# The Nazi thing



## Big Don (Jun 6, 2008)

Many democrats in this country tend to throw out the Nazi label against conservatives, especially but, not limited to republicans.
I came across this, from Yale's Avalon Project
* Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression Volume IV*

Here are a few excerpts:


> Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes.


 Attack the rich, not really a republican thing...


> We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare


What? Expand social security?


> The State is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, by the encouragement of physical fitness, by means of the legal establishment of a gymnastic and sport obligation, by the utmost support of all organizations concerned with the physical instruction of the young.


 Free health care! Forced exercise!
These three could be DNC talking points, shoot, they HAVE been DNC talking points:


> 12. In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
> 13. We demand the nationalization of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).
> 14. We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.


----------



## Big Don (Jun 6, 2008)

> The proposed 25 percent profits tax would apply only to windfall oil company earnings above what would be considered reasonable and only if those profits are not reinvested in refinery capacity expansion or renewable energy sources, according to a summary of the proposal.


ta da


----------



## Big Don (Jun 6, 2008)

Don't miss point 7, the government owes you livelyhood...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 6, 2008)

Big Don said:


> Many democrats in this country tend to throw out the Nazi label against conservatives, especially but, not limited to republicans.
> I came across this, from Yale's Avalon Project
> *Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression Volume IV*


 

Ummm Don... the source for this is



> Source:
> Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression Volume IV
> Office of the United States Chief Counsel for Prosecution of Axis Criminality
> Washington, DC : United States Government Printing Office, 1946


 
And you might want to look here too


----------



## Big Don (Jun 6, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Ummm Don... the source for this is
> 
> 
> 
> And you might want to look here too


Which, with a couple of clicks takes you back to :http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/document/v4menu.htm
or, where I started...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 6, 2008)

Big Don said:


> Which, with a couple of clicks takes you back to :http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/document/v4menu.htm
> or, where I started...


 
Which means Yale translated old documents.. this may come as some shock but many Universities do that sort of thing. If you go to any school that teaches Chinese you are likely to find a translation of Mao's red book too.. does that mean the school supported or agrees with Mao.. not likely. THere is an old saying from George Santayana "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." this just might be a study of history we should not forget too

But back to your original post.... your point of this is :idunno:


You might want to also note

Nazi - A member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party, founded in Germany in 1919 and brought to power in 1933 under Adolf Hitler.

Nazism - The ideology and practice of the Nazis, especially the policy of racist nationalism, national expansion, and state control of the economy.

You might want to read this as well

It is not a label to be tossing aroung lightly


----------



## Big Don (Jun 6, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Which means Yale translated old documents.. this may come as some shock but many Universities do that sort of thing. If you go to any school that teaches Chinese you are likely to find a translation of Mao's red book too.. does that mean the school supported or agrees with Mao.. not likely. THere is an old saying from George Santayana "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." this just might be a study of history we should not forget too
> 
> But back to your original post.... your point of this is :idunno:
> 
> ...


Not tossing it around lightly at all, merely pointing out that more than a few of the 1928 demands of Hitler are echoed by the Democratic party of today, i.e., 
 			 				We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare--
National Health Care? 





> The State is to care for the elevating national health


 Earth, Hitler, 1928!


> 13. We demand the nationalization of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).


Maxine Waters (D-CA) Threatens to nationalize oil
Nah, nothing alike[/sarcasm]


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 6, 2008)

So what exactly is wrong with having a national health service? Why shouldn't good health care be available to all who need it? It's not a NAZI thing to want to take care of people's health. There's also nothing wrong with providing care for the elderly either. 
It's more a moral argument than a political one, I believe providing quality healthcare for all is a moral imperative not a political one. No one should be unable to access good medical care because of lack of money, no one should be forced to the point of bankrupcy to pay for medical care. I would have said it's more the sign of a high minded moral caring society to provide both national healthcare and provision for the elderly than a sign of socialism or Nazism.
It may not be possible to provide this in all countries but surely it's a good thing to aspire to.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 6, 2008)

You mean like this well-known liberal?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 6, 2008)

Big Don said:


> Not tossing it around lightly at all, merely pointing out that more than a few of the 1928 demands of Hitler are echoed by the Democratic party of today, i.e.,
> We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare--
> National Health Care? Earth, Hitler, 1928!
> 
> ...


 
National Health care = Nazism again :idunno:


Then Canada and Great Britian have Nazi Governments again :idunno:

And Nationalizing the Oil Industry again :idunno:  that is not any one persons call as it would have been under a totalitarian Nazi Regime such as the one Hitler envisioned.

I do not think that any Republican or Democrat is suggestion World Domination here like Hitler and the Nazi party tried in a little thing called World War 2


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 6, 2008)

Just because a government or person puts into place one principle that the Nazi government ALSO did, does not mean that the entire government is also Nazi.  That's a big extension. 

The Nazis also believed in Animal Welfare...that does not make anyone who loves Animals a Nazi.  They also believed in preserving the environment....so by that logic, most of the world is heading down the road to Naziism!


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 6, 2008)

http://www.nhshistory.net/bevan.htm

I think you'll find that there's no Nazis in here.


----------



## elder999 (Jun 6, 2008)

I suppose we should all learn to live with trains and other conveyances being late, since trains running on time was supposedly a "Nazi thing" as well.......
.....though you'd have more luck using their writings on _gun control_....


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jun 6, 2008)

Hitler also loved American Movies, often taped his speeches (and thought it was essential to his oratory skills), had a photo album (stolen by a member of Easy Company, 101st Airborne), was a great speach giver/writer, hated astronomy (he thougt it was a load of crap), and hated smoking. However, we're not about to do the opposite of everything Hitler did, just because Hitler did it. 

Hay, how about mandatory smoking laws, Hitler would have hated it!


