in many hundreds of thousands of copies, is full of ideas resembling those of the early socialists. 
But the dominant feature is a fierce hatred of anything capitalistic-individualistic profit seeking, large scale enterprise, banks, joint-stock companies, department stores, "international finance and loan capital," the system of "interest slavery" in general; the abolition of these is described as the "basis of the programme, around which everything else turns." It was to this programme that the masses of the German people, who were already completely under the influence of collectivist ideas, responded so enthusiastically.

*****
That this violent anti-capitalistic attack is genuine, and not a mere piece of propaganda, becomes as clear from the personal history of the intellectual leaders of the movement as from the general milieu from which it springs. It is not even denied that many of the young men who today play a prominent part in it have previously been communists or socialists.


----------



## billc (May 8, 2011)

So please, Hitler was a lefty and a socialist regardless of what some on the study keep trying to say.  I have 3 ph.d's in economics and another writer who has a ph.d. who all say hitler was a lefty and a socialist.  You may not believe me but you  should take what they say seriously, since Hayek and Mises were there at the start of Hitler and his national socialists.


----------



## billc (May 8, 2011)

another view:

http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/id9.html
*HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST* 



John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.)


*The context of Nazism* 
"True, it is a fixed idea with the French that the Rhine is their property, but to this arrogant demand the only reply worthy of the German nation is Arndt's: "Give back Alsace and Lorraine". For I am of the opinion, perhaps in contrast to many whose standpoint I share in other respects, that the reconquest of the German-speaking left bank of the Rhine is a matter of national honour, and that the Germanisation of a disloyal Holland and of Belgium is a political necessity for us. Shall we let the German nationality be completely suppressed in these countries, while the Slavs are rising ever more powerfully in the East?"​Have a look at the quote immediately above and say who wrote it. It is a typical Hitler rant, is it not? Give it to 100 people who know Hitler's speeches and 100 would identify it as something said by Adolf. The fierce German nationalism and territorial ambition is unmistakeable. And if there is any doubt, have a look at another quote from the same author: 
This is our calling, that we shall become the templars of this Grail, gird the sword round our loins for its sake and stake our lives joyfully in the last, holy war which will be followed by the thousand-year reign of freedom.​That settles it, doesn't it? Who does not know of Hitler's glorification of military sacrifice and his aim to establish a "thousand-year _Reich_"? 

But neither quote is in fact from Hitler. Both quotes were written by Friedrich Engels, Karl Marx's co-author (See here and here). So let that be an introduction to the idea that Hitler not only called himself a socialist but that he WAS in fact a socialist by the standards of his day. Ideas that are now condemned as Rightist were in Hitler's day perfectly normal ideas among Leftists. And if Friedrich Engels was not a Leftist, I do not know who would be.


----------



## granfire (May 8, 2011)

billcihak said:


> another view:
> 
> http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/id9.html
> *HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST*
> ...




And again, you are spitting on the many graves left behind by Hitler's men, containing many socialists and Communists.

Increasing the fond size and bolding it STILL does not make it true. 

Back under your bridge!


----------



## billc (May 9, 2011)

First, you obviously did not attempt to read the paper by PH.D. John Ray because that is the font size for the Hitler was a socialist.  Had you, you would have seen the enlarged font sized title and an indepth look at the national socialists, with an index at the bottom that makes it easier to get to the important points about national socialism and why people try to claim it isn't socialism.

Second, wow, don't argue your case because hitler, along with 12-15 million other people he murdered, also killed socialists, and it will make people feel bad.  I didn't kill all those people, the socialist Hitler did.  too many people falsely believe that hilter was not a socialist and the documents tha I have, written by several econoists  point directly to the fact that hitler was a socialist.  Try to argue the facts, and please don't try to silence my opinion with the deaths hitler caused.


----------



## Empty Hands (May 9, 2011)

billcihak said:


> First, you obviously did not attempt to read the paper by PH.D. John Ray because that is the font size for the Hitler was a socialist.



I have a Ph.D. too.  Why won't you listen to a damn thing I say?


----------



## billc (May 9, 2011)

Because you are wrong.


----------



## granfire (May 9, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> I have a Ph.D. too.  Why won't you listen to a damn thing I say?



I listen to you, Honey, and I don't even know what your PhD is about...

However, I have been exposed to a whole lot more of the Hitler than most of you guys (especially billi) worked on a piece about his life, at the time I had about 7 books about him on my nightstand, biographies and analysis of his life and works. And guess what: Not a single one said he was socialist. Using some of the tools, yes, but not in ideology. 

Of course, to understand that you would have to know something about the society he sprung from. 

So in a nutshell: 
billi, you pull out a 'source' I tend to laugh first, then ignore: Your contributions are all along the same line, usually flawed beyond recognition, 100% bias. 
Naturally, when you live so far on the right fringe to make a centrist look like a left wing anarchist, you have to worry about the neighborhood. But rest assure, the globe has not changed much in the last 80 years: What was right wing then is still on the right now.


----------



## Empty Hands (May 9, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Because you are wrong.



Then quit saying Ph.D. like it means anything to you.  You are quoting him because he agrees with you, not because he has a Ph.D.


----------



## Empty Hands (May 9, 2011)

granfire said:


> I listen to you, Honey, and I don't even know what your PhD is about...



That makes me feel better, at least someone is.


----------



## billc (May 9, 2011)

Actually, I am posting their articles because one, I came to my conclusions about hitler and socialism on my own, however, I am just someone on the internet.  People on the left here on the study say I don't know what I am talking about, they say "everyone knows Hitler was a facist, hitler was on the right," well, apparently at least 4 PH.D's think that hitler was on the left and was a socialist.  It isn't just me who thinks that and you can disagree with me all you want, it is a free country, but the idea that Hitler was a socialist is not out of bounds.

read the two articles, and you will see that the questions about Hitler and socialism are addressed.


