Yom Kippur shalom, by the way (I know it's a day late, but based on your absence you didn't use the computer during High Holy Days).Frankly I agree that billc's view is incomprehensibly limited. But let's get a couple things clear. (This is from my phone again, so it's going to come out as one giant paragraph.) First, my only criticism of you so far is that you speak of the political spectrum in the same manner billc does
Yom Kippur shalom, by the way (I know it's a day late, but based on your absence you didn't use the computer during High Holy Days).Frankly I agree that billc's view is incomprehensibly limited. But let's get a couple things clear. (This is from my phone again, so it's going to come out as one giant paragraph.) First, my only criticism of you so far is that you speak of the political spectrum in the same manner billc does: solely in terms of the x- axis. "Left" and "right" speech inherently limits the ability of honest evaluation. It lacks dimension. Secondly, while billc saying that fascism, socialism, communism and marxism are all the same IS entirely nonsensical and ignorant of history, the way you word this makes it seem as if you don't believe the socialists killed millions. Problem is, that is exactly what happened in the USSR under Stalin. Thirdly, I DO understand the horror wrought by the Nazi party. I AM versed 20th century European history. Moreover, when my mom converted to Judaism when I was in middle-school, I found myself immersed in Jewish culture along with her. I've spoken to members of her synagogue who were holocaust survivors. So I not only have historical context and emotional experience. DO NOT lump me in with bill merely because I pointed out the basic flaw in your argument. I represent me.
That definitely is outside of my experience.
The fact that we are talking about political from two different national perspectives is precisely the reason I go at this from the standpoint of political science, which evaluates the forms of political structures. Communism was actually the out-party in the time of Stalin and was suppessed. Now I will grant that stalian was more dictatorial than true socialism. And even in America it is incorrect to lump socialists, communists, nazis and fascists together. That was a critique I leveled at billc myself. You are again pumping me with him. Stop it. I can agree with specific points he makes without agreeing with him in ALL his points, let alone think like him. I am against communism, but that does not make me Nazi simply because they did too. There's certainly not one sole over-riding view in America for politics, history, or anything else for that matter. But as far as political science goes, the definitions for polital forms are more or less unified for what communism, socialism, fascism, nationalism, authoritarian, etc. actually are.Billc, by his own admission having no formal understanding of political science, takes a "hobbyists" point of view which allows him to feel justified in making statements from ignorance and using one expert or another to back up what he wants to believe, rather than take the time to gain some foundation and understanding, since this being a martial are website somehow constitutes the acceptability of willful ignorance. I don't. So again, don't lump me and him together the way he lumps communism and socialism together. It is just as patently false. And I would like to point out that European politics also isn't simply classified as "left, right, center". Applying a 2- or 3-axis understanding for evaluating and classifying political forms would do some good.
One well known description is "a democratic dictatorship of the proletariat. ". Democracy IS often a factor in both socialism and communist. Obviously not the only factor, by far, and it is often a heavily limited factor. But you left out a sizeable chunck of my argument.
I am sorry if I come off as lecturing. Not my intent. Just long winded. However, at least in THIS discussion I have yet to hear you talk 2 dimensionally. It's all been in 1 dimension: single axis continuum, ultimately consisting of left and right. As far as for my definitions reeking of propoganda... Hpwever, I was using the Oxford dictionary, Mirriam-Webster, and the Communist Manifesto. One source was propaganda for certain, but done by the father of both. The key difference between communism and socialism, in the LEXICAL definition, is whether or not goods are equally distributed.