----------



## Big Don (Jun 7, 2008)

elder999 said:


> I suppose we should all learn to live with trains and other conveyances being late, since trains running on time was supposedly a "Nazi thing" as well.......
> .....though you'd have more luck using their writings on _gun control_....


The trains on time thing was Italian fascism under the direct orders of Mussolini, Il Duce, had his Blackshirts take over the railroads when the employees went on strike, since many of the Blackshirts were veterans, they operated with a militaristic command structure.

Hitler was also  violently opposed to drinking, smoking and an avid and LOUD about it, vegetarian.


----------



## shesulsa (Jun 7, 2008)

I don't have time right now to post all that I think about this ... jibe at liberalism but I'll pause long enough to say there is a distinct difference between socialism and fascism or totalitarianism.  

To confuse them or mish-mash them into some absolutist comparison is misguided and antagonistic ... bullying even ... quite typical of the tactics the right used to gain popularity ... the persistence in which has lost them popularity as well.


----------



## Big Don (Jun 7, 2008)

shesulsa said:


> I don't have time right now to post all that I think about this ... jibe at liberalism but I'll pause long enough to say there is a distinct difference between socialism and fascism or totalitarianism.
> 
> To confuse them or mish-mash them into some absolutist comparison is misguided and antagonistic ... bullying even ... quite typical of the tactics the right used to gain popularity ... the persistence in which has lost them popularity as well.


Tis no jibe, and no jive either. Merely an honest comparison of the stated goals of 1928 Nazism and 2008 DNC brand Liberalism, and ain't it amazing how many of their stated goals are identical...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 7, 2008)

You do a lot of these type of posts, some good, some bad, some inflammatory and some just plain silly and this one is at best the last two with a bit of gross misunderstanding of history thrown in. 

Look at any political policy today with an unbiased eye be it conservative or liberal and compare it to totalitarian regimes of the past or dictatorships or any other group we consider bad or evil today and you will see some similarity. And no I am not going to waste my time pointing you in the direction of any of these you are competent enough to find the ones you post I am sure you can just as easily find the others assuming you can approach this in an unbiased manor.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jun 7, 2008)

I disagree Xue

the goals of the national socialist part in 1928 in Germany and the goals of the DNC today are very close to each other.

It cant really be denied.

liberals love to get all huffy and puffy about it, but it IS true. The motivation may well be different, but the desired results are the same.

just like saying 'the right has ties to fundamental christian groups" IS true, conservatives might not like it being pointed out, but it IS true to some extent.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 7, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> I disagree Xue
> 
> the goals of the national socialist part in 1928 in Germany and the goals of the DNC today are very close to each other.
> 
> ...


 
I'm neither a liberal nor huffy nor am I saying there are not similarities. I am saying singling out anyone group such as this post has done by comparing it to another group from that past can be done for any group today and it is not proof of anything. Especially if you are using a partial comparison and making that out to be the whole. Gee I am tall blond and of Germanic (grater than 50%)decent and I did at one time take German therefore based on that I must be a Nazi supporter of Hitler if I am to take the stuff of this post seriously. And I am not a Nazi nor do I support Hitler. Oh and I am married to a woman form Beijing that grew up during the Cultural Revolution so I must be a communist and think Mao was an ok guy.. and I'm not and I don't. And here is a bit of a shock, based on the post in question&#8230; neither is my wife nor does she think that either.

OK liberals have similar things that they say does the fact that they support national health care mean they are a racist regime that wants to round up a particular group for purposes of genocide?

Does the fact that they want to give money to the elderly mean they are about to circumvent the Maginot Line and invade France or blitzkrieg Poland

Does anything that they say mean they are also considering themselves a master race and about to practice social Darwinism on a global scale?

There was a lot more to Hitler and the Nazi&#8217;s that is not being said by liberals and since you can compare totalitarian and evil regimes of the past to things the conservative side has said and done does that mean that is what they are or that they are about to kill thousands and try and take over the world?

It is a gross lack of historical understanding at best or an out right omission of facts in order to inflame and make a point IMO which makes the whole thing, to me, inflammatory and silly.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 7, 2008)

Not that anyone particularly cares, but I personally find it extremely insulting and offensive that someone would compare portions of the American Government with Nazism.  Granted, the government has its problems and is FAR from perfect.  Does a lot of things that people don't agree with....BUT, I think that we're pretty far from openly encouraging genocide, advocating a master race and making an open push to taking over the world.  Even in our current military endeavors, we have a (very general idea as is it) foe for a very specific purpose.  Argue it however you want, no one has ever said that our GOAL is to eliminate every muslim from the face of the earth.

To make a sweeping generalization such as comparing a few select beliefs of one system of thinking with a completely different ideology is honestly what I had idealistically hoped was above most people.  

Vigilance is important.  Constantly looking at our own beliefs and ensuring that the government and the people are "doing the right thing" is necessary...especially in a govenmernt like this, where, however small it is, the people have some say.  If we are going down the wrong road, it is important to say something....and while many people don't agree with things that we're doing....I really think that we're in a different ballpark from the Nazi national objectives.

My personal opinion is that any "ism" or policatical partisan alliance is detrimental to the greater good.  I think that the massive number of recent threads whose primary purpose is the "bash" and put down another set of beliefs is proof of that.  Don't agree?  Fine.  Want to tell people that you don't agree?  GREAT!  But put people into two nice little groups and boy does it become easy to generalize and bash an huge portion of the population for the beliefs of a few.  There is just as much diversity within each political party as there are religions or races or any other large portion of the population.

Ok, down off my soapbox.  Personal opinions, obviously everyone's right to disagree.  I just feel that when we get to the point of comparing the entire American liberal party to Nazis....we're on the verge of McCarthyism.


----------



## Darksoul (Jun 7, 2008)

-I had healthcare/health insurance once. But that was several years ago. I don't have it anymore.

-Want to know why? BECAUSE I CAN'T AFFORD IT!!!

-There are people in this nation, the 'greatest nation', suffering and dying due to a simple lack of healthcare. Things that should be easy to have a doctor look at and take care of. They're not looked at, and time goes by, and the problem catches up with that person. But there are other bills to pay, rent, food. I mean, we all have our priorities, right?

-Oh I forgot, just rush myself to the emergency room, that will solve it, that will take care of it. Not. Frankly, if you don't believe people should have affordable healthcare, something so basic and decent to any human being, then don't call yourself human.

-Of course, that is just my opinion.

Andrew


----------



## Big Don (Jun 7, 2008)

Darksoul said:


> -I had healthcare/health insurance once. But that was several years ago. I don't have it anymore.
> 
> -Want to know why? BECAUSE I CAN'T AFFORD IT!!!
> 
> ...


Should you be forced to pay for my health care?


----------



## Twin Fist (Jun 7, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> when we get to the point of comparing the entire American liberal party to Nazis....we're on the verge of McCarthyism.



everyone forgets that while he may have been a loathsome man, McCarthy was also RIGHT about most of the things he said.  Russia was supporting communists in the US. With the purpose of destroying the American government. The Soviets WERE in fact trying to take over the world.

demonize him all you want, but give credit where it is due. he was RIGHT.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 7, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> everyone forgets that while he may have been a loathsome man, McCarthy was also RIGHT about most of the things he said. Russia was supporting communists in the US. With the purpose of destroying the American government. The Soviets WERE in fact trying to take over the world.
> 
> demonize him all you want, but give credit where it is due. he was RIGHT.


 
He was a loathsome man and some of the things that he said were correct, but his actions and his path for solving those things was not by any standard right.  I think that is what it comes down to and what I was referring to....his ACTIONS.

A lot of the things that he SAID were right, there were communists at work in the US.  There were spys here trying to undermine the government....but the majority of the trials were witch hunts.

But either way, that was communism, we're discussing Naziism.  My analogy was simply pointing out the fact that he took a huge portion of the population and accused them of being something that they were not because of a few of their actions which may or may not have been related to the cause that he was using to accomplish his means.  The point is that it is easy to take an idea or "ism" that everyone associates with Evil, then pin some other group to it....which is completely unrelated in the majority of its beliefs or its important beliefs.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2008)

Big Don said:


> Should you be forced to pay for my health care?


 

As I suspect you know already it doesn't work like that. Here all adults in employment pay either weekly or monthly a National Insurance stamp, those unable to work ( unable not bone idle),are credited with their stamps. Note the word _insurance_. This is what pays for our medical care. Do we have to pay it? Yes but everyone is accepted for medical care regardless of any pre existing medical condition or any illness you may get. It covers from antenatal care to terminal illness care and everything in between. It covers emergency ambulances, paramedics, A&E, it covers physiotherapy, chiropedy, cancer care, mental health, hospital stays, health visitors, midwives well just about everyhting. The NHS isn't perfect, there's problems of course but after 60 years we wouldn't be without it.
You probably pay for private health insurance, it's no different for us except we pay it into the national system, we get healthcare, benefits when we get old but we have paid for them ourselves. It's insurance for all who can pay and it's a safety net for those people who can't. No one should die because they can't afford to see a doctor.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 7, 2008)

Big Don said:


> Should you be forced to pay for my health care?


 
But wait.. I work for the government and people have to pay taxes, 
if you don't they go to jail and those taxes are used, in part, to pay for my health care... and pension... So I am guessing NYS is a Nazi state by what you are putting forth here. And since we all pay federal taxes that are also used in part to pay healthcare and pensions then the USA is also a Nazi state.... nope sorry there is more to it to being a Nazi than paying healthcare for others and paying them when they retire.

But if NYS or the USA ever does invade Poland, circumvent the Maginot Line and start building death camps for ethnic cleansing you be sure to let me know ok


----------



## Ahriman (Jun 7, 2008)

OK, I tried to restrain myself. I succeeded for long enough. And now......
The USA will never be a "fascist" or a "nazi" state, as fascism is by default *Italian *while nazism is *German*. It can only become a *dictatorship*, either totalitarian or authoritarian, *unless* either Germany or Italy occupies the USA after *remaking* the mentioned parties.
...
Health care: Big Don, you'd be surprised if you'd ever visit Hungary. The government tried to eradicate the national insurance method, and the idea failed miserably. Simply because a small amount of money paid by everyone monthly is enough to keep the system working. Absolutely not perfectly, mind you - but with the American method, my girlfriend would be dead for a long time. I didn't visit any doctors in the last 3 years while I paid my taxes, and you know what? I don't think it was wasted money, and apparently about 7 million other Hungarians thought the same way. I can know for sure that if I ever get sick or injure myself enough to need medical care then I can rely on my right_ (proved by my insurance card checked by the hospital)_ to get sufficient medical care.


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (Jun 7, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> My personal opinion is that any "ism" or policatical partisan alliance is detrimental to the greater good. I think that the massive number of recent threads whose primary purpose is the "bash" and put down another set of beliefs is proof of that. Don't agree? Fine. Want to tell people that you don't agree? GREAT! But put people into two nice little groups and boy does it become easy to generalize and bash an huge portion of the population for the beliefs of a few. There is just as much diversity within each political party as there are religions or races or any other large portion of the population.
> 
> Ok, down off my soapbox. Personal opinions, obviously everyone's right to disagree. I just feel that when we get to the point of comparing the entire American liberal party to Nazis....we're on the verge of McCarthyism.


 
Couldn't have said it better, thank you for this.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 7, 2008)

The healthcare issue is one that deserves a discussion of it's own - in fact I think there is a thread about it buried somewhere.  It's an important matter and one that actually does tie in with the way that pay-your-own-way-via-private-insurance method of funding healthcare has artificially inflated the costs around the globe.