----------



## Nomad (May 9, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Actually, I am posting their articles because one, I came to my conclusions about hitler and socialism on my own, however, I am just someone on the internet.  People on the left here on the study say I don't know what I am talking about, they say "everyone knows Hitler was a facist, hitler was on the right," well, apparently at least 4 PH.D's think that hitler was on the left and was a socialist.  It isn't just me who thinks that and you can disagree with me all you want, it is a free country, but the idea that Hitler was a socialist is not out of bounds.
> 
> read the two articles, and you will see that the questions about Hitler and socialism are addressed.



I'm willing to bet we can find more than 4 Ph.D.'s here on MartialTalk that will tell you that those other 4 Ph.D.'s are full of crap.

Empty Hands is one, I'll happily volunteer to go second.  Any other takers?


----------



## elder999 (May 9, 2011)

Nomad said:


> I'm willing to bet we can find more than 4 Ph.D.'s here on MartialTalk that will tell you that those other 4 Ph.D.'s are full of crap.
> 
> Empty Hands is one, I'll happily volunteer to go second. Any other takers?


 
Been telling him that since Thanksgiving, but my PhD. is in physics, and Empty's is in biology,so they don't really count.

Of course, I don't know that a PhD. in eceonomics counts anymore for this issue, either.

Dr. Ray's PhD. is in behavioral psychology, so I don't know how that is relevant.

Couldn't find the other two that billi was talking about, so I guess that puts us up one completely irrelevant PhD. to his two completely irrelevant ones....:lol:


----------



## billc (May 9, 2011)

A few PH.D's from a variety of fields who say that the Nazis were socialists:

Thomas Sowell, PH.D.  Economics university of chicago
Friedrich von Hayek PH.D. Economics and nobel prize winner
Leonard Peikoff PH.D. Philosophy, heir to Ayn Rands estate
Rudy J Rummel PH.D. Political science Author, Death by Government
Walter E. Williams Ph.D. economics former chair of the economics department of George mason university
Ludwig von Mises PH.D. in economics
John Ray Ph.D in behavioral psychology
Jacques Ellul, proffesor of law, leader of the french resistance

I have article by each of these men that discusses Nazis, national socialism, as both lefty's and socialists.  the point that should be noticed is that the theory of nazis being socialists is not something that I came up with off the top of my head or made up.  You can disagree with me or them, but their is obviously a case to be made when I say the nazis were leftists and socialists.


----------



## billc (May 9, 2011)

Of course, John Ray, Ph.D. in behavioral Psychology, states that the push back from the left about the nazis and their claims that the nazis were not lefties or socialists is probably due to the fact that they do not want people to realize that the biggest mass murderers in the 20th century were all lefties and socialists.


another article about nazis and socialism:

http://thepathtotyranny.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/the-socialist-promises-of-the-nazis/

From the author Michael E. Newton from his book " The Path to Tryanny"


Many today believe that the Nazis were capitalists, despite the evidence of Nazism&#8217;s socialist roots and agenda. Jacques Ellul, a leader of the French Resistance in World War II, philosopher, and law professor, writes, &#8220;The dogmatic and elementary interpretation of Nazism as having been conceived by capitalists to counter communism, and a bourgeois tool in the class struggle, has gained incredibly broad acceptance as a self-evident fact, despite its contradiction of fact. Even after his alliance with certain capitalists, Hitler controlled them as much as they did him.&#8221;[769] In 1927, Hitler said, &#8220;We are socialists, we are enemies of today&#8217;s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.&#8221;[770]

As the name implies, the National Socialist German Workers Party was founded primarily to promote socialism in Germany. National Socialism originally stood for partial collectivism aimed primarily at large industrial corporations, leading financial institutions, and wealthy landowners, as detailed in the party&#8217;s Twenty-Five Points of 1920.[767] The Twenty-Five Points included the following socialist demands:[768]

&#8220;Every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood.&#8221;
&#8220;All unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.&#8221;
&#8220;Total confiscation of all war profits.&#8221;
&#8220;Nationalization of all trusts.&#8221;
&#8220;Profit-sharing in large industries.&#8221;
&#8220;Increase in old-age pensions.&#8221;
&#8220;Communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople.&#8221;
&#8220;A law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose.&#8221;
&#8220;The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.&#8221;
&#8220;Usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.&#8221;
&#8220;The State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people.&#8221;
&#8220;Specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.&#8221;
&#8220;COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD.&#8221;


----------



## Empty Hands (May 9, 2011)

Every single one of them is a conservative political activist.  You wouldn't accept the words of a handful of activist liberal academics, like say Zinn or Chomsky.  So again, you are quoting them because they agree with you, not because you respect their scholarship.

However many political activists you manage to dig up, it can never stack up against the thousands upon thousands of non-political activist academics, authors and educators that have properly described Naziism and fascism as reactionary for the past 80 or so years.

Of course, this has all been explained to you before.  You have somehow convinced yourself that small republican government, low taxes and other parochial Republican positions in the 21st century are the very definition of conservatism, which leads us to the absurd position that a monarchist in 17th century France or a theocrat in modern Saudi Arabia are not in fact conservatives.  You have no understanding what the term actually means, so any conclusions you would care to draw based on that understanding are necessarily flawed from conception.


----------



## Nomad (May 10, 2011)

elder999 said:


> Been telling him that since Thanksgiving, but my PhD. is in physics, and Empty's is in biology,so they don't really count.
> 
> Of course, I don't know that a PhD. in eceonomics counts anymore for this issue, either.
> 
> ...



Mine's in Organic chemistry.  Completely relevant to the topic at hand. 

But that's kind of the point.  Stating that the author has a Ph.D. is somehow supposed to lend weight to his or her words in spite of the fact that said Ph.D. may be completely irrelevant to the topic at hand and the undeniable fact that possession of a Ph.D. does not in any way mean you're not a crackpot.


