G. Beck had an interesting point on his show.

[LibocalypseNow]

Beck definitely nailed this one. Socialists/Progressives are not the same as Liberals. I've been saying this for years but no one would listen. Look at all the so-called "Liberals" who became Hugo Chavez Butt Sniffers in recent years. No true Liberal would ever support a Dictator who brutally suppresses Freedom the way Chavez does. Sean Penn is a perfect example of these ignorant Chavez Butt Sniffers. He's certainly not a Liberal. He is a Socialist/Progressive instead. No Socialist/Communist nation in history has supported Freedom for the People. The Democratic Party is currently controlled by the Soros-Socialists/Communists/Progressives. These people are not Liberals. People need to stop confusing Socialism with Liberalism. Beck is right. Both parties have become infested with the Socialists/Progressives. Lets hope this begins to change though. Make 2010 count people.

 

[Ame®icano]

When I was offline for a few weeks moving house and getting my ISP sorted out, I had to keep my right wingnut habit so I watched Fox News. I watched Beck. Shallow. Very shallow. That was the most disappointing aspect. Not loud and boofheaded like Hannity, just shallow.

Beck's claim that fascism and communism are both the same relative to the issue of individualism is simply wrong. Fascism is, to fascists, a complete and final stage in social development. The state incorporates everything into itself, including corporations, the military and individuals. Communism is a complex political and social theory that argues that humans are constantly in transition and that transition is to a stateless society, that's the nirvana of communism, where the state no longer exists. So I think Beck is wrong. And shallow.

That's not what Beck said.

His point is, and you just mentioned it, that both racing to the same goal, total government control under social justice umbrella. Only question is who's selling it better and who's going to get there first.

Okay, theoretical differences aside. Total government control is totalitarian. I would hope that any of us, regardless of political persuasion, would be implacably opposed to that concept. Now, did Beck say how it could be opposed?

I just finished watching all 5 parts... yes, he suggests going back to the Constitution and the Republic where our founding fathers placed us.

While for most of us his suggestion is something normal, for those far left is too extreme. I guess that's why they don't like him.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

There is TOTALITARIANISM (whether it be socialist, marxist, communist or whatever)

If you're going to babble about communism, you should learn what it is.
Totalitarianism is state control. Taken to it's limits, you get Soviet Russia, China, Venuzuela, etc.

Historical England, France, Japan...

England, France and Japan are not Totalitarian states...... yet. Read what I said 'taken to it's limits'.

The United States was not designed to copy others, it was set up to be a new way. A truly free Republic.

I said historically, you idiot. Figures you'd attack ideologies that led to your right to vote yet say nothing about the monarchy this nation was founded to escape.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Socialists/Progressives are not Liberals. True Liberals believe in Freedom & Liberty for the People. Socialists/Progressives do not. Someday people will wake up and realize that the current Democratic Party is not the Party of JFK anymore. People can start making changes this year though. Get out and vote the Socialists out of office. You can be heard.

 

[blu]

Socialists/Progressives are not Liberals. True Liberals believe in Freedom & Liberty for the People. Socialists/Progressives do not. Someday people will wake up and realize that the current Democratic Party is not the Party of JFK anymore. People can start making changes this year though. Get out and vote the Socialists out of office. You can be heard.

classical liberalism, what conservatives used to be like

 

[antagon]

look at 'em go. tugging at labels in an effort not to scrutinize policy at its face value.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Current Socialists/Progressives are disguising themselves as Liberals but when you look closer you realize that they are definitely not true Liberals. Look at all these Chavez Butt Sniffers that have cropped up over the years. Most people think that Sean Penn and his ilk are Liberals but they really aren't. No true Liberal could ever support a Marxist Dictator like Chavez. I think more & more people are waking up to this reality though. Things could change. I really do believe that. Make 2010 count people.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Socialists/Progressives are not Liberals. True Liberals believe in Freedom & Liberty for the People. Socialists/Progressives do not. Someday people will wake up and realize that the current Democratic Party is not the Party of JFK anymore. People can start making changes this year though. Get out and vote the Socialists out of office. You can be heard.

Current Socialists/Progressives are disguising themselves as Liberals but when you look closer you realize that they are definitely not true Liberals. Look at all these Chavez Butt Sniffers that have cropped up over the years. Most people think that Sean Penn and his ilk are Liberals but they really aren't. No true Liberal could ever support a Marxist Dictator like Chavez. I think more & more people are waking up to this reality though. Things could change. I really do believe that. Make 2010 count people.

We heard you the first time.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

sigh!

Here we go again.

The opposite of Fascist isn't Democrat

The opposite of Republican isn't Communist.

