celtic_crippler
Senior Master
Those daggum fact thingy's don't suit my position.. therefore.. I'll ignore them. ROFL
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Those daggum fact thingy's don't suit my position.. therefore.. I'll ignore them. ROFL
The Japanese in the United States were lucky...they were in the United States.
OK, I'll take your word for it, you are wrong.
Hitler:
The National Socialist Party will prevent in the future, by force if necessary, all meetings and lectures which are likely to exercise a depressing influence on the German state.
We are Socialists, we are enemies of the 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 all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.
National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd and artificial ties with the democratic order.
Goebbels:
As socialists, we are opponents of the Jews, because we see, in the Hebrews, the incarnation of capitalism, of the misuse of the nation’s goods.
Next you will tell us Islamic terrorist groups like al qaeda aren't Islamic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Labour_Front
Consolidating all unions into one super sized union is hardly eliminating unions.
No, no relation to the Nazis at all
War is something socialist countries do well because the whole State is consumed to perform a single activity. This is why war results in more socialism, it greases the skids of tyranny by destroying individual freedom. FDR, Hitler, Stalin, Churchill, Europe, Japan, the whole West lurched toward socialism after WWII. Even the "conservatives" became socialists as they supported more and more militarism/security. This is the ugly legacy of WWII. It wasn't a war against socialism, it was a war between socialists.
Look I know the Untied States has a short history but really I wouldn't pontificate about world history when you obviously don't actually know much about it! I know too that Americans have been brain washed for decades about the dangers of socialism and it's the big bad wolf to you guys but a war between socialist states, really? America has never had nor I think ever will have a socialist President or even politician, not by any definition of socialism outside the States. Hitler was a facist and Stalin a communist dictator not a socialist. Churchill a socialist, you're having a Steffi Graf mate. You guys get confused because your political definitions aren't the same as everyone elses, you call Obama a socialist yet if he were in any other country he'd be quite a right wing conservative. You call liberals left wing when anywhere else they are centre to right wing.
If you are going to commentate on world and European affairs I'm afraid you have to use our definitions not yours, then you will see how things really were. use your definitions by all means when you commentate on your domestic affairs but don't confuse the two which is what you are doing and so making a right dogs dinner of summing up World and European history.
You could also explain why anything you don't like is called 'socialist' and assume that someone who doesn't agree with you is a socialist? Really, that is quite a leap. You all seem so brainwashed that you think because someone rightly defines Hitler as right wing they must be defending the left wing, I know it's what you do...right always defends right.. but funnily enough it doesn't work for the rest of us. Stalin is as equally hated as Hitler was and quite rightly, no one defends Stalin any more than they defend Hitler, both were monsters, both were responsible for millions of deaths, both will be remembered with a shuddering hatred and some fear.
Lol. Americans are just as socialist, if not more, then European states in most of the ways that really matter. The history of European socialism is something I've read extensively about, from European sources. I suggest you try reading an Austrian named Mises. Perhaps he can straighten out your misconceptions.
Mises fled the empire ahead of Hitler because he understood what was happening and recognized the danger.
I love the way you think we know nothing, I do actually know of and have read Mises. the thing is, you read things about Europe and from a European point of view as you say but you understand it from an American point of view, your education and experience of living is all American so everything you see and understand is American-centric.
I think you may well have death threats for calling Americans socialists, at the very least I expect you to get neg rep!!
#From Mises perspective, Americans are socialists. From Mises perspective, militarism is socialism. Or, "war is the health of the state" as they say in the Austrian School of Economics.
Anyway, I don't think my perspective is very American anymore. Not many people in my country share it.
Spain under Franco was facist, he was right wing his views were so similiar to Hitler's that Germany helped them out killing the Spanish who protested and fought against Franco's troops. I don't see people saying 'oh Franco was a socialist!'
Oh, give billie half a chance with his google-foo and copy-pasta...
#
You see, that's the magic word! it's all about persepctive, Americans see the Nazis as socialist, not just because of the name but because that's how they perceive socialism to be, they can't see that socialism could be anything as good as capitalism, theyve never needed to see any other system in their short history. Europe, with it's centuries of war, empires, ravages of famines and plagues etc etc have a different perspective, for us the Nazi's are very right wing.
[...]
Spain under Franco was facist, he was right wing his views were so similiar to Hitler's that Germany helped them out killing the Spanish who protested and fought against Franco's troops. I don't see people saying 'oh Franco was a socialist!'
True enough, he's on ignore but to me he's still the man who thinks Maggie Thatcher is a socialist!! Imagine the Iron Lady as a commie roflmao!
I've been doing a lot of reading in the Austrian School of Economics lately and from their perspective, there are many different flavors of socialism that comprise modern politics. Left wing socialism is what people would identify with communism. Right wing socialism is what people would define as fascism. Middle of the road, centrist socialism is not fascist or communist, it's what most people would define as a social democracy. This is the brain child of the Fabian Socialists, a clique out of Britain, who were the actual ideological winners of the second world war.
We know through history that both ends of the perspective can lead to genocide, but I think it remains to be seen in regards to social democracies. We shall see...
Okay, it's not 'Fabian socialists' it's the Fabian Society, it's a think tank, Britian's oldest formed in 1884. They aren't a clique btw but a well respected organisation. They are socialist in inclination but as they say.. "It is however editorially, organisationally and financially independent of the Labour Party and works with a wide range of partners of all political persuasions and none." Being a member I know about this. I am however a socialist being what you call classic liberal, something very different. Members have included HG Wells, George Bernard Shaw, Rupert Brooke, Oscar Wilde, Emmeline Pankhurst and Earnest Bevin.
As the anarcho-communists argued for a form of socialism so decentralized that it required the abolition of the state, a milder and markedly centralist version of socialism, Fabianism, emerged in Britain. Fabian Socialism was so called because the members of the Fabian Society admired the tactics of the Roman general Fabius Cunctator (Fabius the Delayer), who avoided pitched battles and gradually wore down Hannibal’s forces. Instead of revolution, the Fabians favoured “gradualism” as the way to bring about socialism. Their notion of socialism, like Saint-Simon’s, entailed social control of property through an effectively and impartially administered state—a government ...
It wasn't just figures on the extreme right of politics who backed the eugenics philosophy. Some of British socialism's most celebrated names were among the champions of eugenics - Sidney and Beatrice Webb (the founders of the Fabian Society), Harold Laski, John Maynard Keynes, even the New Statesman and the Manchester Guardian. They hoped that a eugenic approach could build up the strong section of the population and gradually remove the weak. In July 1931, the New Statesman asserted: "The legitimate claims of eugenics are not inherently incompatible with the outlook of the collectivist movement. On the contrary, they would be expected to find their most intransigent opponents amongst those who cling to the individualistic views of parenthood and family economics."Many early left-wing thinkers wanted government to direct social policy towards "improving" the human race by discouraging reproduction among those sections of society deemed to have undesirable genes. Supporters of state planning often found the idea of a planned genetic future attractive. As Adrian Wooldridge, author of Measuring the Mind: Education and Psychology in England 1860-1990, comments: "The Webbs supported eugenic planning just as fervently as town planning." Beatrice Webb declared eugenics to be "the most important question of all" while her husband remarked that "no eugenicist can be a laissez-faire individualist".
Similarly, George Bernard Shaw wrote: "The only fundamental and possible socialism is the socialisation of the selective breeding of man." Bertrand Russell proposed that the state should issue colour-coded "procreation tickets" to prevent the gene pool of the elite being diluted by inferior human beings. Those who decided to have children with holders of a different-coloured ticket would be punished with a heavy fine. HG Wells praised eugenics as the first step towards the elimination of "detrimental types and characteristics" and the "fostering of desirable types" instead.
I'm not sure what you mean by saying the Fabian Society was the idealogical winners of the Second World War, that doesn't make sense.
Barack Obama is a Fabian socialist. I should know; I was raised by one. My Grandfather worked as a union machinist forIngersoll Rand (nyse: IR - news -people ) during the day. In the evenings he tended bar and read books. After his funeral, I went back home and started working my way through his library, starting with T.W. Arnold's The Folklore of Capitalism. This was my introduction to the Fabian socialists.
Fabians believed in gradual nationalization of the economy through manipulation of the democratic process. Breaking away from the violent revolutionary socialists of their day, they thought that the only real way to effect "fundamental change" and "social justice" was through a mass movement of the working classes presided over by intellectual and cultural elites.