It doesn't really fit here with a discussion of democratic-dictatorships (or is it fascist-anarchists ?) other than as an exemplar.

Maybe the old thread can be bumped up?  Or perhaps a new one started.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> The healthcare issue is one that deserves a discussion of it's own - in fact I think there is a thread about it buried somewhere. It's an important matter and one that actually does tie in with the way that pay-your-own-way-via-private-insurance method of funding healthcare has artificially inflated the costs around the globe.
> 
> It doesn't really fit here with a discussion of democratic-dictatorships (or is it fascist-anarchists ?) other than as an exemplar.
> 
> Maybe the old thread can be bumped up? Or perhaps a new one started.


 
I agree but which ever system is chosen by a country it doesn't make it Nazi led just because someone disagrees with someone elses political views.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Jun 7, 2008)

Just wondering why there isnt this kind of reaction when people call Bush/the Bush Administration/Republicans Nazis.....


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 7, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> I agree but which ever system is chosen by a country it doesn't make it Nazi led just because someone disagrees with someone elses political views.


 
I think this is the key point here.  One or even a whole bunch of policies  cannot align a completely separate political party with naziism.  There is simply a difference in very basic ideology...it isn't just about policies and social programs.

I really think that people should just be careful when throwing around the term Nazi.  Its a pretty serious accuasation in my opinion.  This may be the internet...so of course, anyone can say anything to anyone...and maybe I'm behind the times, but I for one still try to be careful about throwing generalizations and stereotypes out there.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 7, 2008)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> Just wondering why there isnt this kind of reaction when people call Bush/the Bush Administration/Republicans Nazis.....


 
Personally, I'd feel the same way.  I haven't seen it, because I pretty mush stay away from the Bush bashing threads....but I'd say that it is just as wrong.  But then, I'm basically non-partisan and try to stay out of politics or political discussions the best that I can.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> I think this is the key point here. One or even a whole bunch of policies cannot align a completely separate political party with naziism. There is simply a difference in very basic ideology...it isn't just about policies and social programs.
> 
> I really think that people should just be careful when throwing around the term Nazi. Its a pretty serious accuasation in my opinion. This may be the internet...so of course, anyone can say anything to anyone...and maybe I'm behind the times, but I for one still try to be careful about throwing generalizations and stereotypes out there.


 
I know many people to whom the word Nazi still brings fear, the victims of the 'real' Nazis. The Nazis who burned numbers into peoples arms, who killed millions because of their religion, their sexual orientation, they were disabled, a member of a trade union, the wrong colour and so on. To bandy the word nazi around merely to wind people up on the internet is childish at best, distasteful and hurtful at the very least and malicious probably.

No, you aren't behind the times,you have good sensibilities and a disinclination to hurt people for amusement.


----------



## arnisador (Jun 7, 2008)

Eh, I don't get this thread. The Nazis were also like the Democrats in that they invaded a country(countries) and waged a war that turned out to be unpopular; they were pro-defense spending, like the Republicans. How is this helpful? I could compare and contrast either party with the Boy Scouts of America too and find similarities and differences in each case (social service oriented, like the Dems.; anti-gay rights, like the Reps.). What this shows is that if you pick two objects that each have many qualities, some will likely be shared while some will probably not be shared.

What is the point of this exercise? Surely the term "nazi', when used today to describe a politician in the U.S., usually refers to their fervor and tenacity, not their genocidal tendencies (though an exception occurred here in my town a year or so ago)?


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jun 7, 2008)

Big Don said:


> Should you be forced to pay for my health care?


 
If you don't have kids in public school, you still pay property taxes, which go to schools. For now on, people who do not have kids in public school, don't have to pay property taxes. You're taxes pay my wages. Fine, I don't get payed (being a Marine, and payed by the Federal Government and all). Never had to use the police, fine, you get a tax rebate for not having to pay for there wages. Never needed a firefighter? Fine, you get a tax rebate for not needing them. Which means, your taxes go down, but people who work for the government get screwed! It's the same principle, you may not need a cop, fire fighter, Marine, or school, but you still have to pay for it. You may not need government health care, but others will. And they may not be able to pay for it on there own.

Also, Sukerkin, you said we discuss this in anouther thread, it was open until recently. National Health Care (or Socialised Healthcare) is a Socialist policy (why do you think it's called Socialised, it's to make it evil by association).

Tez, yah I know. I had family that fought the Nazi's (Canadian, Russian, and American). And all things considered, I would be amased if I didn't have a distant cousin in a camp somewhere. I get pretty, well lets just say it, I get pretty pissed when people through the term Nazi around like this.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 7, 2008)

Interesting thought occurred to me this afternoon. "The Volkswagen"... if you can actually associate someone with the Nazi party because they believe in national healthcare insurance or welfare for the elderly then if you ever owned a Volkswagen you just might be a supporter of Hitler and if you ever drove or owned a Volkswagen Beetle you agree with the Third Reich.

You see  Adolf Hitler submitted sketches to Ferdinand Porsche of a proposed Volks Wagen 1n 1933

And the KdF-Wagen (Kraft durch Freude [Strength through Joy]) was used in Germany during WW II and Kraft durch Freude was the official leisure organization in the Third Reich. The KdF-Wagen was latter called and renamed the Volkswagen Beetle. 

Now none of this bodes well for me however... since I have already said that I am blonde and by heritage greater than 50% German, took German language in College and now with this, since I use to be a Volkswagen Mechanic... :uhoh: 

And I am fairly certain that Republicans and Democrats as well as Conservatives and Liberals are among the Ranks of Volkswagen owners and likely a few owned or own a beetle :uhohh:


----------



## shesulsa (Jun 7, 2008)

I read through part of this, have read the Nazi documents before and I think, rather than hack up part of a book in a poor, inflammatory attempt to claim American Liberalism is The Devil, a side-by-side analysis would hold more water.

This is the classic bastardization the right has become famous for - and you know what? It doesn't work anymore.

Socialized health care has worked in more countries (nothing's perfect) than it has not worked in.  In fact, socialism itself is the reason Germany emerged from being one of the poorest nations in the world to one of the worlds largest superpowers.

Social security and welfare saved this country's poor and turned the population, over some years, into a thriving consumership - you know ... that bank of spending people enterprise relies upon for building wealth and creating economy.

The document you referenced, Big Don, is incomplete in your quotation AND is taken out of context with the entire book from which it was excised.

The DNC will not send armed military police into the homes of Jews, Blacks or even Illegal Aliens to rob them of their wealth and kill the owners in concentration camps.

The DNC will not confiscate properties nor businesses by use of military  or civilian armed and violent forces.

Big Don - you apparently came here to gripe about Democrats bellyache about Liberalism in an egregious way.  And it's all you do here, apparently.  Howzabout you contribute to an art section? The one you study (or used to) perhaps?

And if this DNC = Nazi Party thing is something you got from the radio or some other conservative rag/blog, perhaps you might be better entertained by thinking for yourself.

Breathe, Don. There *IS* life after the Bush era.


----------



## FearlessFreep (Jun 7, 2008)

> Breathe, Don. There *IS* life after the Bush era.



Yeah, but you gotta admit, it probably won't be as entertaining, whichever side you're on


----------



## FearlessFreep (Jun 7, 2008)

I will say that one thing I think missed in all this in all the argument about whether or not DNC == Nazi is simply that I have seen in many contexts the assertion that Bush==Hitler and/or GOP == Nazi and I think all that should really be taken from Don's initial post is that that given plastic sword cuts both ways, albeit inaccurately


----------



## Twin Fist (Jun 7, 2008)

Shesulsa,
the study was created for these discussions, and if Don choose's to post here more than anywhere else, thats within the rules.

You either are in favor of free speech or you are not. That includes Don's. 

"The DNC will not send armed military police into the homes of Jews, Blacks or even Illegal Aliens to rob them of their wealth and kill the owners in concentration camps."

in point of fact the DNC wont kill those people, but it wants to rob the wealth of anyone lucky enough to be successful. it's called "wealth re-distribution" and it is a key plank in the DNC's manifesto

" The DNC will not confiscate properties nor businesses by use of military  or civilian armed and violent forces."

Hillary just suggested taking all oil company profits, in effect siezing the company.

" Socialized health care has worked in more countries (nothing's perfect) than it has not worked in."

"works" is faily open to debate, and more importantly, when ever it is tried in a country with a population more than   "tiny" it fails. Not to mention the fact that I am not obligated to pay for YOUR health care.

To try and get the thread back on track, yes, you can, if you try hard enough, find common traits between the nazi's and the Boy Scouts.

There are, of course, common traits between the Nazi's and the DNC

it MIGHT be alarmists, and annoying to liberals, but it is a fair topic for discussion.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 7, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> To try and get the thread back on track, yes, you can, if you try hard enough, find common traits between the nazi's and the Boy Scouts.
> 
> There are, of course, common traits between the Nazi's and the DNC


 
So if you CAN find common traits between Nazis and Boy Scouts, why is this particular comparision of concern?  If you can find similarities between ANY two groups, doesn't that lessen the impact of any of the comparisons?  I think that point that people are trying to make is that there may be similarities, but not in any major or meaningful area.  There are no similarities that are causes for alarm - simply the same things that people disagree with and have always disagreed with due to party alliances.

Now if ANY party starts talking about the Master Race....then this discussion needs to be had.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 7, 2008)

It'd also be nice if people would firm up their terms a little in these matters - using 'liberal' as a derogatory term is hardly good debating practise when, for many of us non-Americans, the Liberal party (aka Whigs) has a long and respectable tradition.

It has often been said that, at heart, most English people are Liberals, with their values of common-sense, consideration for others and social stability.  How it's become a hated thing to have a social conscience in America is something of a mystery.

Sadly, a bi-polar system does not foster the middle ground and you end up with these ludicrous political discussions on martial arts forums.  There are sites out there in Webland that cater specifically for discourse on political theory and the more knife-in-the-back practical nature of modern politics.  Surely, if that's all you want to talk about those are the places to go?

Active, fervent, threads on non-martial-arts topics are always good to visit and read as a change of pace... but not when it's effectively the same refrain again and again.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Jun 7, 2008)

shesulsa said:


> I read through part of this, have read the Nazi documents before and I think, rather than hack up part of a book in a poor, inflammatory attempt to claim American Liberalism is The Devil, a side-by-side analysis would hold more water.
> 
> This is the classic bastardization the right has become famous for - and you know what? It doesn't work anymore.


 
The right has become famous for...? I believe both parties engage in this type of rhetorical behavior. As an example from Representative Peter Stark (D - California):

Mr. STARK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. Chairman, there are some of us who remember this world in the 1930s, when Hitler suspended the Bundestag to promulgate conservative ideology and not let people speak. It is a shame that the Republicans in the House, Mr. Chairman, have taken up that same ideology and are denying a chance for debate and open discussion of a budget. It does smack of fascism; and it is too bad, because the American people will recognize that and understand that in a free economy, and in a free country that created programs like Social Security and Medicare and special education and aid for dependent children and aid for people who are unable to care for themselves, for the disabled, that to deny them care is obscene. 

source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/651496/posts

Also, Chairman of the NAACP Julian Bond:

"The Republican Party would have the American flag and the swastika flying side by side," 

source: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48635 



> Socialized health care has worked in more countries (nothing's perfect) than it has not worked in. In fact, socialism itself is the reason Germany emerged from being one of the poorest nations in the world to one of the worlds largest superpowers.
> 
> Social security and welfare saved this country's poor and turned the population, over some years, into a thriving consumership - you know ... that bank of spending people enterprise relies upon for building wealth and creating economy.


 
If social welfare saved this countrys poor, then why are there still poor people? Quite frankly, it is the fact that this country has the lowest unemployment rate (4.6%) compared to that of Germany (9.1%), England (5.4%), and France (8%), countries with which the U.S. is readily compared. Perhaps that could have something to do with the reason why.

The U.S. also has an average number of percentage of people living below the poverty line as compared to those countries as well: U.S. (12%), Germany (11%), U.K. (14%) and France (6.2%, as of 2004).

source: CIA World Fact Book https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

Now, I am not saying that socialism is necessarily a bad thing. I believe, however, that it can only work based on the cultural context in which it serves. That being said, I believe that it only works in a country with a homgeneous culture. As we all know, the U.S. is not such a place. In fact, there are those in the U.S. community who decry such a thing. 



> The DNC will not send armed military police into the homes of Jews, Blacks or even Illegal Aliens to rob them of their wealth and kill the owners in concentration camps.
> 
> The DNC will not confiscate properties nor businesses by use of military or civilian armed and violent forces.


 
What makes you think this? The U.S. has already done it based on the interpreatation of laws. See Asset Forfeiture laws, articles relating to the confiscation of firearms from both citizens and manufacturers, natural disaster survivor stories. This type of thing happens all the time. And by both parties when they are in charge.



> Big Don - you apparently came here to gripe about Democrats bellyache about Liberalism in an egregious way. And it's all you do here, apparently. Howzabout you contribute to an art section? The one you study (or used to) perhaps?
> 
> And if this DNC = Nazi Party thing is something you got from the radio or some other conservative rag/blog, perhaps you might be better entertained by thinking for yourself.
> 
> Breathe, Don. There *IS* life after the Bush era.


 
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

Let me see here. Looking back at your posts for the last few weeks, I have yet to see you try to censor Elder999 for his multiple posts (count 7) bashing Bush. And now you have the cajones to accuse Big Don of griping. How so very hypocritical of you.


----------



## Big Don (Jun 7, 2008)

Cuba has a much hyped socialist medical system, and yet, when Castro needed surgery, the bearded one went to Spain. If socialized medicine is so great, why wasn't he treated in Cuba?


----------



## Big Don (Jun 7, 2008)

Duplicate
Duplicate


----------



## Big Don (Jun 7, 2008)

shesulsa said:


> The DNC will not send armed military police into the homes of Jews, Blacks or even Illegal Aliens to rob them of their wealth and kill the owners in concentration camps.
> 
> The DNC will not confiscate properties nor businesses by use of military  or civilian armed and violent forces.


There are 120,000 Japanese who might disagree with you on those two points there...
Oh, and a Cuban, we can't forget Elian Gonzalez
What republican ordered this:?


----------



## Big Don (Jun 7, 2008)

No where in this, or any other thread did I claim the DNC was "JUST LIKE THE NAZI's"
What I did do, was point out that a number of their stated policies are *IDENTICAL *to those of the NSDAP demands of 1928.


----------



## Big Don (Jun 8, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> I'm neither a liberal nor huffy nor am I saying there are not similarities. I am saying singling out anyone group such as this post has done by comparing it to another group from that past can be done for any group today and it is not proof of anything. Especially if you are using a partial comparison and making that out to be the whole. Gee I am tall blond and of Germanic (grater than 50%)decent and I did at one time take German therefore based on that I must be a Nazi supporter of Hitler if I am to take the stuff of this post seriously. And I am not a Nazi nor do I support Hitler. Oh and I am married to a woman form Beijing that grew up during the Cultural Revolution so I must be a communist and think Mao was an ok guy.. and I'm not and I don't. And here is a bit of a shock, based on the post in question neither is my wife nor does she think that either.
> 
> OK liberals have similar things that they say does the fact that they support national health care mean they are a racist regime that wants to round up a particular group for purposes of genocide?
> 
> ...


 Gee, we covered the Democratic Party Platform endorsing slavery before... LINK   Not to mention Margret Sanger...





> It is a gross lack of historical understanding at best or an out right omission of facts in order to inflame and make a point IMO which makes the whole thing, to me, inflammatory and silly.


Really, people with, in their opinions, the best of intentions have done some fairly horrific things...


----------



## Big Don (Jun 8, 2008)

On an episode of the Simpsons, Sideshow Bob was running for Mayor. 





> Well, I do disagree with his Bart killing policy


Homer.
It is interesting that an idea put forth by a conservative can be, and often is, called fascist, nazi, etc, but, pointing out that many of the demands of Hitler in 1928 are IDENTICAL to the DNC's stated policies is somehow wrong.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jun 8, 2008)

Big Don said:


> Cuba has a much hyped socialist medical system, and yet, when Castro needed surgery, the bearded one went to Spain. If socialized medicine is so great, why wasn't he treated in Cuba?


 
Well, Cuba is not a Socialist Coutry, so you cann't really call it "Socialised". However, that aside, it's because when every element of a certain area of the economy is controlled by one person, it becomes a flop (be it President or owner of an monopoly). Thus, I like what the British have!


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 8, 2008)

Big Don said:


> It is interesting that an idea put forth by a conservative can be, and often is, called fascist, nazi, etc, but, pointing out that many of the demands of Hitler in 1928 are IDENTICAL to the DNC's stated policies is somehow wrong.


 
I think it's the repetition more than anything else *BD*.  

Airing your views is one thing but harping on the same refrain time after time, when it's one that is almost bound to cause pointless friction, is disruptive.

As to 'the other side', well like I said to *TF* the other day, I'd have to go look at how this started.   

However, I don't recall seeing a daily tide of Bush-Bashing that wasn't just normal political cynicism until it ramped up in coincidence with the Purity of Republicans and Demonic Democrats posts.

Still, chicken and egg cycles reach a point where it doesn't matter so much who started them but whether they stop or not.


----------



## elder999 (Jun 8, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> As to 'the other side', well like I said to *TF* the other day, I'd have to go look at how this started.
> 
> However, I don't recall seeing a daily tide of Bush-Bashing that wasn't just normal political cynicism until it ramped up in coincidence with the Purity of Republicans and Demonic Democrats posts.


 
 April 6, 2008. for me, before that, though, Christmas Eve, 2007........


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 8, 2008)

Big Don said:


> Gee, we covered the Democratic Party Platform endorsing slavery before... LINK Not to mention Margret Sanger...
> Really, people with, in their opinions, the best of intentions have done some fairly horrific things...


 
And yet no response to owners of Volkswagens... could it be your favorite politician owns one.... or.... could it be.... oh no Don&#8230; say it ain&#8217;t so&#8230;. that you own or once did own&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; a&#8230;.a&#8230;. Volkswagen


----------



## Ahriman (Jun 8, 2008)

Ehhhhhh...
Those who want to get control have to play on those things the population wants. These are simple things - panem et circenses, basically.
You can play on their desire to live freely or on their desire to get everything they need without much effort put into getting those. You can play on their desire to have a group_ (political, racial, religious, etc)_ they can freely hate_ (give the nation an enemy against whom the nation unifies)_. Etc etc......
Those who want to get control will use these methods. Not may use, not sometimes use, they will use. Their usage has *nothing* to do with the desired goals of the persons using them. They are just methods to lure in voters.
So comparing policies is just plain stupid. Comparing the methods of *working* governments is not stupid.

...

And there aren't evil governments. There are different kinds. Differences can go to that level where it contradicts our ideas about how humans should live. My favourite example is ancient Athens, the hyped democracy with slavery, aggressive wars, slave hunting as a sport, ignoring and sometimes killing "low quality" newborns and so on. When differences reach a certain level or/and the government can't take care of things reliably the inhabitants start revolting, nearby countries get angry at the government's actions and the government goes into history as evil. Hitler's dictatorship undeniably reached this level at a time but wasn't at that level when it started.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Jun 8, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Still, chicken and egg cycles reach a point where it doesn't matter so much who started them but whether they stop or not.


 

Actually, both appeared simultaneously as a chicken omelette. 

And it stopped when I ate it.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Jun 9, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> I think it's the repetition more than anything else *BD*.
> 
> Airing your views is one thing but harping on the same refrain time after time, when it's one that is almost bound to cause pointless friction, is disruptive.
> 
> ...


 

It appears to me that you are now making excuses for the Bush-bashing that occurs here. 

Again, where is the criticism of Elder999, and his many posts by the same people who are bashing Big Don now?


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 9, 2008)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> It appears to me that you are now making excuses for the Bush-bashing that occurs here.
> 
> Again, where is the criticism of Elder999, and his many posts by the same people who are bashing Big Don now?


 
Bush bashing?

In my country there is a long and honoured tradition of 'bashing' those in power. Since the invention of printing political pamphlets lampooning our political and royal leaders has been rife. We have comedians, satirists, politicals cartoonists and ordinary people all taking pops some very scathing at out governments and our leaders... all of them. There is a very serious purpose to this, it keeps our political leaders grounded. Like the slaves who whispered constantly in the Roman emperors' ears as they proceeded in truimph "sic transit glori amundum" they serve to remind that they are only mortal and prone to making mortals mistakes. 
It's fine to say we can change things by voting, the truth is that it changes very little but public opinion yes that can change things. No politician wants to be made fun of or have his policies lampooned in the media. It's true people power, in the past many have tried to silence their critics, some with draconian measure a la Hitler etc, this is testament to the power of public criticism.
Bush isn't immune to being criticised no political leader is, he doesn't deserve respect based soley on the fact he was elected president, not even if he's the president of the United States of America. In fact he deserves more criticism, if he can take it and answer his critics with good sense, courtesy and intelligence ( the same goes for his followers) he is doing his job. It is the Oppositions job to keep the government on the straight and narrow. They are a vital part of democracy.

http://www.empireclubfoundation.com/details.asp?FT=yes&SpeechID=252,


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 9, 2008)

I wouldn't characterise the comments being made as 'bashing' Don, *Kenpo* but then again I don't see it through your eyes.  I can only speak for me but what I have said has been more to draw attention to a potential problem with being so single-focussed.

As for 'Bush Bashing', well, like Irene, I don't see it in the same light perhaps as the American members except to note again that it seems to have gotten more voluminous in response to the Bush-Fans posts.  It is further to be emphasised that I'm not certain how this cycle got started but I do believe that it has to stop as it is not healthy argumentation but endless repeats of "'Tis" vs "'Tisn't".  

That does noone any good and when it gets to the stage that it's aggrivating the likes of liberal minded me (who thinks that all politicians should be put in a field to fight it out and leave the rest of us alone) then it might be time to consider if its gone on long enough.  

P.S. Just to be clear, that's the proper use of the word "liberal" there rather than the twisted version that's getting bandied about here as if it's the converse of Nazi.


----------



## elder999 (Jun 9, 2008)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> It appears to me that you are now making excuses for the Bush-bashing that occurs here.
> 
> Again, where is the criticism of Elder999, and his many posts by the same people who are bashing Big Don now?


 

Let's see.....I didn't have "many posts"  until Big Don started in on his incessant "Democrats=Racism" thing, and didn't really get warmed up until he derailed the thread about MLK by insinuating that Democrats had him assassinated, or some such nonsense....heck, I've been on this board for 3 years and 3 months, and I just passed 1,000 posts fairly recently.