----------



## billc (May 10, 2011)

A small correction on Friedrich hayek:

from wikipedia--Education and career
At the University of Vienna, he earned doctorates in law and political science in 1921 and 1923 respectively, and he also studied philosophy, psychology, and economics. For a short time, when the University of Vienna closed, Hayek studied in Constantin von Monakow's Institute of Brain Anatomy, where Hayek spent much of his time staining brain cells. Hayek's time in Monakow's lab, and his deep interest in the work of Ernst Mach, inspired Hayek's first intellectual project, eventually published as _The Sensory Order_ (1952). It located connective learning at the physical and neurological levels, rejecting the "sense data" associationism[_clarification needed_] of the empiricists and logical positivists. Hayek presented his work to the private seminar he had created with Herbert Furth called the Geistkreis.[7]

In 1974 Hayek shared the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics (with Swedish economist Gunnar Myrdal) for his "pioneering work in the theory of money and economic fluctuations and [his] penetrating analysis of the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena."[3] He also received the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1991 from president George H. W. Bush.[4]


----------



## billc (May 10, 2011)

I think I have answered the point that although I am just a guy on the internet, there are serious thinkers, men of great education and wisdom who also believe that the nazis (national socialists) were actually socialists.  Now, you can disagree with that, you can debate that but to say I don't know what I am talking about with nazis and socialism is silly.


----------



## billc (May 10, 2011)

From widipedia:

*Socialism* is an economic system...

From wikidpedia we learn that socialism is an economic system so the people who may have studied economic systems in depth would be....PH.D's in economics.

Walter E. williams PH.D. economics
Thomas Sowell PH.D. in economics
Ludwig von Mises Ph.D. in economics

In the least these guys might know something about socialism, what it is and what it isn't. Thomas Sowell started out his career as a marxist communist who eventually saw how silly it was. Apparently, some on the study think that Ph.D. in economics from the Universtiy of Chicago is little better than getting an associates degree from a local junior college. You guys will believe your guys I will believe mine. What isn't up for debate is that some really smart people also think that the nazis are socialists. Debate it, hate it, but don't doubt that there is an argument to be made.

Thomas Sowell:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell
Friedrich von Hayek: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_von_Hayek
Walter E. williams: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_E._Williams
Ludwig von mises: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises
Leonard Peikoff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Peikoff

Yes, aren't they all just a bunch of crack pots.

An article by Rudy Rummel, author "Death by Government."

http://democraticpeace.wordpress.com/2009/05/23/hitler-was-a-socialist/  **A PH.D in political Science, of course that wouldn't have any bearing on socialism as a system of government.**

Hitlers _National Socialism_ was state socialism at its worse. It not only shared the socialism of fascism, but was explicitly racist. In this it differs from the state socialism of Burma today, and that of some African and Arab dictatorships.


----------



## Tez3 (May 10, 2011)

Bill you are still just quoting other people. Endless quotes from people who's politics as far as I can see are the polar opposite of socialism and they seem to feel the need like yourself to paint everything bad in the world as the fault of the socialists. Of course your lot are going to paint Hitler and the Nazis as socialists, you want to portray socialism as the Great Satan of political systems. It's sad, pointless and just wrong.

There are so many things you touch on but have no idea about, I think you may need to look up the French Resistance before you start quoting any of their leaders as experts on socialism. 
What's your take on the Spainish fascists under Franco then? More socialists? perhaps you could explain then why the communists were fighting him? On second thoughts no don't bother, I really don't need more fairy stories.

You know I could agree with you but I'd be wrong too then.


----------



## Empty Hands (May 10, 2011)

billcihak said:


> You guys will believe your guys I will believe mine.



It's sad that knowledge comes down to such for you.  True scholarship assesses the evidence, and then draws a conclusion based on the preponderance of the evidence.  True scholarship is not choosing what to believe, and then finding evidence to support your position while ignoring the rest.  Nor is it selective appeals to authority.

I don't need "my guys" to tell me about the politics of fascism.  I've read dozens of histories of Nazi Germany from multiple authors and viewpoints, none of which made political conclusions.  From that knowledge it isn't hard to figure out what they were, especially if you actually know what "reactionary" means or that the sum total of conservatism is not defined by a particular subset of views of the Republican party in the United States in 2011.

Ask "your guys" to explain the Night of the Long Knives if the Nazis were leftists.  Ask them to explain why the land redistribution and other socialist planks of the early party platform were never, _ever _acted upon.  Ask them to explain the critical alliance between Hitler and entrenched business interests and the entrenched aristocratic military elite.  Ask them to explain how the yearning for a return to a mythic past and the rejection of modernism could _ever _be considered leftism, when that yearning and that rejection is the _sine qua non _of conservatism.  

Ask them when their politics became more important to them than the truth.


----------



## billc (May 10, 2011)

Yeah, I'm sure none of those PH.D types did any of that research stuff you talk about.  Probably just made it all up in their heads.  Wow, and I thought that the University of Chicago was a good school.  They must just give PH.D's away.  Guess I was wrong.  And that Nobel prize stuff, they can't fool us anymore.  Thanks, you have really opened my eyes.


----------



## elder999 (May 10, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Yeah, I'm sure none of those PH.D types did any of that research stuff you talk about. Probably just made it all up in their heads. Wow, and I thought that the University of Chicago was a good school. They must just give PH.D's away. Guess I was wrong. And that Nobel prize stuff, they can't fool us anymore. Thanks, you have really opened my eyes.


 

Yes, they must, indeed, know more about Nazism than Adolph Hitler:



> "Our adopted term Socialist has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true Socialism is not.", Adolph Hitler, _Sunday Express_, September 28, 1930.