The scale of oppressive government ranges for zero (anachy) to 100%absolute totalitarianism.(slavery)

Republican and Democrat, conservative and liberal, have nothing to do with it.

Despite the very different economic systems Fascist Germany and Satalinist USSR had, they were both very far up the TOTALITARIAN scale.

Hitler used a command capitalist economy. He wasn't a conservative

Stalin used a command socialist economy. He wasn't a liberal.

The point being the end result of progressivism is communism .
The point being the end result of progressivism is fascism .

Once the political body is infected by progressivism it moves away from the constitution .

Define progressivism, please.

And no circular logic, please.

Be specific.

What is progressivism?

Incidently, progressivism was an invention of the Republican Party, Fitnah.

Do you know who the first Progressive Republican president was?

Both parties are subject to progressive thought
The federal reserve bank prohibition and eugenics are also born of the progressive movement.
To progress beyond the bounds of the constitutional government seems to be the hall mark of progressive thought .
I dont have more time for more now.

Progressive Era - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SQrNpkd29o[/ame]

 

[☭proletarian☭]

The point being the end result of progressivism is communism .
The point being the end result of progressivism is fascism .

Once the political body is infected by progressivism it moves away from the constitution .

Define progressivism, please.

And no circular logic, please.

Be specific.

What is progressivism?

Incidently, progressivism was an invention of the Republican Party, Fitnah.

Do you know who the first Progressive Republican president was?

Progressivism: the latest word they learned from Glenn Beck

 

[AllieBaba]

Beck definitely nailed this one. Socialists/Progressives are not the same as Liberals. I've been saying this for years but no one would listen. Look at all the so-called "Liberals" who became Hugo Chavez Butt Sniffers in recent years. No true Liberal would ever support a Dictator who brutally suppresses Freedom the way Chavez does. Sean Penn is a perfect example of these ignorant Chavez Butt Sniffers. He's certainly not a Liberal. He is a Socialist/Progressive instead. No Socialist/Communist nation in history has supported Freedom for the People. The Democratic Party is currently controlled by the Soros-Socialists/Communists/Progressives. These people are not Liberals. People need to stop confusing Socialism with Liberalism. Beck is right. Both parties have become infested with the Socialists/Progressives. Lets hope this begins to change though. Make 2010 count people.

Except for this...they CALL themselves liberals, because they don't want to be identified as what they actually are.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Yes,today's Socialists/Progressives are disguising themselves as Liberals. Just look closer and you will quickly find that they are not true Liberals. The President himself is an indoctrinated and trained Marxist yet many still call him a Liberal. There really is a big difference between the two. True Liberals believe in individual Freedom & Liberty while Socialists/Progressives do not. The State must control all in the Socialist/Progressive World. It would be like calling Stalin or Mao Tse Tung Liberals. People just need to learn the differences. I think this is finally happening though. I guess we'll see in 2010 if the people have grown tired of the Socialists.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Keep in mind that the Fascists of History were also Socialists. The Nazi Party itself was a Socialist Party. In fact Hitler considered himself to be a loyal Socialist right up till the end. Something else to chew on i guess.

 

[Diuretic]

That's not what Beck said.

His point is, and you just mentioned it, that both racing to the same goal, total government control under social justice umbrella. Only question is who's selling it better and who's going to get there first.

Okay, theoretical differences aside. Total government control is totalitarian. I would hope that any of us, regardless of political persuasion, would be implacably opposed to that concept. Now, did Beck say how it could be opposed?

By returning to the founding principles. It ain't rocket science. The founders deliberately wrote the Constitution, etc. to put the country as close to 'anarchy' as possible without actually descending into total anarchy.

It did take them two attempts. The first was before Washington was POTUS, and it didn't work. The states fought each other, there was no trust and it failed. So they fixed it. If we ran the country the way it is designed to be run we would be what we are supposed to be. A beacon of light and hope for the world to emulate.

A conservative viewpoint, fair enough. I disagree though, this is where it's necessary to accept that the US isn't the small collection of agricultural economies it was in the late 18th Century and while the basic principles are sound there's a need to accept that the Constitution has to keep up with the times. I would imagine that's why there was a facility to amend the Constitution.

 

[Diuretic]

When I was offline for a few weeks moving house and getting my ISP sorted out, I had to keep my right wingnut habit so I watched Fox News. I watched Beck. Shallow. Very shallow. That was the most disappointing aspect. Not loud and boofheaded like Hannity, just shallow.

Beck's claim that fascism and communism are both the same relative to the issue of individualism is simply wrong. Fascism is, to fascists, a complete and final stage in social development. The state incorporates everything into itself, including corporations, the military and individuals. Communism is a complex political and social theory that argues that humans are constantly in transition and that transition is to a stateless society, that's the nirvana of communism, where the state no longer exists. So I think Beck is wrong. And shallow.