Don's been here since last September, and has about 400 more posts than I do. Not that that's a good thing or a bad thing,....heck, you've got way less posts than I do,Mr. Kenpo 5-0, and you've been here just as long. I'm just pointing out the difference in  volume-especially when you consider that for a while there, there wasn't a single thread in the Study that didn't get some "evil Demoncrat" input-not that I always responded, though ....

In the time that Don's been here, I've posted on  a variety of topics, but I've only started a relatively few threads, except for the last couple of weeks. Those threads have covered Jimmy Carter, judo, racism and religion, Racism and the republican party,which wars work best?, all manner of stuff-a lot of which was more philosophical/rhetorical than "Bush-bashing."

Im okay with you calling it that, too:"Bush bashing," but it's interesting how a presentation of fact gets construed that way. It's true, in the last two weeks I have posted a lot of "Bushie" stuff, let's see:

Scott McClellan says "this" about Bush, and Scott McClellan says "that." Please note that *I* didn't say it-I posted a links to articles. 

"Bush reveals plans for Iraq invasion to ghost writer in 1999" please note that he didn't reveal it to *me*, he revealed it to someone else, and I posted a link to an article.

"Bush regime blocks Holocaust reparations." Please note that the conclusions were not *mine*, and I posted a link to an article.

"United Methodists upset with  Bush Cheney," Please note that-well, you do get the idea...in fact, the only Bush bashing that *I've* really done is say that "Bush policies aren't Christian," which I'll stand by. 

Oh, that, and deliberately misspell his name...I love to do that! :lol:


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Jun 11, 2008)

Sorry for the delay, been working alot lately.

Dont misconstrue what I am saying.  You have the absolute right to say what you want in any thread, and post whatever thread you want (withing the rules of the forum, of course).

What I take issue with is peoples forms of argumentation.  People keep trashing Big Don because he keeps bringing up points to defend Bush and the Republicans.  He has that right.  Just has you have the right to post threads bashing him.  

But they dont trash you for doing so.  Why?  Probably because they agree with you.  It is the hypocracy that I am really getting at, not your posting of the threads themselves.


----------



## Archangel M (Jun 11, 2008)

Thats the liberal way.. 

:2xbird:


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 11, 2008)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> People keep trashing Big Don because he keeps bringing up points to defend Bush and the Republicans.



I don't bash him because he defends Republicans.  Plenty of people here do that.  What I do bash him for is for refusing to engage in debate of his points, and for consistently ignoring substantiated information brought up by others which conclusively refutes what he is saying.  It is intellectually dishonest behavior and not worthy of this board.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 11, 2008)

Archangel M said:


> Thats the liberal way..
> 
> :2xbird:


 
Oi!  Pack that in.  Agitator.  

We let the Colonies go once, don't think we can't take them back if you keep bad-mouthing Liberals (aka Whigs) .

Politeness costs nothing and accuracy of phrasing even less.  "Liberal" is not a curse.  It means 'holding the middle ground' and 'even-handed', 'intelligent compromise' and 'tolerance'.

We are very careful with our useage of some words in the on-line community and it's about time the sort of mis-application we're putting up with of this one is addressed.

Liberal is not a synonym for something bad.  It is simply neither Fascist nor Communist but a rational point somwhere in the middle - with emphasis on the 'rational'.

Rant over ... continue with your scheduled mis-information and brainwashing ... erm ... sorry ... I mean posting and discourse ... obviously ... tum-te-tum-te-tum ...


----------



## Archangel M (Jun 11, 2008)

American Liberals are different animals.

Just havin a bit o fun, what with it being open season with all of elders BuSh threads and all.....


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 11, 2008)

:grumbles and settles back into cave:  grrr ... umm ... okay then ... cake anyone ?


----------



## Archangel M (Jun 11, 2008)




----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Jun 11, 2008)

Empty Hands said:


> I don't bash him because he defends Republicans. Plenty of people here do that. What I do bash him for is for refusing to engage in debate of his points, and for consistently ignoring substantiated information brought up by others which conclusively refutes what he is saying. It is intellectually dishonest behavior and not worthy of this board.


 

I am not necessarily referring to you in this context.  I agree that some here take up very ardent positions without regard to factual information.  Big Don may at times be one of them.  

I said this here and in another thread, it seems that people do not have a problem being hypocritical when it comes to maintaining their own positions.  As an example, I use wikipedia as a source on one occasion, and get bashed for it.  Then, that very same person uses wikipedia as a source for their own position.  

The same thing goes on with BD.  He is told to stop defending Bush / Republicans and to stop bashing Democrats / liberal (the U.S. meaning *S*), yet no one is telling those who are bashing *BuSh *to do the same.

My point is that we are all entitled to our thoughts.  This is an open forum.  If you are going to attack him, or anyone else for that matter, do it on the basis of logic and fact.  Be intellectually honest, and very importantly, consistent.  Dont do it because he says something that you may simply find unpleasent.


----------



## Big Don (Jun 11, 2008)

When I post links I don't use Fox, because of the lunatic bias against them, held by some, I use MSM sources if possible to back up my claims, others make claims and cite quotes with out even a biased source. I ask for proof, and am more or less told to pound sand. It is like CBS and their forged memos of the Bush NG thing from 2004, No actual evidence, but, _The CHARGE was important_ Funny how that only works when the alleged evil doer is a Republican,a Christian, a white guy, or holy crap, all three...
I mean, a number of women came forward with abuse claims against Bill... 
Louis Freeh, former CLINTON APPOINTED FBI Director wrote a fairly scathing book about his time as director, but, he isn't to be believed, a former press secretary's book is given more weight...


----------

