G. Beck had an interesting point on his show.

[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...

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...

Thank you! That is how these are the same. Its the same collective thinking where fascist creates a collective out of the nation while communist creates a collective out of the working man. One has a national identity that superimposes over everything else while the other has a strong working man identity that imposes over everything else. Workers have no nations which is why they can internationalize themselves and be "citizens of the world" and be people without countries.

Even with these slight differences national socialist still catered to the working man identity but catered to that identity on a national level only. In my opinion, modern communist threw away the socialist international in favor of socialism within their country.

 

[ihopehefails]

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

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.

What I know for sure is that you mom charges to much for a blow job...

 

[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.

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...

You may want to re-read them again. No where does it say they are 'based' in collectivism. Having collectivism as a feature is not the same as being 'based' in. Capitalism and democracy also have collectivism as a feature, but I don't think you'd argue that it's based in collectivism.

And remember Beck was attempting to have a 'philosophical' discussions about these two forms of government. So, rather that using a cleaver, Beck was trying to use a scaple...albeit, very badly.

 

[beowolfe]

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.

What I know for sure is that you mom charges to much for a blow job...

Well, I guess we're done becasue I absolutely refuse to play the dozens with you. It's a bit too juvenille even for USMB.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

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

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...

You may want to re-read them again. No where does it say they are 'based' in collectivism. Having collectivism as a feature is not the same as being 'based' in. Capitalism and democracy also have collectivism as a feature, but I don't think you'd argue that it's based in collectivism.

And remember Beck was attempting to have a 'philosophical' discussions about these two forms of government. So, rather that using a cleaver, Beck was trying to use a scaple...albeit, very badly.

Why is it that you guys always fall back upon the nitpicking of words instead of facing the basic understanding......?

Call collectivism as not being "based in" but as "a feature" of communism or fascism.....i don't care....you will still notice that collectivism is still a more imposing aspect within both those two philosophies albeit in different forms....fascism has collective ownership by the state of the main forms of production....in America individuals own the companies....(at least they used to...)

Individualism or individual liberty is what made our country great.....and so different from all those other failed "collective" and totalitarian systems around the world.....ranging from monarchy to dictatorships to socialism to fascism to communism....

 

[kwc57]

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

You're hanging your hat on the use of a single word which can have more than one meaning. A for instance, conservatives in America see "progressive" as the enemy. Yet just across our northern border, Canada has a Progressive Conservative party. PC Party, Canada, Progressive Conservative, Progressive Canadian Party Things that make you go hmmmmmm?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Hitler called himself national socialist while the russians called themselves Soviet Socialist republics.

And McCain called himself a Republican, Bush called himself a fiscal conservative, and every member of the KKK called themselves good Americans.

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.

Actually, Hitler locked up communists and socialists.



And many of us are familiar with the work of the International- labour unions, feminism, desegregation...

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Interesting that you turn to the Third International, not the First International of the leaders of Communist thought or the Second.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Not all American Democrats are Hugo Chavez Butt Sniffers but almost all American Hugo Chavez Butt Sniffers are Socialist/Progressive Democrats. So just do your own Math on that. No real Liberal would ever support a brutal Dictator like Hugo Chavez. Chavez isn't any more of a "Liberal" than Stalin,Castro and Mao were. Today's Democrats are not Liberals. I think people are finally seeing this.

 

[beowolfe]

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...

You may want to re-read them again. No where does it say they are 'based' in collectivism. Having collectivism as a feature is not the same as being 'based' in. Capitalism and democracy also have collectivism as a feature, but I don't think you'd argue that it's based in collectivism.

And remember Beck was attempting to have a 'philosophical' discussions about these two forms of government. So, rather that using a cleaver, Beck was trying to use a scaple...albeit, very badly.

Why is it that you guys always fall back upon the nitpicking of words instead of facing the basic understanding......?

Call collectivism as not being "based in" but as "a feature" of communism or fascism.....i don't care....you will still notice that collectivism is still a more imposing aspect within both those two philosophies albeit in different forms....fascism has collective ownership by the state of the main forms of production....in America individuals own the companies....(at least they used to...)

Individualism or individual liberty is what made our country great.....and so different from all those other failed "collective" and totalitarian systems around the world.....ranging from monarchy to dictatorships to socialism to fascism to communism....

Nitpicking! That nitpicking, as you call it, is what distinguishes the different types of government. If you look at government with a broad enough brush, they are all alike. Calling every form of government 'totalitarian' except ours is an example of that broad brush.

