It's Very Ironic that Liberals Frequently Compare Conservatives to Hitler and the Nazis

[Pogo]

Of course the point of this thread is evidently to make some vague philosophic connection between Nazis and Democrats. What kind of children play stupid word games like that?

It's the drivel of Limblobian sycophants taking the para-Right's Eliminationist goals to heart.

Eliminationism is the belief that one's political opponents are "a cancer on the body politic that must be excised — either by separation from the public at large, through censorship or by outright extermination — in order to protect the purity of the nation"

-- the ethnic cleansing of political rhetoric; the opposing view is not to be debated, negotiatted or reasoned with, but rather to be entirely exterminated and sterilized from the body politic like so much bacteria.

Ironically, the same thing Hitler tried to do with leftists, socialists, Jews, intellectuals and anyone else who might present any kind of opposing view.
​

First thing to do for the Eliminationist is demonize and dehumanize the perceived adversary; create for the public an Emmanuel Goldstein. One way to do that is to invent histories from whole cloth; another is to take an already-established demon and associate him with the Eliminatee -- thus we get these revisionista fantasies of "Liberal Fascism", "Hitler was a leftist", this cockamamie idea that "leftists = mass murder", and of course while doing all this you're already trying to equate Liberalism with leftism, which has been going on since the Red Scare daze. In the real world of course, Liberals are who invented this country and that's what the fascist Revisionistas want to loot and pervert into a one-party authoritarian State.

Again the irony in this case is the Eliminationist revisionists are themselves using the same tactics on "the left" and "Liberals" (lumped together as one) as the Nazis did against Jews:

Demonization then -- demonization now... only the technology has changed.​

And that demonization is propagated among the unwashed by the malleable minds of people like the OP. At no expense to the propagandists of course; Dittoheads are just sycophantic enough to do it all for free. That's what happens when the authoritarian-minded take their subservient hero-worship role; they follow-the-leader blindly without ever stopping to think if what they're being told makes any sense on planet Earth.

Gullible's Travels....

These historical revisionists are no different from Holocaust deniers. They all lie all the time.

--- and an interesting juxtaposition of two Revisionisms:

-- "Hitler wasn't a bad guy 'cuz the Holocaust never happened!" becomes
-- "Hitler was a bad guy and he was a lefist!"
​

.... Two mutually-exclusive thoughts, run simultaneously. Orwell warned us about that.
Or if not run simultaneously, one supercedes the other seamlessly via the same Doublethink Revisionism:

"Eastasia is our ally; we have always been at war with Oceania" ... then the next day:
"Oceania is our ally; we have always been at war with Eastasia"​

"Hitler was never a bad guy, he didn't kill Jews ... then the next day:
"Hitler was always a bad guy, a leftist, killed Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Shintoists, animists...."​

It's the price of being a Liar. When they traffic in self-deception to delude themselves, they forget the rest of us aren't playing that game.

 

[bripat9643]

Rohm was killed because he was a threat to Hitler's power, not because he was a queer. Hitler knew he was gay from the beginning.

But Hitler used that as part of his excuse to get rid of Rohm.

You're a gullible moron and a statist tool. History never changes, but what people know about it does. When someone publishes the facts, that changes people's understanding. Of course a leftwing toady like you will never admit the facts. You're expected to regurgitate the official dogma because that is what supports the regime.

Official dogma? Is that what all pre Goldberg history should now be considered? Because his stunning insights have forever changed the way history should read. Obviously all the actual historical documents will have to be altered to fit the new reality.

Almost all history is government approved dogma. That's the reason the government puts historians on its payroll, so they know how to massage the evidence.

Tell us, has this historical document been altered?

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's 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." --Adolf Hitler


(Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)​

History is government approved dogma. So then you've never read any history, have you. I mean in books, not on websites...those don't count.

Yes, I've read plenty of history books, like the one quoted previously where Hitler said he was a socialist. I've also read books on economics. Those books explain that Hitler's economic policies were a form of socialism.

Any questions, asshole?

You can't quote any books because you never read any. No one anywhere thinks Hitler is associated with left wing politics in any form. The one's who say they do are simply lying. End of story.

You're just an ignorant blowhard. Everything you just said has been proven untrue in this forum multiple times.

 

[Liminal]

Of course the point of this thread is evidently to make some vague philosophic connection between Nazis and Democrats. What kind of children play stupid word games like that?

It's the drivel of Limblobian sycophants taking the para-Right's Eliminationist goals to heart.

Eliminationism is the belief that one's political opponents are "a cancer on the body politic that must be excised — either by separation from the public at large, through censorship or by outright extermination — in order to protect the purity of the nation"

-- the ethnic cleansing of political rhetoric; the opposing view is not to be debated, negotiatted or reasoned with, but rather to be entirely exterminated and sterilized from the body politic like so much bacteria.