----------



## elder999 (May 11, 2011)

I am just a guy on the internet.
There are serious thinkers,
probably just made it all up in their heads.
Men of great education and wisdom
didn't kill all those people
the socialist Hitler did.
Debate it, hate it,
You guys will believe your guys
 I will believe mine.


----------



## Empty Hands (May 11, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Yeah, I'm sure none of those PH.D types did any of that research stuff you talk about.  Probably just made it all up in their heads.



They didn't have to make it up, all they had to do was ignore countervailing evidence.  It can happen to PhD's, especially ones with a political agenda.  Otherwise, how do you explain the fact that they are overwhelmingly outnumbered in the academy in their conclusions?

Oh yeah, it's all those OTHER thousands of PhDs who are politically biased, and the brave handful of truth-tellers that just so happen to have come to a conclusion that flatters your political views are the unbiased ones.

See also: global warming.


----------



## Tez3 (May 11, 2011)

Having a Phd. only proves that the person has studied and has expertise in their subject, it doesn't mean they are necessarily deep thinkers or have any expertise at all outside their field. One could argue that often it doesn't mean they have any intellectual reasoning at all depending on the subject they take. Someone amazingly good at mathematics could be a complete dunce with anything else. You simply can't say that because this person has a Phd. that they are intellectually correct when everyone else is wrong.

Is 'research' better then that people's living memories? Of living through and seeing everyday the horrors or is it better just to read a book and draw conclusions based on your own political viewpoint?

As for Hitler being a communist/socialist as had been said before ...'Reichstag', from that you can see how much the Nazis loved the communists, in fact just about as much as they loved the Jews, the gays, the handicapped etc etc.


----------



## granfire (May 11, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Having a Phd. only proves that the person has studied and has expertise in their subject, it doesn't mean they are necessarily deep thinkers or have any expertise at all outside their field. One could argue that often it doesn't mean they have any intellectual reasoning at all depending on the subject they take. Someone amazingly good at mathematics could be a complete dunce with anything else. You simply can't say that because this person has a Phd. that they are intellectually correct when everyone else is wrong.
> 
> Is 'research' better then that people's living memories? Of living through and seeing everyday the horrors or is it better just to read a book and draw conclusions based on your own political viewpoint?
> 
> As for Hitler being a communist/socialist as had been said before ...'Reichstag', from that you can see how much the Nazis loved the communists, in fact just about as much as they loved the Jews, the gays, the handicapped etc etc.



eh, met some of the academia...ain't impressed much.

I know of a professor....his subject was addiction. He did a lot of research - his wine cellar was well stocked. He made an interesting discovery: Asians can't become alcoholics. 

Other than that...he was a jerk and in some aspects oblivious to worse...

In any case, of all the things that _can _be reinterpreted, Hitler and his goons are NOT one of them. And not the least reason being that they documented _everything_ in detail.
Hitler is probably the only politician in history who said what he was going to do in his campaign and actually kept his word....too bad the people thought he was lying like the rest of them....
He spend much of his early years - when he was supposed to study - in the theater watching Wagner operas. Hardly anything progressive...he studied how to bamboozle people, and he did that well. He spend hours in front of his mirror to practice his speeches, gestic and all. He told the people what they wanted to hear.


----------



## crushing (May 11, 2011)

elder999 said:


> Yes, they must, indeed, know more about Nazism than Adolph Hitler:


 
Interesting quote of Hitler selling his brand of "true" Socialism as being better than the Marxist Socialism.


----------



## billc (May 11, 2011)

Friedrich von Hayek:

from wikipedia:

Unwilling to return to Austria after the Anschluss brought it under the control of Nazi Germany in 1938, Hayek remained in Britain and became a British subject in 1938.


Hmmmm....It looks like he was alive and well during Hitlers rise to power and eventual downfall.


----------



## Tez3 (May 11, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Friedrich von Hayek:
> 
> from wikipedia:
> 
> ...


 
and was politically to the right, he was a Conservative. It actually just proves my point that these people who you revere as being learned can just as easily be biased politically. They aren't immune form having political agendas. He didn't live in Germany during the war, he left before then.


----------



## K831 (May 11, 2011)

While doing undergraduate work, I had two polisci professors (one a moderate conservative, the other a progressive) who would place fascism left of spectrum, and discussed often the many similarities in ideology. Graduate work I had one professor (another self-proclaimed progressive, who sat on my thesis defense) who would argue the same. 



This notion is not underrepresented or fringe. Debated, yes. Many who take odds with the notion will admit to the many similarities in means and ends to fascism, socialism etc, while they also contend that fascism is still in possession of distinctly right wing facets.  I have been told many times that they simply avoid any discussion of these similarities with the general public as any admittance to such would link their preferred form of government and ideology to a historically stigmatized reference, and it is better to avoid that than to engage in intellectual honesty with the general public. 





Empty Hands said:


> They didn't have to make it up, all they had to do was ignore countervailing evidence. .




  If you would actually take the time to read any of the prominent writers on the subject, you would discover that all of the countervailing evidence is discussed at length. That of course, would require you actually study something that doesnt fit YOUR political agenda.




Empty Hands said:


> Otherwise, how do you explain the fact that they are overwhelmingly outnumbered in the academy in their conclusions? .




  This cant seriously be your counter argument, can it?  Exposing the general public to the fact that modern progressivism shares many ideological underpinnings with other sociopolitical, economic systems and ideologies on the left,( such as fascism, communism and socialism) would hinder their agenda. The scrubbing of liberalism's roots in relation to such movements listed above has been a long term undertaking, and one which has been discussed openly on many college campuses. 



  You are seriously ready to apply the logic that if a dissenting view is overwhelmingly outnumbered it can only be explained as being false? Yikes. 





Empty Hands said:


> Ask "your guys" to explain the Night of the Long Knives if the Nazis were leftists. Ask them to explain why the land redistribution and other socialist planks of the early party platform were never, _ever _acted upon. Ask them to explain the critical alliance between Hitler and entrenched business interests and the entrenched aristocratic military elite. Ask them to explain how the yearning for a return to a mythic past and the rejection of modernism could _ever _be considered leftism, when that yearning and that rejection is the _sine qua non _of conservatism.



Besides the fact that none of these run counter to the argument that fascism is more accurately represented on the left of the spectrum, you bringing these up as some type of "proof" simply indicates that you do not recognize the nuanced difference between achieving the liberal social end by means of technocratic authoritarianism and/or force vs pursuing a fascist end but in what one attempts to argue is a more liberal way.

(also, your idea of what is _sine qua non _of conservatism indicates you either do not understand it, or you are confused as to the definition of _mythic _and _modernism_ as they relate.) 

Liberal rhetoric from Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt to our current president have worked to establish a fascist-like concentration of power in Washington, convincing themselves and others that it is ok, and not truly fascist so long, as FDR said, it is a "'wholesome and proper' buildup of power because he was leading 'a people's government.' 

Liberals have convinced themselves that authoritarian government is fine as long as representatives of 'the people'  (which is of course, themselves) are in charge, and that they of course know best, even when it conflicts with the majority of the governed. (As we have seen under our current president, and many past). 



Empty Hands said:


> Ask them when their politics became more important to them than the truth.



Oh please. The self-righteous hypocrisy. Wow you can lay it on thick... almost poetic. 




Tez3 said:


> and was politically to the right, he was a Conservative. It actually just proves my point that these people who you revere as being learned can just as easily be biased politically. They aren't immune form having political agendas. He didn't live in Germany during the war, he left before then.



If this is the standard by which we judge a scholarly work, research or any intellectual assertion then they all fail. ANYONE you refer to on the other side fails this same test. 


Some research on some of the authors being maligned in this thread would do some good. To say Mr. Sowell isn't a deep thinker, or that he isn't incredibly bright and insightful is ignorant.  And since political affiliation seems to denote whether or not many here give any credence to scholars, you should note, Sowell is a convert, from the left to the right, and has a firm grasp of the driving ideology and psych. of people on both sides. His grasp of history, economics and politics are such that all would do well to read him. 


In terms of comparing him or any other scholar to the rest of us with advanced degrees, perhaps we should all post our published works and accolades? Maybe all of us together can reach 1/100th of Mr. Sowells. Peoples willingness to marginalize the success of others. Interesting. 



Tez3 said:


> Bill you are still just quoting other people.



Please, someone list some substantive counter arguments, and do so from the depths of your own intellect. I'd like to see it done without quoting or referencing "other people", since that apparently is pretty taboo around here.  Any takers?  It will be fun to see how quickly I can find those arguments used previously by someone else. 



Tez3 said:


> Endless quotes from people who's politics as far as I can see are the polar opposite of socialism and they seem to feel the need like yourself to paint everything bad in the world as the fault of the socialists. Of course your lot are going to paint Hitler and the Nazis as socialists, you want to portray socialism as the Great Satan of political systems. It's sad, pointless and just wrong.



"AS far as you can see" clearly illustrates that you haven't read them. Why is delineating the relating ideological underpinnings of Socialist government and Fascism "sad pointless and wrong?" There is one reason and one only; It conflicts with your personal notions. Read the authors you are so willing to malign and condemn. Hell, I'll even mail you some of their works, along with the works of those on the other side. Send them back with some modicum of proof you have read them, then it might be worth having such a discussion. Until then, you are ignorantly accusing men and womens whose work you have never read. 




Tez3 said:


> What's your take on the Spainish fascists under Franco then? More socialists? perhaps you could explain then why the communists were fighting him? On second thoughts no don't bother, I really don't need more fairy stories.



You see, if you had even glanced at the work of some of those we are discussing you would have your answer. Fairy stories? You do understand the purpose of a coup, yes? Are you somehow under the impression that such authors have contested that there is no difference at all amongst these ideologies, or are you naively convinced that those with similar agendas, or similar ideologies never compete for power? Do you believe that communist countries have never had conflict? 


  I have seen billcihak post things that I do not agree with  the willingness of so many on this board to immediately spew criticisms and accusations on whatever or whomever he linked to, without even reading the works of those authors, then simultaneously condemning him for being uniformed or not researching is so outwardly hypocritical, I just cant believe it. I guess that is why my post count is so low in the study  if ever there was a misnomer.


----------



## Blade96 (May 11, 2011)

billcihak said:


> You didn't put anything in the poem about liberals in hollywood, I think that would have helped round out the poem.  You could mention some of the people I disagree with, that might make it more interesting to some of the people I have had the longest debates with.
> 
> ****The fact that you didn't once mention Blade 96 is really a travesty.  If there is one poster that should get recognition it is her.  She at least recongnizes my humor, if not my genius.  You could also mention long suffering Tez.  She doesn't like me much but mentioning her would round out the poem and give it a touch of seriousness.*****
> 
> ...



Haha, thanks. Yeah I do find you humorous.  I understand why Irene (Tez) wouldnt though, because the holocaust is personal for her, so saying hitler is a socialist for her is like Stevebjj saying that bully victims are kind of to blame for the attacks of the bullies. Struck a nerve with me, because I was a bully victim. But i realized he wasnt trying to insult me or anyone, and I don't think you mean to  hurt Irene, either.



Nomad said:


> I'm willing to bet we can find more than 4 Ph.D.'s here on MartialTalk that will tell you that those other 4 Ph.D.'s are full of crap.
> 
> Empty Hands is one, I'll happily volunteer to go second.  Any other takers?



I would, but I just have a undergrad degree in history, not a PhD in it, I'm afraid.


----------



## granfire (May 11, 2011)

K831 said:


> While doing undergraduate work, I had two polisci professors (one a moderate conservative, the other a progressive) who would place fascism left of spectrum, and discussed often the many similarities in ideology. Graduate work I had one professor (another self-proclaimed progressive, who sat on my thesis defense) who would argue the same.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




A couple of interesting points.
The moment I can sit down and pick it apart I will do so.


----------



## Blade96 (May 11, 2011)

Oh I'm sorry,Tez, I called you by your real name, then i read on the other thread thats now closed that you didnt want that. I didn't know you wished to be called Tez. I apologize.


----------



## billc (May 11, 2011)

Elder, 
I just have to say that I am flattered by your poetry. I just want you to know though, that trying to "woo" me with poetry is not going to work, I enjoy the company of women. I appreciate the thought and effort on your part, but it really isn't "my thing." Now, let me say that I don't think there is anything wrong with that lifestyle, but it just isn't me. I think you mentioned that you were married, does your wife know that you are writing poetry to another man? Elder, it is the twenty first century, you owe it to yourself and to your wife to be truthful. You shouldn't be afraid to express yourself, in fact, you should live your life to the fullest, but just be honest about it.

On a side note, I'm curious. I saw an episode of Oprah where she talked about African American men who live on the "down low," is that what you are doing? Just curious. Live free or die Elder. thanks again for the poetry, it is awfully nice, but it really isn't for me.

A poem by Elder:

I am just a guy on the internet.
There are serious thinkers,
probably just made it all up in their heads.
Men of great education and wisdom
didn't kill all those people
the socialist Hitler did.
Debate it, hate it,
You guys will believe your guys
I will believe mine.


----------



## elder999 (May 11, 2011)

billcihak said:


> saw an episode of Oprah where she talked about African American men who live on the "down low," is that what you are doing? Just curious


 
Oh, honey-_*don't*_...:lfao:


----------



## elder999 (May 11, 2011)

In the tradition of "Make the Pie Higher," another poem by billcihak-history major at the University of Illinois at Chicago,originally from Lombard, Illinois, lately of Peoria, Illinois, where he attends church regularly, is single, and _claims_ to enjoy the company of women......(*now*, you can be flattered, Bill. :lfao: )

"Down Low" 

I enjoy the "company of women"
On a side note, I'm curious.
about African American men 
who live on the "down low,"
Just curious
to be truthful
Live free or die 
you owe it to yourself
*You see how that works?*


----------



## Ramirez (May 11, 2011)

Hey Bill, you know I like you and all, and find you harmless. 

   I agree with Tez,  you at least don't get personal in your posts even though I tried to get your goat a few times.....but seriously this Hitler was a socialist thing is just getting tiresome.

  Not only that but as Blade points out it is upsetting a few posters who have a personal stake in it and not just a personal stake but some serious tragedy.  

  Just give it up mate.


----------



## billc (May 11, 2011)

Ramirez, I didn't start this thread, just responding to it. Elder and some others want to engage in this so I am going to post articles that dispute what they put out. If they are offending people then they should stop. Also, I am not wrong. Hitler was a socialist. I don't quite understand where the emotion in this comes from. Ask Trotsky if socialists kill other socialists. Trying to use guilt to stop someone from posting their opinion is weak and silly. If they see the topic and they are truly upset by it, they shouldn't read it. I like you Ramirez but seriously, I'll post what I post and defend it. Have you looked at any of the articles that I have found?

Yours in freindship,
Billcihak

You know, my sister in-laws grandparents were children in Poland when the german socialists came in. They won't talk about what happened. I am someone trying to point out the dangers of socialism, especially the people who call themselves communists today. Socialists killed over 100 million people world wide. The national socialists killed 12-15 million the international socialists killed over 100 million world wide. For some reason, people remember the german socialists, and have convinced themselves that they weren't socialists, and yet can sit there and ignore the crimes of the communists. They ignore the history of communism and even accept them marching in the open with SEIU. That is where the problem is. If you don't want the mass murder to happen again, you need to remember who did it. I don't want it to happen again.

I also find you harmless Ramirez.


----------



## K831 (May 11, 2011)

Ramirez said:


> Hey Bill, you know I like you and all, and find you harmless.
> 
> I agree with Tez,  you at least don't get personal in your posts even though I tried to get your goat a few times.....but seriously this Hitler was a socialist thing is just getting tiresome.



Sir, 

The ideological underpinnings of fascism in general, (and much of Hitlers methodologies in particular) and the similarities with socialism is a study of comparative politics, economics, and history currently being studied by scholars far brighter than most. Simply because you find it tiresome that Hitler was one the opposite side of the spectrum from what you previously conceived, is no ones problem but your own, and it doesn't lessen the validity of the argument. 



Ramirez said:


> Not only that but as Blade points out it is upsetting a few posters who have a personal stake in it and not just a personal stake but some serious tragedy.
> 
> Just give it up mate.



I'm sorry, but this is a cop-out. No amount of tragedy equates to a valid reason not to move forward intellectually. The PC notion that we should stop studying, evaluating and discussing any aspect of history or politics or economics or psychology etc...simply because it upsets someone is pretty silly. 

Understanding in greater depth the socio-economic, sociopolitical and cultural environment that existed in any era of great tragedy, and understanding the driving ideology that led to a person(s) actions, or to the decision of a populace to grant (at least at the outset) that person(s) power is key to slowing or halting the reproduction of such context and actions. 

Were people more able to do just that, we wouldn't have much of the politics and politicians we have these days.

Refusing to look at similarities between currently popular ideologies and political movements and refusing to compare them and evaluate them against past movements and ideologies is pretty intellectually weak, even if it is because it makes someone upset. 

They do not have to read the material, and if they wish, can keep their heads planted firmly in the sand. However, if such events do hold personal pain and tragedy for them, one would think that gaining a more comprehensive and less one-sided view of the debate would be in their interest more than the rest. No?


----------



## Carol (May 11, 2011)

Sit around and curse Apocalypse in verse 
Gets so you can't recognize the gentlemen from the jerks 
Verbal masturbation prime time on the air 
Outside there's another rights parade 
Somebody hands you isms of despair 

And we were sitting in this room 
You and me and these four walls 
Talking through each others eyes 
And saying nothing nothing nothing at all 
And it was the best waste of time I ever had 
It was the best waste of time I ever had

(T.Cochrane)


----------



## Ramirez (May 11, 2011)

K831 said:


> They do not have to read the material, and if they wish, can keep their heads planted firmly in the sand. However, if such events do hold personal pain and tragedy for them, one would think that gaining a more comprehensive and less one-sided view of the debate would be in their interest more than the rest. No?



 Whatever, but this whole Hitler/socialist thing is beating a dead horse,  it's been going on for a while and no one has changed their position.  Also this is not an academic institution but a discussion board.  Also you are asking the wrong person, using Hitler as a bogeyman on socialism...while it find it distasteful I can't relate to it the way the posters who have lost family have.

  I really have no dog in this fight so to speak, and I probably shouldn't be speaking for Tez and CanuckMA except that I am quite fond of them and would hate to see Tez disappear off the board again.

  Don't bother replying,  I am going to let the interested parties fight it out without further comment.


----------



## elder999 (May 11, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Ramirez, I didn't start this thread, just responding to it. Elder and some others want to engage in this so I am going to post articles that dispute what they put out. If they are offending people then they should stop. Also, I am not wrong. Hitler was a socialist. I don't quite understand where the emotion in this comes from. Ask Trotsky if socialists kill other socialists. Trying to use guilt to stop someone from posting their opinion is weak and silly. If they see the topic and they are truly upset by it, they shouldn't read it. I like you Ramirez but seriously, I'll post what I post and defend it. Have you looked at any of the articles that I have found?


 
Hey, I don't care if you think "National socialists are socialists and communists are international socialists." are fascists are leftists are all that's evil and wrong in the world.....and I'm tired of arguing the finer points of it, Mr. Cihak-frankly, I'm not entirely sure you read all of those articles yourself, and you just keep posting them, and posting them, like a baby in a crib smearing the walls with it's own excrement.

At least K831 cogently explained *his* point of view, and interpretation of those ideas-frankly, fascism can and has been rightist and leftist, socialist and capitalist. Governments of all sorts-including ours- have elements from both sides of the divide.

Next you'll be saying that Marcos, Allende, and Somosa were leftists.....

I just think it's some ridiculous **** to make fun of, and that's all I've done. It ranks right up there with "the real triumph of the first Thanksgiving was a triumph over socialism" or whatever-that's some George W. Bushism worthy **** that merits memorialization in verse....:lfao:

(Thanks for "Ask Trotsky if socialists kill other socialists." That's some Wallace Stevens emperor of ice cream right there....:lfao: )

Of course, it bugs me that you bug Tez and CanuckMA, but hey-that's between you and them, though I also don't want to see Tez leave again.

(BTW, in case you hadn't noticed, I'm from New York. You pretty much can't insult or even slight (as though gay sex is some sort of insult  ) my sexuality, because I'm secure that the reality of it is more than you could ever possibly wrap your mind-or hands!-around without feeling wholly inadequate and scarred for life.)


----------



## Ramirez (May 11, 2011)

elder999 said:


> (BTW, in case you hadn't noticed, I'm from New York. You pretty much can't insult or even slight (as though gay sex is some sort of insult  ) my sexuality, because I'm secure that the reality of it is more than you could ever possibly wrap your mind-or hands!-around without feeling wholly inadequate and scarred for life.)



  Holy Crom.....that was funny!


----------



## CanuckMA (May 11, 2011)

It's getting tiresome. I'm on the fence looking out. One foot on the fence, the other out of the Study already. It comes mainly from 2 things. The whole Hitler thing is one. Not just the "Hitler is a socialist" thing, but the constant bringing up og him and what he did. It is extremely painfull to me.

The other is the rapid ratcheting up of a lack of civility. Noticed it more when Twin Fist came back. and it centers o the increasing use of real names in posts. We use screen names for a reason. I find it very rude and disrespectful when real names are used. Also a littel bit creepy. It's adding a feeling of "I know who you are".


----------



## billc (May 11, 2011)

I use my real name because I was new to posting when I signed up here at martialtalk and so I just used my name. Also, I didn't think it was right to hide behind a screen name.  As I told Ramirez, I am just responding here to this thread.  That's not to say I won't post about socialism and the national socialists in the future, or anything else for that matter, but talk to Elder.  You have more of a problem with him here than with me.


----------



## elder999 (May 11, 2011)

billcihak said:


> but talk to Elder. You have more of a problem with him here than with me.


 
In keeping with the original intent of this thread, another poem by billi, in the tradition of "_Make the Pie Higher_"

"Talk to Elder"

You have more of a problem with him here 
Elder and some others want to engage in this 
"on the down low."
Talk to Elder
Also, I am not wrong. 
Ask Trotsky if socialists kill other socialists
Hitler killed communists
They won't talk about what happened.
sit there and ignore the crimes of the communists. 
Elder and some others want to engage in this. 
Talk to Elder
The stories are virtually the same
So please, Hitler was a lefty 
it will make people feel bad
Because you are wrong
Talk to Elder
I am just someone on the internet.



CanuckMA said:


> The other is the rapid ratcheting up of a lack of civility. Noticed it more when Twin Fist came back. and it centers o the increasing use of real names in posts. We use screen names for a reason. I find it very rude and disrespectful when real names are used. Also a littel bit creepy. It's adding a feeling of "I know who you are".