 

[ihopehefails]

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

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

You're hanging your hat on the use of a single word which can have more than one meaning. A for instance, conservatives in America see "progressive" as the enemy. Yet just across our northern border, Canada has a Progressive Conservative party. PC Party, Canada, Progressive Conservative, Progressive Canadian Party Things that make you go hmmmmmm?

progressivism is the enemy of liberalism and it always was but modern liberals have absorbed the progressive doctrine into itself to the point where the two are indistinguishable from another.

A liberal is someone who believes in less government, low taxes, free enterprise as something that exist for the individual's benefit, and the right for the individual to progress in whatever direction they choose for themselves that will carry them to whatever goal they have in their own life. This makes all conservatives liberals in many more ways than 'liberals' are today.

 

[ihopehefails]

Hitler called himself national socialist while the russians called themselves Soviet Socialist republics.

And McCain called himself a Republican, Bush called himself a fiscal conservative, and every member of the KKK called themselves good Americans.

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.

Actually, Hitler locked up communists and socialists.



And many of us are familiar with the work of the International- labour unions, feminism, desegregation...

ignored...

 

[ihopehefails]

Interesting that you turn to the Third International, not the First International of the leaders of Communist thought or the Second.

I was pointing out that both fascist and communist did similar things internally and externally because it was based on the same thinking.

 

[ihopehefails]

Hitler called himself national socialist while the russians called themselves Soviet Socialist republics.

And McCain called himself a Republican, Bush called himself a fiscal conservative, and every member of the KKK called themselves good Americans.

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.

Actually, Hitler locked up communists and socialists.



And many of us are familiar with the work of the International- labour unions, feminism, desegregation...

Communist locked up other communist groups so it wouldn't surprise me if one totalitarian wanted to do away with another totalitarain group because how can you have two totalitarian political organizations in the same country. One has to squash the other.

 

[JakeStarkey]

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?

Beck is incorrect and you have not researched this beyond progressives have belonged to both parties historically. Progressivism is not communism or facism nor is it socialism.

Until you learn how to define terms correctly, you and GB are going to reach incorrect conclusions.

 

[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?

Beck is incorrect and you have not researched this beyond progressives have belonged to both parties historically. Progressivism is not communism or facism nor is it socialism.

Until you learn how to define terms correctly, you and GB are going to reach incorrect conclusions.

Read Mein Kamp, observe how many times Hitler uses the term organic to describe the nation state, and then count how many times Wilson used the same term in his own writings.

Look at the NAZI platform and observe how they wanted to end child labor just like the progressives wanted to. Observe other correlations between national socialist and progressives such as T.Rosevelt's idea that private property can't be owned by the state but must be used for the purpose of the community. Tell me that doesn't smack of Mussilini's corpratist theory or that doesn't sound like fascism's third way between communism and capitalism.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Hitler called himself national socialist while the russians called themselves Soviet Socialist republics.

And McCain called himself a Republican, Bush called himself a fiscal conservative, and every member of the KKK called themselves good Americans.

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.

Actually, Hitler locked up communists and socialists.



And many of us are familiar with the work of the International- labour unions, feminism, desegregation...

ignored...

Of course. You can't be bothered with any facts that don't fit your agenda.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Communist locked up other communist groups so it wouldn't surprise me if one totalitarian wanted to do away with another totalitarain group because how can you have two totalitarian political organizations in the same country. One has to squash the other.

They didn't get along because they're not the same.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

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?

Beck is incorrect and you have not researched this beyond progressives have belonged to both parties historically. Progressivism is not communism or facism nor is it socialism.

Until you learn how to define terms correctly, you and GB are going to reach incorrect conclusions.

Read Mein Kamp, observe how many times Hitler uses the term organic to describe the nation state, and then count how many times Wilson used the same term in his own writings.

Read Mein Kampf. Observe how many times he spoke of a Christian Germany and removing the ungodly. Then observe how often the Christian Right uses the same language....

Look at the NAZI platform and observe how they wanted to end child labor just like the progressives wanted to[/QUOTE

So opposing child labour makes one a Nazi?

Observe other correlations between national socialist and progressives such as T.Rosevelt's idea that private property can't be owned by the state but must be used for the purpose of the community.

Volkswagen...

Tell me that doesn't smack of Mussilini's corpratist theory or that doesn't sound like fascism's third way between communism and capitalism.

Calm down, Mr Beck. You're starting to sound like MICHAEL MOORE'S lost twin

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Tell me that doesn't smack of Mussilini's corpratist theory or that doesn't sound like fascism's third way between communism and capitalism" certainly sounds like the pantings of some of our reactionaries to the far right here in America.