Ironically, the same thing Hitler tried to do with leftists, socialists, Jews, intellectuals and anyone else who might present any kind of opposing view.
​

First thing to do for the Eliminationist is demonize and dehumanize the perceived adversary; create for the public an Emmanuel Goldstein. One way to do that is to invent histories from whole cloth; another is to take an already-established demon and associate him with the Eliminatee -- thus we get these revisionista fantasies of "Liberal Fascism", "Hitler was a leftist", this cockamamie idea that "leftists = mass murder", and of course while doing all this you're already trying to equate Liberalism with leftism, which has been going on since the Red Scare daze. In the real world of course, Liberals are who invented this country and that's what the fascist Revisionistas want to loot and pervert into a one-party authoritarian State.

Again the irony in this case is the Eliminationist revisionists are themselves using the same tactics on "the left" and "Liberals" (lumped together as one) as the Nazis did against Jews:

Demonization then -- demonization now... only the technology has changed.​

And that demonization is propagated among the unwashed by the malleable minds of people like the OP. At no expense to the propagandists of course; Dittoheads are just sycophantic enough to do it all for free. That's what happens when the authoritarian-minded take their subservient hero-worship role; they follow-the-leader blindly without ever stopping to think if what they're being told makes any sense on planet Earth.

Gullible's Travels....

These historical revisionists are no different from Holocaust deniers. They all lie all the time.

--- and an interesting juxtaposition of two Revisionisms:

-- "Hitler wasn't a bad guy 'cuz the Holocaust never happened!" becomes
-- "Hitler was a bad guy and he was a lefist!"
​

.... Two mutually-exclusive thoughts, run simultaneously. Orwell warned us about that.
Or if not run simultaneously, one supercedes the other seamlessly via the same Doublethink Revisionism:

"Eastasia is our ally; we have always been at war with Oceania" ... then the next day:
"Oceania is our ally; we have always been at war with Eastasia"​

"Hitler was never a bad guy, he didn't kill Jews ... then the next day:
"Hitler was always a bad guy, a leftist, killed Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Shintoists, animists...."​

It's the price of being a Liar. When they traffic in self-deception to delude themselves, they forget the rest of us aren't playing that game.

No doubt we could use their same logic to prove that Gandhi was actually a Mormon.

 

[Liminal]

But Hitler used that as part of his excuse to get rid of Rohm.
Official dogma? Is that what all pre Goldberg history should now be considered? Because his stunning insights have forever changed the way history should read. Obviously all the actual historical documents will have to be altered to fit the new reality.

Almost all history is government approved dogma. That's the reason the government puts historians on its payroll, so they know how to massage the evidence.

Tell us, has this historical document been altered?

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's 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." --Adolf Hitler


(Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)​

History is government approved dogma. So then you've never read any history, have you. I mean in books, not on websites...those don't count.

Yes, I've read plenty of history books, like the one quoted previously where Hitler said he was a socialist. I've also read books on economics. Those books explain that Hitler's economic policies were a form of socialism.

Any questions, asshole?

You can't quote any books because you never read any. No one anywhere thinks Hitler is associated with left wing politics in any form. The one's who say they do are simply lying. End of story.

You're just an ignorant blowhard. Everything you just said has been proven untrue in this forum multiple times.

Never once, that would be impossible.

 

[bripat9643]

Almost all history is government approved dogma. That's the reason the government puts historians on its payroll, so they know how to massage the evidence.

Tell us, has this historical document been altered?

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's 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." --Adolf Hitler


(Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)​

History is government approved dogma. So then you've never read any history, have you. I mean in books, not on websites...those don't count.

Yes, I've read plenty of history books, like the one quoted previously where Hitler said he was a socialist. I've also read books on economics. Those books explain that Hitler's economic policies were a form of socialism.

Any questions, asshole?

You can't quote any books because you never read any. No one anywhere thinks Hitler is associated with left wing politics in any form. The one's who say they do are simply lying. End of story.

You're just an ignorant blowhard. Everything you just said has been proven untrue in this forum multiple times.

Never once, that would be impossible.

How would that be "impossible?"

 

[Liminal]

History is government approved dogma. So then you've never read any history, have you. I mean in books, not on websites...those don't count.

Yes, I've read plenty of history books, like the one quoted previously where Hitler said he was a socialist. I've also read books on economics. Those books explain that Hitler's economic policies were a form of socialism.

Any questions, asshole?

You can't quote any books because you never read any. No one anywhere thinks Hitler is associated with left wing politics in any form. The one's who say they do are simply lying. End of story.

You're just an ignorant blowhard. Everything you just said has been proven untrue in this forum multiple times.

Never once, that would be impossible.

How would that be "impossible?"

Proven? You are evidently having some trouble with the meaning of that word.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, I've read plenty of history books, like the one quoted previously where Hitler said he was a socialist. I've also read books on economics. Those books explain that Hitler's economic policies were a form of socialism.

Any questions, asshole?

You can't quote any books because you never read any. No one anywhere thinks Hitler is associated with left wing politics in any form. The one's who say they do are simply lying. End of story.

You're just an ignorant blowhard. Everything you just said has been proven untrue in this forum multiple times.

Never once, that would be impossible.

How would that be "impossible?"

Proven? You are evidently having some trouble with the meaning of that word.

Not at all. You're the one having trouble with it. For example, you think the mere opinion of some blowhard pinko history professor on the government payroll proves your opinions about the Nazis.

 

[Liminal]

You can't quote any books because you never read any. No one anywhere thinks Hitler is associated with left wing politics in any form. The one's who say they do are simply lying. End of story.

You're just an ignorant blowhard. Everything you just said has been proven untrue in this forum multiple times.

Never once, that would be impossible.

How would that be "impossible?"

Proven? You are evidently having some trouble with the meaning of that word.

Not at all. You're the one having trouble with it. For example, you think the mere opinion of some blowhard pinko history professor on the government payroll proves your opinions about the Nazis.

Pinko professors? Is that who writes history?

 

[bripat9643]

You're just an ignorant blowhard. Everything you just said has been proven untrue in this forum multiple times.

Never once, that would be impossible.

How would that be "impossible?"

Proven? You are evidently having some trouble with the meaning of that word.

Not at all. You're the one having trouble with it. For example, you think the mere opinion of some blowhard pinko history professor on the government payroll proves your opinions about the Nazis.

Pinko professors? Is that who writes history?

That's who writes the official government dogma.

 

[Liminal]

I just love reading all the leftist dogma espoused by authors like George Patton, Omar Bradley, and John Pershing.

 

[bripat9643]

I just love reading all the leftist dogma espoused by authors like George Patton, Omar Bradley, and John Pershing.

Why do you imagine they aren't leftists? We know Patton was a Democrat. Winning a few battles isn't proof that you're not a socialist. There's no profession more certain to be populated with bootlickers than the military.

 

[orogenicman]

Erm, I think this thread violates Godwin's law from the very beginning. So why does it continue?

 

[Pogo]

Of course the point of this thread is evidently to make some vague philosophic connection between Nazis and Democrats. What kind of children play stupid word games like that?

It's the drivel of Limblobian sycophants taking the para-Right's Eliminationist goals to heart.

Eliminationism is the belief that one's political opponents are "a cancer on the body politic that must be excised — either by separation from the public at large, through censorship or by outright extermination — in order to protect the purity of the nation"

-- the ethnic cleansing of political rhetoric; the opposing view is not to be debated, negotiatted or reasoned with, but rather to be entirely exterminated and sterilized from the body politic like so much bacteria.

Ironically, the same thing Hitler tried to do with leftists, socialists, Jews, intellectuals and anyone else who might present any kind of opposing view.
​

First thing to do for the Eliminationist is demonize and dehumanize the perceived adversary; create for the public an Emmanuel Goldstein. One way to do that is to invent histories from whole cloth; another is to take an already-established demon and associate him with the Eliminatee -- thus we get these revisionista fantasies of "Liberal Fascism", "Hitler was a leftist", this cockamamie idea that "leftists = mass murder", and of course while doing all this you're already trying to equate Liberalism with leftism, which has been going on since the Red Scare daze. In the real world of course, Liberals are who invented this country and that's what the fascist Revisionistas want to loot and pervert into a one-party authoritarian State.

Again the irony in this case is the Eliminationist revisionists are themselves using the same tactics on "the left" and "Liberals" (lumped together as one) as the Nazis did against Jews:

Demonization then -- demonization now... only the technology has changed.​

And that demonization is propagated among the unwashed by the malleable minds of people like the OP. At no expense to the propagandists of course; Dittoheads are just sycophantic enough to do it all for free. That's what happens when the authoritarian-minded take their subservient hero-worship role; they follow-the-leader blindly without ever stopping to think if what they're being told makes any sense on planet Earth.

Gullible's Travels....

These historical revisionists are no different from Holocaust deniers. They all lie all the time.

--- and an interesting juxtaposition of two Revisionisms:

-- "Hitler wasn't a bad guy 'cuz the Holocaust never happened!" becomes
-- "Hitler was a bad guy and he was a lefist!"
​

.... Two mutually-exclusive thoughts, run simultaneously. Orwell warned us about that.
Or if not run simultaneously, one supercedes the other seamlessly via the same Doublethink Revisionism:

"Eastasia is our ally; we have always been at war with Oceania" ... then the next day:
"Oceania is our ally; we have always been at war with Eastasia"​

"Hitler was never a bad guy, he didn't kill Jews ... then the next day:
"Hitler was always a bad guy, a leftist, killed Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Shintoists, animists...."​

It's the price of being a Liar. When they traffic in self-deception to delude themselves, they forget the rest of us aren't playing that game.

No doubt we could use their same logic to prove that Gandhi was actually a Mormon.

And a Democrat who slaughtered Jews and taught Saul Belinsky before teaming up with Rachel Carson to decimate the population of India. And he invented crack too.

 

[orogenicman]

I just love reading all the leftist dogma espoused by authors like George Patton, Omar Bradley, and John Pershing.

Why do you imagine they aren't leftists? We know Patton was a Democrat. Winning a few battles isn't proof that you're not a socialist. There's no profession more certain to be populated with bootlickers than the military.

Wrong. Patton was a Republican, though his father and grandfather were Democrats.

 

[Pogo]

You're just an ignorant blowhard. Everything you just said has been proven untrue in this forum multiple times.

Never once, that would be impossible.

How would that be "impossible?"

Proven? You are evidently having some trouble with the meaning of that word.

Not at all. You're the one having trouble with it. For example, you think the mere opinion of some blowhard pinko history professor on the government payroll proves your opinions about the Nazis.

Pinko professors? Is that who writes history?

Finger-boy's go-to Poison the Well fallacy. Been using it as long as he's been here.

 

[Liminal]

I just love reading all the leftist dogma espoused by authors like George Patton, Omar Bradley, and John Pershing.

Why do you imagine they aren't leftists? We know Patton was a Democrat. Winning a few battles isn't proof that you're not a socialist. There's no profession more certain to be populated with bootlickers than the military.

I think you've just established absolute proof, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you don't really know anything about anything. One thing is certainly clear, you were never man enough to serve your country in uniform.

 

[Liminal]

Never once, that would be impossible.

How would that be "impossible?"

Proven? You are evidently having some trouble with the meaning of that word.

Not at all. You're the one having trouble with it. For example, you think the mere opinion of some blowhard pinko history professor on the government payroll proves your opinions about the Nazis.

Pinko professors? Is that who writes history?

Finger-boy's go-to Poison the Well fallacy. Been using it as long as he's been here.

It's a fundamentally stupid argument based entirely on ignorance. He could only gain traction for ideas like that on an internet forum.

 

[bripat9643]

I just love reading all the leftist dogma espoused by authors like George Patton, Omar Bradley, and John Pershing.

Why do you imagine they aren't leftists? We know Patton was a Democrat. Winning a few battles isn't proof that you're not a socialist. There's no profession more certain to be populated with bootlickers than the military.

I think you've just established absolute proof, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you don't really know anything about anything. One thing is certainly clear, you were never man enough to serve your country in uniform.

You keep saying that, but so far you haven't offered a shred of evidence. That's because you're an ignorant coward who knows he will be creamed in any debate on the subject.

Since I'm well over the legal age to join the service, that's highly likely. When I was of age the services were trying to reduce their manpower, so joining wasn't an option. However, it doesn't really matter since you were just posting a gratuitous insult in lieu of any facts or logic to support your idiocies.

 

[Liminal]

I just love reading all the leftist dogma espoused by authors like George Patton, Omar Bradley, and John Pershing.

Why do you imagine they aren't leftists? We know Patton was a Democrat. Winning a few battles isn't proof that you're not a socialist. There's no profession more certain to be populated with bootlickers than the military.

I think you've just established absolute proof, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you don't really know anything about anything. One thing is certainly clear, you were never man enough to serve your country in uniform.

You keep saying that, but so far you haven't offered a shred of evidence. That's because you're an ignorant coward who knows he will be creamed in any debate on the subject.

Since I'm well over the legal age to join the service, that's highly likely. When I was of age the services were trying to reduce their manpower, so joining wasn't an option. However, it doesn't really matter since you were just posting a gratuitous insult in lieu of any facts or logic to support your idiocies.

Joining wasn't an option? What year was that? 1946? 1919? 1866?

 

[bripat9643]

I just love reading all the leftist dogma espoused by authors like George Patton, Omar Bradley, and John Pershing.

Why do you imagine they aren't leftists? We know Patton was a Democrat. Winning a few battles isn't proof that you're not a socialist. There's no profession more certain to be populated with bootlickers than the military.

I think you've just established absolute proof, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you don't really know anything about anything. One thing is certainly clear, you were never man enough to serve your country in uniform.

You keep saying that, but so far you haven't offered a shred of evidence. That's because you're an ignorant coward who knows he will be creamed in any debate on the subject.

Since I'm well over the legal age to join the service, that's highly likely. When I was of age the services were trying to reduce their manpower, so joining wasn't an option. However, it doesn't really matter since you were just posting a gratuitous insult in lieu of any facts or logic to support your idiocies.

Joining wasn't an option? What year was that? 1946? 1919? 1866?

That's enough discussion about my personal life, asshole.