 
Some of us use real names with each other. I don't mind when TwinFist uses mine (which is readily available and was known to a few before I got here, anyway) and I don't think he minds when I use his.Same with Ramirez, and a few others. I won't be using Tez's, though I think for now that she was directing that at one person in particular....

hell, though, I thought I was a household name....:lfao:





(and I've been "elder999" just about everywhere electronic since Anthony called me a "junior elder" back in 1996....really more like "elder984" now...:lfao: )


----------



## Tez3 (May 12, 2011)

K831, if some of us seem less than scholarly it's because we have had endless posts on 'Hitler was a socialist' on endless threads by Billcihak, it's even posted on threads that have little to do with Nazism. We've had posts on how conservatives are happy people, socialists aren't, conservatives are peaceful, socialists are violent, please do read every single one of Billcihak's posts and see if you are left with the same ennui as we feel. We've even, as I've said before, had Maggie Thatcher being accused of being a socialist. It's not an academic discussion as someone has said, hell it's not even a debate anymore. I did appreciate your posts though, it was refreshing to have someone express their own thoughts whether we agree or not but frankly I think a lot of us are tired of the endless anti left, anti socialist posts, I think Billcihak must a great tool in the conservatives fight against socialism.

If we post in a non academic, generalised way it's because we've tried the scholarly approach, we've tried the debating approach, we've tried discussing but what we get back are more thoughts from media types, more blank assertions that Hitler was a socialist as was Mussolini and goodness knows who else. I invite you to try to open an open discussion with Billcihak.

Blade, I don't mind my name being used so much it's how it's used that bothers me. On that particular thread someone was trying to wind me up by using my name as Canuck says as a way of saying 'I know who you are', it is creepy. Perhaps it's being English but we expect to be called in real life by title ie Miss/Mrs/Mr and our surname until we say a person can use our forename. We don't like to be called by our first names until we say, it smacks of used car salesmen, it's sleazy. Here I prefer Tez, friends who PM me call me my my first name of course. Elder you are absolutely a friend!


----------



## Blade96 (May 12, 2011)

billcihak said:


> I use my real name because I was new to posting when I signed up here at martialtalk and so I just used my name. Also, I didn't think it was right to hide behind a screen name.  As I told Ramirez, I am just responding here to this thread.  That's not to say I won't post about socialism and the national socialists in the future, or anything else for that matter, but talk to Elder.  You have more of a problem with him here than with me.





Tez3 said:


> Blade, I don't mind my name being used so much it's how it's used that bothers me. On that particular thread someone was trying to wind me up by using my name as Canuck says as a way of saying 'I know who you are', it is creepy. Perhaps it's being English but we expect to be called in real life by title ie Miss/Mrs/Mr and our surname until we say a person can use our forename. We don't like to be called by our first names until we say, it smacks of used car salesmen, it's sleazy. Here I prefer Tez, friends who PM me call me my my first name of course. Elder you are absolutely a friend!



Ok, that's cool. 

I don't mind people calling me by my first name either, if i minded I wouldn't put my real name on my profile and its there.   Actually to save trouble of looking at my profile, my name is Jacklyn. There, I said it.  I don't mind if people call me blade, blade96, jacklyn or jack. You pick.  I do respect those who'd rather be called by a forum username though. I've one too, blade96, but my real name is also on my profile. 

Bill its also probably people don't care about what you think hitler is so much as how many times its said. You can only talk about a subject so much before it becomes like a pain in the butt when the same subject is talked about over and over.  There's so many things to talk about, the possibilities are endless.  Don't have to be socialism all the time.


----------



## crushing (May 12, 2011)

elder999 said:


> hell, though, I thought I was a household name....:lfao:


 
Yes, I think your name is as universal as the name of the Frost poem that contains this:

"He is all pine and I am apple orchard. My apple trees will never get across and eat the cones under his pines"


----------



## elder999 (May 12, 2011)

crushing said:


> Yes, I think your name is as universal as the name of the Frost poem that contains this:
> 
> "He is all pine and I am apple orchard. My apple trees will never get across and eat the cones under his pines"



You dirty bastard! :lfao:


----------



## Blade96 (May 12, 2011)

elder999 said:


> You dirty bastard! :lfao:



Mind if I call you Jeff Coffee? 

*goes to Tim Horton's: May I have a cup of Jeff Coffee please?


----------



## elder999 (May 12, 2011)

Blade96 said:


> Mind if I call you Jeff Coffee?
> 
> *goes to Tim Horton's: May I have a cup of Jeff Coffee please?


 
*Yes, I do.*

(Like I haven't heard that or hundreds of thousands of variants since kindergarten 46 years ago.... :lol: )


----------



## crushing (May 12, 2011)

elder999 said:


> You dirty bastard! :lfao:


 
My apologies for rubbing salt in that old wound.  To make up for it I give you these words of wisdom from another famous poem:

From the sky the sun benignant 
Looked upon them through the branches, 
Saying to them, "O my children, Love is sunshine, hate is shadow, 
Life is checkered shade and sunshine, 
Rule by love, O Hiawatha!"


----------



## Blade96 (May 12, 2011)

elder999 said:


> *Yes, I do.*
> 
> (Like I haven't heard that or hundreds of thousands of variants since kindergarten 46 years ago.... :lol: )


----------



## elder999 (May 12, 2011)

crushing said:


> My apologies for rubbing salt in that old wound. To make up for it I give you these words of wisdom from another famous poem:
> 
> From the sky the sun benignant
> Looked upon them through the branches,
> ...


 
_*Heartless,* filthy dirty bastard!!!_ :lfao:


----------



## Blade96 (May 12, 2011)

elder999 said:


> *Yes, I do.*
> 
> (Like I haven't heard that or hundreds of thousands of variants since kindergarten 46 years ago.... :lol: )



LOL people used to sing the Addams Family song to me when i was younger because that's my last name. 

So i know how it is, hehe


----------