I can remember plenty of folks back home that have never been in transition.

You can't apply one set rule to everyone.

How are they going with their flint tools?

 

[Diuretic]

There is TOTALITARIANISM (whether it be socialist, marxist, communist or whatever)

If you're going to babble about communism, you should learn what it is.
Totalitarianism is state control. Taken to it's limits, you get Soviet Russia, China, Venuzuela, etc.

Historical England, France, Japan...

England, France and Japan are not Totalitarian states...... yet. Read what I said 'taken to it's limits'.

The United States was not designed to copy others, it was set up to be a new way. A truly free Republic.

Indeed it was, it broke free from the totalitarianism that was government in the 18th Century just about around the world and definitely showed the way to....England, France and Japan and others who eventually caught up.

 

[beowolfe]

He pointed out that the right calls left communist and left calls the right fascist whenever one side seeks to gain power over someone else but he pointed out that communism and fascism were nearly identical to each other on a philosophical level about the rights of individuals. He then pointed out that America doesn't have a communist or fascist problem but a progressive problem witch is neither liberal or conservative in any way. The philospophy that started in the beginning of the 20th century in American and has always infected both parties and definately was not friendly to the rights of individuals or freedom in any way.

It kind of made me wonder if you stripped the progressive out of both parties would would liberals and conservative be any different from each other?

The fact that you find it interesting just means either you are as dumb as Beck; or Beck is as dumb as you...

Fascism, pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzəm/, is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2][3][4] Fascists seek to organize a nation on corporatist perspectives; values; and systems such as the political system and the economy.[5][6] Scholars generally consider it to be on the far right of the conventional left-right political spectrum,[7][8][9][10][11][12] although some scholars claim that fascism has been influenced by both the left and the right.[13][14]

Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.[15] Fascists identify violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.[16] Fascists claim that culture is created by collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus rejects individualism.[15] In viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, fascists claim that pluralism is a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety.[17][18] Fascism rejects and resists autonomy of cultural or ethnic groups who are not considered part of the fascists' nation and who refuse to assimilate or are unable to be assimilated.[19] Fascists consider attempts to create such autonomy as an affront and threat to the nation.[19]

Communism is a social structure in which classes are abolished and property is commonly controlled, as well as a political philosophy and social movement that advocates and aims to create such a society.[1] Karl Marx, the father of communist thought, posited that communism would be the final stage in society, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution and only possible after a socialist stage develops the productive forces, leading to a superabundance of goods and services.[2][3]

"Pure communism" in the Marxian sense refers to a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life. In modern usage, communism is often used to refer to the policies of the various communist states which were authoritarian governments that had ownership of all the means of production and centrally planned economies. Most communist governments based their ideology on Marxism-Leninism.

 

[ihopehefails]

He pointed out that the right calls left communist and left calls the right fascist whenever one side seeks to gain power over someone else but he pointed out that communism and fascism were nearly identical to each other on a philosophical level about the rights of individuals. He then pointed out that America doesn't have a communist or fascist problem but a progressive problem witch is neither liberal or conservative in any way. The philospophy that started in the beginning of the 20th century in American and has always infected both parties and definately was not friendly to the rights of individuals or freedom in any way.

It kind of made me wonder if you stripped the progressive out of both parties would would liberals and conservative be any different from each other?

The fact that you find it interesting just means either you are as dumb as Beck; or Beck is as dumb as you...

Fascism, pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzəm/, is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2][3][4] Fascists seek to organize a nation on corporatist perspectives; values; and systems such as the political system and the economy.[5][6] Scholars generally consider it to be on the far right of the conventional left-right political spectrum,[7][8][9][10][11][12] although some scholars claim that fascism has been influenced by both the left and the right.[13][14]

Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.[15] Fascists identify violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.[16] Fascists claim that culture is created by collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus rejects individualism.[15] In viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, fascists claim that pluralism is a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety.[17][18] Fascism rejects and resists autonomy of cultural or ethnic groups who are not considered part of the fascists' nation and who refuse to assimilate or are unable to be assimilated.[19] Fascists consider attempts to create such autonomy as an affront and threat to the nation.[19]

Communism is a social structure in which classes are abolished and property is commonly controlled, as well as a political philosophy and social movement that advocates and aims to create such a society.[1] Karl Marx, the father of communist thought, posited that communism would be the final stage in society, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution and only possible after a socialist stage develops the productive forces, leading to a superabundance of goods and services.[2][3]

"Pure communism" in the Marxian sense refers to a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life. In modern usage, communism is often used to refer to the policies of the various communist states which were authoritarian governments that had ownership of all the means of production and centrally planned economies. Most communist governments based their ideology on Marxism-Leninism.

What comes out of my ass has more intelligence than what you can make come out of your mouth.

Hitler called himself national socialist while the russians called themselves Soviet Socialist republics. They were based on the same idealogy but differed in that one wanted to be a socialist international while the other wanted to national socialist. The same stuff that communist did mussilini also attempted such as creating a fascist international that mirrored the communist internatinal. I can keep pointing out similarities if you want between the two political concepts.

fascist international congress

Communist international

 

[ScreamingEagle]

He pointed out that the right calls left communist and left calls the right fascist whenever one side seeks to gain power over someone else but he pointed out that communism and fascism were nearly identical to each other on a philosophical level about the rights of individuals. He then pointed out that America doesn't have a communist or fascist problem but a progressive problem witch is neither liberal or conservative in any way. The philospophy that started in the beginning of the 20th century in American and has always infected both parties and definately was not friendly to the rights of individuals or freedom in any way.

It kind of made me wonder if you stripped the progressive out of both parties would would liberals and conservative be any different from each other?

The fact that you find it interesting just means either you are as dumb as Beck; or Beck is as dumb as you...

Fascism, pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzəm/, is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2][3][4] Fascists seek to organize a nation on corporatist perspectives; values; and systems such as the political system and the economy.[5][6] Scholars generally consider it to be on the far right of the conventional left-right political spectrum,[7][8][9][10][11][12] although some scholars claim that fascism has been influenced by both the left and the right.[13][14]

Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.[15] Fascists identify violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.[16] Fascists claim that culture is created by collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus rejects individualism.[15] In viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, fascists claim that pluralism is a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety.[17][18] Fascism rejects and resists autonomy of cultural or ethnic groups who are not considered part of the fascists' nation and who refuse to assimilate or are unable to be assimilated.[19] Fascists consider attempts to create such autonomy as an affront and threat to the nation.[19]

Communism is a social structure in which classes are abolished and property is commonly controlled, as well as a political philosophy and social movement that advocates and aims to create such a society.[1] Karl Marx, the father of communist thought, posited that communism would be the final stage in society, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution and only possible after a socialist stage develops the productive forces, leading to a superabundance of goods and services.[2][3]

"Pure communism" in the Marxian sense refers to a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life. In modern usage, communism is often used to refer to the policies of the various communist states which were authoritarian governments that had ownership of all the means of production and centrally planned economies. Most communist governments based their ideology on Marxism-Leninism.

You will please note in your two definitions that both Fascism and Communism are based in collectivism...hence their similarity....

Towards the other end of the scale exist conservatives and traditional liberals who believe in individualism...

 

[beowolfe]

He pointed out that the right calls left communist and left calls the right fascist whenever one side seeks to gain power over someone else but he pointed out that communism and fascism were nearly identical to each other on a philosophical level about the rights of individuals. He then pointed out that America doesn't have a communist or fascist problem but a progressive problem witch is neither liberal or conservative in any way. The philospophy that started in the beginning of the 20th century in American and has always infected both parties and definately was not friendly to the rights of individuals or freedom in any way.

It kind of made me wonder if you stripped the progressive out of both parties would would liberals and conservative be any different from each other?

The fact that you find it interesting just means either you are as dumb as Beck; or Beck is as dumb as you...

Communism is a social structure in which classes are abolished and property is commonly controlled, as well as a political philosophy and social movement that advocates and aims to create such a society.[1] Karl Marx, the father of communist thought, posited that communism would be the final stage in society, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution and only possible after a socialist stage develops the productive forces, leading to a superabundance of goods and services.[2][3]

"Pure communism" in the Marxian sense refers to a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life. In modern usage, communism is often used to refer to the policies of the various communist states which were authoritarian governments that had ownership of all the means of production and centrally planned economies. Most communist governments based their ideology on Marxism-Leninism.

What comes out of my ass has more intelligence than what you can make come out of your mouth.

Hitler called himself national socialist while the russians called themselves Soviet Socialist republics. They were based on the same idealogy but differed in that one wanted to be a socialist international while the other wanted to national socialist. The same stuff that communist did mussilini also attempted such as creating a fascist international that mirrored the communist internatinal. I can keep pointing out similarities if you want between the two political concepts.

fascist international congress

Communist international

What we know for sure is that what comes out of your mouth is about the same as what comes out of the your 'nether regions'........

Only an imbecile finds 'interesting' the thoughts of another imbecile.