- Thread starter
- #181
Just pointing out again- that pretty much every USMB post refering to Nazi's are by resident USMB Conservatives calling Liberals Nazis.
That's interesting, because posters like Lakhota frequently accuse conservatives of being Nazis or like Nazis.
Conservative references to liberals as Nazis are valid for many reasons, some of which are outlined in the OP.
Tell me, if a gay-owned restaurant announced that it would not host or cater normal weddings, do you think the owners would be flooded with death threats and profane insults? Do you think the Brown-shirt-like hate campaign against them would be so vicious that they would be afraid to re-open? But that's exactly what liberals have done to the family-owned pizzeria in Indiana that merely said that although they would gladly serve gay customers, they would not host or cater gay weddings.
I don't call you people Nazis, they are their own kind of evil, but I frequently use the term "fascist" to describe those who give the police a free pass no matter what, want to invade/bomb/kill various groups/nations without provocation, believe the lower classes deserve fewer rights/shouldn't vote and have their religion and politics so closely intertwined that they are inseparable. All are fascist traits and the nastiest conservative posters to this board richly deserve the label.
So how many conservatives "give the police a free pass no matter what?" And could it be that your view on this is based on false information about certain incidents, such as the Ferguson shooting and the Trayvon Martin shooting? I might add that some of the worst, most egregious law enforcement abuses occurred during the Clinton administration (Waco, Ruby Ridge). I know many conservatives who do not hesitate to call for investigations and disciplinary action when there seems to be credible evidence of local police misconduct.
Who are the conservatives who want to "invade/bomb/kill various groups/nations without provocation"? That's an extreme, bombastic claim.
I follow politics pretty closely, and I've never heard of a conservative who believes "the lower classes deserve fewer rights." What is the basis of this sweeping, extreme claim? Every citizen in the land is entitled to all the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. What are you talking about here?
As for believing that the lower classes "shouldn't vote," that's another bombastic, sweeping charge, and this issue is also complicated. By your sweeping standard, one could say that the founding fathers were "fascists" because they believed in certain restrictions on voting eligibility and did not believe in pure majority rule. They recognized that nations can and have collapsed when certain masses can outvote everybody else and engage in "legal plunder" where they vote for politicians who will give them other people's money. They also believed that voting should require some effort. They felt, on the basis of considerable historical precedent, that it would be dangerous for the president to be elected by popular vote, which is why they wisely gave us the Electoral College. They also did not want Senators elected by popular vote--they wanted Senators to be selected by their respective state governments so that the states would have a strong voice in federal policy.
Finally, as for your claim that some conservatives "have their religion and politics so closely intertwined that they are inseparable," one can say this about everybody, right, left, and center. Everyone has a "religion" of one kind or another. Your "religion" is the worldview/belief system upon which you base your lifestyle and actions. Everybody "worships" something or someone to varying degree. Many liberals embrace secular humanism as their religion. Some liberals embrace versions of the "social gospel" as their religion. Some conservatives are as secular and immoral/amoral as some liberals.
Last edited: