Some Dead...More Equal Than Others

[ChrisL]

You know, nobody is "all bad" or "all good" regardless of their political ideology. PEOPLE sometimes do bad things to one another. I think this has more to do with the people involved than the overall political ideology. You want to insinuate that a political ideology can be a driving force behind genocidal acts. I think most people would find that silly.

"You know, nobody is "all bad" or "all good" regardless of their political ideology."

Hitler was a great painter: two coats in an afternoon!



Simple to live your life through platitudes, eh?

Sorry that you're so insane.

As per that quote, the choice of being a happy pig or a dissatisfied human being, I can actually see your choice of the former as being a valid choice.


Most especially if you

a. recognize that you aren't bright enough to consider the facts,
or
b. if you are too cowardly to confront the Liberal herd.



,,,and, no....I'm not insane: mommy had me tested.

I think you need more testing, seriously. Your paranoid rants are really just . . . beyond silly. I don't know if you are serious or if you just do it for the attention from the other crazies around here.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You know, rather than fearing a Hitler, IMO, it is people like yourself that are much more destructive to OUR country at this point in time. Divisive, paranoid, delusional seems to be the way to be around here. Going out of your way to make obscure references in order to instigate this type of division along party lines. The hatred is absolutely palpable. One can only HOPE that people such as yourselves are not an accurate representation of most people in our great country.

Have no fear.

I plan to give your opinion all the consideration it deserves.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You know, nobody is "all bad" or "all good" regardless of their political ideology. PEOPLE sometimes do bad things to one another. I think this has more to do with the people involved than the overall political ideology. You want to insinuate that a political ideology can be a driving force behind genocidal acts. I think most people would find that silly.

"You know, nobody is "all bad" or "all good" regardless of their political ideology."

Hitler was a great painter: two coats in an afternoon!



Simple to live your life through platitudes, eh?

Sorry that you're so insane.

As per that quote, the choice of being a happy pig or a dissatisfied human being, I can actually see your choice of the former as being a valid choice.


Most especially if you

a. recognize that you aren't bright enough to consider the facts,
or
b. if you are too cowardly to confront the Liberal herd.



,,,and, no....I'm not insane: mommy had me tested.

I think you need more testing, seriously. Your paranoid rants are really just . . . beyond silly. I don't know if you are serious or if you just do it for the attention from the other crazies around here.

"paranoid rants"...."the other crazies around here."

Ironic that you put it that way....that's exactly what Stalin used toward his dissidents.

"Political abuse of psychiatry in the Soviet Union"
Political abuse of psychiatry in the Soviet Union - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Birds of a feather, huh?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Molotov: "...the two ideologies and methods were the same."

You used your "quote" above as part of your proof for your thesis; your premise that Fascism and Communism methodology and ideology were one and the same. I haven't been able to locate a source for that quote to see what is written before the ellipsis, so I'm led to believe you didn't want to disclose that or an exact source you claim to have quoted by Molotov, which is actually a quote of yourself from your #3 in post #27. Quoting yourself in the same post?

In any case...

We all SHOULD know that collectivism was a major goal following the Bolshevik Revolution with the rise of Leninist/Marxist Communism. As initiated by Lenin and followed on by Stalin later on and through WWII, collectivism in its various forms was maintained over the entire period of the Nazi regime from 1933-1945 in the USSR.

Were the Nazis collectivists? The historical record does not bear that out at all. Germany had a large, stable and growing industrial base in the1930's run by quasi-capitalists and neither agriculture nor private property of Arians were collectivized. Private companies like Krupp, Messerschmitt, Daimler-Benz, Siemens, Focke-Wulf, et al, were among the industrial base when the Nazis came to power. None of those businesses were collectivized. Competitors such as Heinkel, Messerschmitt, and Focke-Wulf competed for contracts with the Reich for aircraft design and production. Krupp was the worlds largest arms manufacturer. They made a lots of Marks!

Given these historical facts, how are collectivist and quasi-capitalist industrial systems economically and ideologically the same? The two certainly were not!

Given these historical facts, how are collectivist and quasi-capitalist industrial systems economically and methodologically the same? The two certainly were not!

The main political parallel between the two was both regimes were totalitarian. The Communist collectivists were on far left of the political spectrum, while the Nazi fascists were on the opposite end, the right during that period.

The two ideologies and methodologies were definitely not the same.

Put away your biased Randian colored glasses, Chica.

BTW, you PLAGIARIZED yourself by not attributing the quote I noted at the top to yourself!

2. "Were the Nazis collectivists? The historical record does not bear that out at all. Germany had a large, stable and growing industrial base in the1930's run by quasi-capitalists....."

Wrong.
(sigh...) If you had only paid more attention in school



"What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existedin name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it wasthe German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of thesubstantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."
Mises Daily Mises Institute

I warned you to take off your Randian colored glasses didn't I? And I wasn't home schooled.

The fact that George Reisman wrote about, not quoted, but wrote about what Mises borrowed from what Ayn Rand postulated [The Ayn Rand Lexicon Objectivism from A to Z Ayn Rand Lexicon] does not change history. What a course to follow; from Rand to Mises to Reisman! Quit trying deflect from the topic and your faulty conclusions based on an alleged quote by Molotov to align with your Objectivist views.

Instead of a C&P of a bit of philosophy rather than documented proof of practice, provide either a documented commentary or source information of any historical practice of collectivism in Germany between 1933 and 1945 involving industry, agriculture and private property of Arians in the Reich equivalent to that practiced in the USSR during that same period. You can't do it because it didn't happen. Because extreme right wing Objectivists say there is an equivalence through semantic manipulations does not change the historical record of the matter.

During the Reich, Communist collectivism WAS NOT and NEVER WAS the political or practiced equivalent of Nazi fascism, and share only their totalitarian nature, and in their diametric opposition within the political spectrum; extreme left for the former and extreme right for the latter.

In any case, you have failed to prove what you claimed; "Molotov: "...the two ideologies and methods were the same."" [PoliticalChic, Page 3, Post 27]. Unless you are able to prove that, your grade is FAILED!

I put you in your place again, huh?

Drop by for an education anytime.

Your argument FAILED

Your assertion that Communist collectivism and Nazi fascism were identical forms of ideology and methodology is False.

Therefore, you FAILED!

Given you refuse to acknowledge your failure indicates the depth of your dishonesty and lack of character. Endit!

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

You know, nobody is "all bad" or "all good" regardless of their political ideology. PEOPLE sometimes do bad things to one another. I think this has more to do with the people involved than the overall political ideology. You want to insinuate that a political ideology can be a driving force behind genocidal acts. I think most people would find that silly.

"You know, nobody is "all bad" or "all good" regardless of their political ideology."

Hitler was a great painter: two coats in an afternoon!



Simple to live your life through platitudes, eh?

Sorry that you're so insane.

As per that quote, the choice of being a happy pig or a dissatisfied human being, I can actually see your choice of the former as being a valid choice.


Most especially if you

a. recognize that you aren't bright enough to consider the facts,
or
b. if you are too cowardly to confront the Liberal herd.



,,,and, no....I'm not insane: mommy had me tested.

I think you need more testing, seriously. Your paranoid rants are really just . . . beyond silly. I don't know if you are serious or if you just do it for the attention from the other crazies around here.

I'm thinking self esteem issues, the person Politic Chica has and a desire for attention unquenched. A very sad person who needs help.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You know, nobody is "all bad" or "all good" regardless of their political ideology. PEOPLE sometimes do bad things to one another. I think this has more to do with the people involved than the overall political ideology. You want to insinuate that a political ideology can be a driving force behind genocidal acts. I think most people would find that silly.

"You know, nobody is "all bad" or "all good" regardless of their political ideology."

Hitler was a great painter: two coats in an afternoon!



Simple to live your life through platitudes, eh?

Sorry that you're so insane.

As per that quote, the choice of being a happy pig or a dissatisfied human being, I can actually see your choice of the former as being a valid choice.


Most especially if you

a. recognize that you aren't bright enough to consider the facts,
or
b. if you are too cowardly to confront the Liberal herd.



,,,and, no....I'm not insane: mommy had me tested.

I think you need more testing, seriously. Your paranoid rants are really just . . . beyond silly. I don't know if you are serious or if you just do it for the attention from the other crazies around here.

I'm thinking self esteem issues, the person Politic Chica has and a desire for attention unquenched. A very sad person who needs help.

You are noted as a "spherical imbecile" because you are an imbecile no matter the direction from which you are looked at.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

"You know, nobody is "all bad" or "all good" regardless of their political ideology."

Hitler was a great painter: two coats in an afternoon!



Simple to live your life through platitudes, eh?

Sorry that you're so insane.

As per that quote, the choice of being a happy pig or a dissatisfied human being, I can actually see your choice of the former as being a valid choice.


Most especially if you

a. recognize that you aren't bright enough to consider the facts,
or
b. if you are too cowardly to confront the Liberal herd.



,,,and, no....I'm not insane: mommy had me tested.

I think you need more testing, seriously. Your paranoid rants are really just . . . beyond silly. I don't know if you are serious or if you just do it for the attention from the other crazies around here.

I'm thinking self esteem issues, the person Politic Chica has and a desire for attention unquenched. A very sad person who needs help.

You are noted as a "spherical imbecile" because you are an imbecile no matter the direction from which you are looked at.

Now that was geometrically clever coming from such a linear absolutist narrow mind. Now take your pill and get some rest, dear...that must have been taxing!

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Molotov: "...the two ideologies and methods were the same."

You used your "quote" above as part of your proof for your thesis; your premise that Fascism and Communism methodology and ideology were one and the same. I haven't been able to locate a source for that quote to see what is written before the ellipsis, so I'm led to believe you didn't want to disclose that or an exact source you claim to have quoted by Molotov, which is actually a quote of yourself from your #3 in post #27. Quoting yourself in the same post?

In any case...

We all SHOULD know that collectivism was a major goal following the Bolshevik Revolution with the rise of Leninist/Marxist Communism. As initiated by Lenin and followed on by Stalin later on and through WWII, collectivism in its various forms was maintained over the entire period of the Nazi regime from 1933-1945 in the USSR.

Were the Nazis collectivists? The historical record does not bear that out at all. Germany had a large, stable and growing industrial base in the1930's run by quasi-capitalists and neither agriculture nor private property of Arians were collectivized. Private companies like Krupp, Messerschmitt, Daimler-Benz, Siemens, Focke-Wulf, et al, were among the industrial base when the Nazis came to power. None of those businesses were collectivized. Competitors such as Heinkel, Messerschmitt, and Focke-Wulf competed for contracts with the Reich for aircraft design and production. Krupp was the worlds largest arms manufacturer. They made a lots of Marks!

Given these historical facts, how are collectivist and quasi-capitalist industrial systems economically and ideologically the same? The two certainly were not!

Given these historical facts, how are collectivist and quasi-capitalist industrial systems economically and methodologically the same? The two certainly were not!

The main political parallel between the two was both regimes were totalitarian. The Communist collectivists were on far left of the political spectrum, while the Nazi fascists were on the opposite end, the right during that period.

The two ideologies and methodologies were definitely not the same.

Put away your biased Randian colored glasses, Chica.

BTW, you PLAGIARIZED yourself by not attributing the quote I noted at the top to yourself!

2. "Were the Nazis collectivists? The historical record does not bear that out at all. Germany had a large, stable and growing industrial base in the1930's run by quasi-capitalists....."

Wrong.
(sigh...) If you had only paid more attention in school



"What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existedin name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it wasthe German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of thesubstantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."
Mises Daily Mises Institute

I warned you to take off your Randian colored glasses didn't I? And I wasn't home schooled.

The fact that George Reisman wrote about, not quoted, but wrote about what Mises borrowed from what Ayn Rand postulated [The Ayn Rand Lexicon Objectivism from A to Z Ayn Rand Lexicon] does not change history. What a course to follow; from Rand to Mises to Reisman! Quit trying deflect from the topic and your faulty conclusions based on an alleged quote by Molotov to align with your Objectivist views.

Instead of a C&P of a bit of philosophy rather than documented proof of practice, provide either a documented commentary or source information of any historical practice of collectivism in Germany between 1933 and 1945 involving industry, agriculture and private property of Arians in the Reich equivalent to that practiced in the USSR during that same period. You can't do it because it didn't happen. Because extreme right wing Objectivists say there is an equivalence through semantic manipulations does not change the historical record of the matter.

During the Reich, Communist collectivism WAS NOT and NEVER WAS the political or practiced equivalent of Nazi fascism, and share only their totalitarian nature, and in their diametric opposition within the political spectrum; extreme left for the former and extreme right for the latter.

In any case, you have failed to prove what you claimed; "Molotov: "...the two ideologies and methods were the same."" [PoliticalChic, Page 3, Post 27]. Unless you are able to prove that, your grade is FAILED!

I put you in your place again, huh?

Drop by for an education anytime.

Your argument FAILED

Your assertion that Communist collectivism and Nazi fascism were identical forms of ideology and methodology is False.

Therefore, you FAILED!

Given you refuse to acknowledge your failure indicates the depth of your dishonesty and lack of character. Endit!

If you're too dumb to put 2 and 2 together maybe you should step back and not announce it to the world. Everything she said is correct. Only a useful idiot would argue otherwise.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sorry that you're so insane.

As per that quote, the choice of being a happy pig or a dissatisfied human being, I can actually see your choice of the former as being a valid choice.


Most especially if you

a. recognize that you aren't bright enough to consider the facts,
or
b. if you are too cowardly to confront the Liberal herd.



,,,and, no....I'm not insane: mommy had me tested.

I think you need more testing, seriously. Your paranoid rants are really just . . . beyond silly. I don't know if you are serious or if you just do it for the attention from the other crazies around here.

I'm thinking self esteem issues, the person Politic Chica has and a desire for attention unquenched. A very sad person who needs help.

You are noted as a "spherical imbecile" because you are an imbecile no matter the direction from which you are looked at.

Now that was geometrically clever coming from such a linear absolutist narrow mind. Now take your pill and get some rest, dear...that must have been taxing!

Wait...aren't you the guy I showed to be a lying sack of sewage?

Yup....you are.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

You used your "quote" above as part of your proof for your thesis; your premise that Fascism and Communism methodology and ideology were one and the same. I haven't been able to locate a source for that quote to see what is written before the ellipsis, so I'm led to believe you didn't want to disclose that or an exact source you claim to have quoted by Molotov, which is actually a quote of yourself from your #3 in post #27. Quoting yourself in the same post?

In any case...

We all SHOULD know that collectivism was a major goal following the Bolshevik Revolution with the rise of Leninist/Marxist Communism. As initiated by Lenin and followed on by Stalin later on and through WWII, collectivism in its various forms was maintained over the entire period of the Nazi regime from 1933-1945 in the USSR.

Were the Nazis collectivists? The historical record does not bear that out at all. Germany had a large, stable and growing industrial base in the1930's run by quasi-capitalists and neither agriculture nor private property of Arians were collectivized. Private companies like Krupp, Messerschmitt, Daimler-Benz, Siemens, Focke-Wulf, et al, were among the industrial base when the Nazis came to power. None of those businesses were collectivized. Competitors such as Heinkel, Messerschmitt, and Focke-Wulf competed for contracts with the Reich for aircraft design and production. Krupp was the worlds largest arms manufacturer. They made a lots of Marks!

Given these historical facts, how are collectivist and quasi-capitalist industrial systems economically and ideologically the same? The two certainly were not!

Given these historical facts, how are collectivist and quasi-capitalist industrial systems economically and methodologically the same? The two certainly were not!

The main political parallel between the two was both regimes were totalitarian. The Communist collectivists were on far left of the political spectrum, while the Nazi fascists were on the opposite end, the right during that period.

The two ideologies and methodologies were definitely not the same.

Put away your biased Randian colored glasses, Chica.

BTW, you PLAGIARIZED yourself by not attributing the quote I noted at the top to yourself!

2. "Were the Nazis collectivists? The historical record does not bear that out at all. Germany had a large, stable and growing industrial base in the1930's run by quasi-capitalists....."

Wrong.
(sigh...) If you had only paid more attention in school



"What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existedin name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it wasthe German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of thesubstantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."
Mises Daily Mises Institute

I warned you to take off your Randian colored glasses didn't I? And I wasn't home schooled.

The fact that George Reisman wrote about, not quoted, but wrote about what Mises borrowed from what Ayn Rand postulated [The Ayn Rand Lexicon Objectivism from A to Z Ayn Rand Lexicon] does not change history. What a course to follow; from Rand to Mises to Reisman! Quit trying deflect from the topic and your faulty conclusions based on an alleged quote by Molotov to align with your Objectivist views.

Instead of a C&P of a bit of philosophy rather than documented proof of practice, provide either a documented commentary or source information of any historical practice of collectivism in Germany between 1933 and 1945 involving industry, agriculture and private property of Arians in the Reich equivalent to that practiced in the USSR during that same period. You can't do it because it didn't happen. Because extreme right wing Objectivists say there is an equivalence through semantic manipulations does not change the historical record of the matter.

During the Reich, Communist collectivism WAS NOT and NEVER WAS the political or practiced equivalent of Nazi fascism, and share only their totalitarian nature, and in their diametric opposition within the political spectrum; extreme left for the former and extreme right for the latter.

In any case, you have failed to prove what you claimed; "Molotov: "...the two ideologies and methods were the same."" [PoliticalChic, Page 3, Post 27]. Unless you are able to prove that, your grade is FAILED!

I put you in your place again, huh?

Drop by for an education anytime.

Your argument FAILED

Your assertion that Communist collectivism and Nazi fascism were identical forms of ideology and methodology is False.

Therefore, you FAILED!

Given you refuse to acknowledge your failure indicates the depth of your dishonesty and lack of character. Endit!

If you're too dumb to put 2 and 2 together maybe you should step back and not announce it to the world. Everything she said is correct. Only a useful idiot would argue otherwise.

 

[PoliticalChic]

2. "Were the Nazis collectivists? The historical record does not bear that out at all. Germany had a large, stable and growing industrial base in the1930's run by quasi-capitalists....."

Wrong.
(sigh...) If you had only paid more attention in school



"What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existedin name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it wasthe German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of thesubstantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."
Mises Daily Mises Institute

I warned you to take off your Randian colored glasses didn't I? And I wasn't home schooled.

The fact that George Reisman wrote about, not quoted, but wrote about what Mises borrowed from what Ayn Rand postulated [The Ayn Rand Lexicon Objectivism from A to Z Ayn Rand Lexicon] does not change history. What a course to follow; from Rand to Mises to Reisman! Quit trying deflect from the topic and your faulty conclusions based on an alleged quote by Molotov to align with your Objectivist views.

Instead of a C&P of a bit of philosophy rather than documented proof of practice, provide either a documented commentary or source information of any historical practice of collectivism in Germany between 1933 and 1945 involving industry, agriculture and private property of Arians in the Reich equivalent to that practiced in the USSR during that same period. You can't do it because it didn't happen. Because extreme right wing Objectivists say there is an equivalence through semantic manipulations does not change the historical record of the matter.

During the Reich, Communist collectivism WAS NOT and NEVER WAS the political or practiced equivalent of Nazi fascism, and share only their totalitarian nature, and in their diametric opposition within the political spectrum; extreme left for the former and extreme right for the latter.

In any case, you have failed to prove what you claimed; "Molotov: "...the two ideologies and methods were the same."" [PoliticalChic, Page 3, Post 27]. Unless you are able to prove that, your grade is FAILED!

I put you in your place again, huh?

Drop by for an education anytime.

Your argument FAILED

Your assertion that Communist collectivism and Nazi fascism were identical forms of ideology and methodology is False.

Therefore, you FAILED!

Given you refuse to acknowledge your failure indicates the depth of your dishonesty and lack of character. Endit!

If you're too dumb to put 2 and 2 together maybe you should step back and not announce it to the world. Everything she said is correct. Only a useful idiot would argue otherwise.

I'm glad to see you're not letting education get in the way of your ignorance.

First of all, you're an idiot.

And second...nah, that pretty much covers it.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

You used your "quote" above as part of your proof for your thesis; your premise that Fascism and Communism methodology and ideology were one and the same. I haven't been able to locate a source for that quote to see what is written before the ellipsis, so I'm led to believe you didn't want to disclose that or an exact source you claim to have quoted by Molotov, which is actually a quote of yourself from your #3 in post #27. Quoting yourself in the same post?

In any case...

We all SHOULD know that collectivism was a major goal following the Bolshevik Revolution with the rise of Leninist/Marxist Communism. As initiated by Lenin and followed on by Stalin later on and through WWII, collectivism in its various forms was maintained over the entire period of the Nazi regime from 1933-1945 in the USSR.

Were the Nazis collectivists? The historical record does not bear that out at all. Germany had a large, stable and growing industrial base in the1930's run by quasi-capitalists and neither agriculture nor private property of Arians were collectivized. Private companies like Krupp, Messerschmitt, Daimler-Benz, Siemens, Focke-Wulf, et al, were among the industrial base when the Nazis came to power. None of those businesses were collectivized. Competitors such as Heinkel, Messerschmitt, and Focke-Wulf competed for contracts with the Reich for aircraft design and production. Krupp was the worlds largest arms manufacturer. They made a lots of Marks!

Given these historical facts, how are collectivist and quasi-capitalist industrial systems economically and ideologically the same? The two certainly were not!

Given these historical facts, how are collectivist and quasi-capitalist industrial systems economically and methodologically the same? The two certainly were not!

The main political parallel between the two was both regimes were totalitarian. The Communist collectivists were on far left of the political spectrum, while the Nazi fascists were on the opposite end, the right during that period.

The two ideologies and methodologies were definitely not the same.

Put away your biased Randian colored glasses, Chica.

BTW, you PLAGIARIZED yourself by not attributing the quote I noted at the top to yourself!

2. "Were the Nazis collectivists? The historical record does not bear that out at all. Germany had a large, stable and growing industrial base in the1930's run by quasi-capitalists....."

Wrong.
(sigh...) If you had only paid more attention in school



"What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existedin name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it wasthe German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of thesubstantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."
Mises Daily Mises Institute

I warned you to take off your Randian colored glasses didn't I? And I wasn't home schooled.

The fact that George Reisman wrote about, not quoted, but wrote about what Mises borrowed from what Ayn Rand postulated [The Ayn Rand Lexicon Objectivism from A to Z Ayn Rand Lexicon] does not change history. What a course to follow; from Rand to Mises to Reisman! Quit trying deflect from the topic and your faulty conclusions based on an alleged quote by Molotov to align with your Objectivist views.

Instead of a C&P of a bit of philosophy rather than documented proof of practice, provide either a documented commentary or source information of any historical practice of collectivism in Germany between 1933 and 1945 involving industry, agriculture and private property of Arians in the Reich equivalent to that practiced in the USSR during that same period. You can't do it because it didn't happen. Because extreme right wing Objectivists say there is an equivalence through semantic manipulations does not change the historical record of the matter.

During the Reich, Communist collectivism WAS NOT and NEVER WAS the political or practiced equivalent of Nazi fascism, and share only their totalitarian nature, and in their diametric opposition within the political spectrum; extreme left for the former and extreme right for the latter.

In any case, you have failed to prove what you claimed; "Molotov: "...the two ideologies and methods were the same."" [PoliticalChic, Page 3, Post 27]. Unless you are able to prove that, your grade is FAILED!

I put you in your place again, huh?

Drop by for an education anytime.

Your argument FAILED

Your assertion that Communist collectivism and Nazi fascism were identical forms of ideology and methodology is False.

Therefore, you FAILED!

Given you refuse to acknowledge your failure indicates the depth of your dishonesty and lack of character. Endit!

If you're too dumb to put 2 and 2 together maybe you should step back and not announce it to the world. Everything she said is correct. Only a useful idiot would argue otherwise.

Anyone can pop out of the woodwork and respond to and exchange between others with a disingenuous critique lacking any basis in foundation. For your edification, Chica made this statement in a post further back; the veracity of which I challenged:
"Molotov: "...the two ideologies and methods were the same."" [PoliticalChic, Page 3, Post 27]

Care to outline your take on how Communist collectivism and Nazi fascism were identical forms of the same ideology and methodology as claimed by Chica? How, specifically, was the Soviet brand of industrial collectivism IDENTICAL to the Reich's industrial quasi-capitalism, how, specifically, were German and the USSR's collectivized agricultural systems IDENTICAL and how, specifically, were German property rights and Soviet property collectivization IDENTICAL?

Chica avoided the attempt a few times, when challenged, to respond to those points when her premise was challenged. Anyone can make a mistake or may have missed something, some point of understanding. I don't hold that against anyone, and will allow them an opportunity to redeem themselves if given the chance. I was not afforded that chance.

If you wish to make a reasoned and substantiated argument supporting Chica's premise, I'd like to read it. I'm old enough and wise enough to know beyond a doubt no one is right 100% of the time...no one.

I'll leave it up to you to either stand tall, move on silently or kick into bat shit crazy neoconservative mode as Chica does to deflect from admit error.. Hey, its a free country until the fascist faction takes control, so the options are open to you.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

I warned you to take off your Randian colored glasses didn't I? And I wasn't home schooled.

The fact that George Reisman wrote about, not quoted, but wrote about what Mises borrowed from what Ayn Rand postulated [The Ayn Rand Lexicon Objectivism from A to Z Ayn Rand Lexicon] does not change history. What a course to follow; from Rand to Mises to Reisman! Quit trying deflect from the topic and your faulty conclusions based on an alleged quote by Molotov to align with your Objectivist views.

Instead of a C&P of a bit of philosophy rather than documented proof of practice, provide either a documented commentary or source information of any historical practice of collectivism in Germany between 1933 and 1945 involving industry, agriculture and private property of Arians in the Reich equivalent to that practiced in the USSR during that same period. You can't do it because it didn't happen. Because extreme right wing Objectivists say there is an equivalence through semantic manipulations does not change the historical record of the matter.

During the Reich, Communist collectivism WAS NOT and NEVER WAS the political or practiced equivalent of Nazi fascism, and share only their totalitarian nature, and in their diametric opposition within the political spectrum; extreme left for the former and extreme right for the latter.

In any case, you have failed to prove what you claimed; "Molotov: "...the two ideologies and methods were the same."" [PoliticalChic, Page 3, Post 27]. Unless you are able to prove that, your grade is FAILED!

I put you in your place again, huh?

Drop by for an education anytime.

Your argument FAILED

Your assertion that Communist collectivism and Nazi fascism were identical forms of ideology and methodology is False.

Therefore, you FAILED!

Given you refuse to acknowledge your failure indicates the depth of your dishonesty and lack of character. Endit!

If you're too dumb to put 2 and 2 together maybe you should step back and not announce it to the world. Everything she said is correct. Only a useful idiot would argue otherwise.

I'm glad to see you're not letting education get in the way of your ignorance.

First of all, you're an idiot.

And second...nah, that pretty much covers it.

And yet you will not reply to the substance of my posts regarding my challenges to your premise that, "Molotov: "...the two ideologies and methods were the same."" [PoliticalChic, Page 3, Post 27]

That pitiful Objectivist/Mises dodge didn't come close to a proper response.

Why is that Chica? All you have is ad hominem to use as a shield to avoid displaying your perfidy.

 

[2aguy]

1. The devotees of totalitarianism, where government and the collective is more important than any human, any individual, accept genocide as government policy in support of doctrine.....communist, fascist, Nazi, and socialism.

As Liberals and Progressives have the same view vis-a-vis the collective, it follows that they are the same as any other totalitarian view qualitatively, if not quantitatively.


a. "The progressive left, and the liberal left, while not themselves communists, share many of the same sympathies, such of redistribution of wealth, and worker’s rights, nationalizations of industry, etc, but are not quite as far left as the communists, and would not go to the same lengths as the communists to achieve their goals. This does not mean, though, that the help of these dupes is not necessary in order for the communists to achieve victory. " Dr. Paul Kengor, Hoover Institution, Stanford “DUPES: How America's Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century


b. It is only America's history and character that prevent our totalitarians from engaging in the genocide that other iterations have:
" The excesses of the European versions of fascism were mitigated by the specific history and culture of America, Jeffersonian individualism, heterogeneity of the population, but the central theme is still an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life., albeit at the loss of what had hitherfore been accepted as ‘inalienable human rights.’" Goldberg, "Liberal Fascism"




2. Marxism (communism), and its spin-off, Nazism, were foursquare behind mass killings.....by bullets, by state-engineered famine, by working prisoners to death....death to millions upon millions.

a. The film opens showing the method used to kill millions of civilians...hands tied behind their backs, an expertly aimed shot to the back of the head, the fall into a mass grave. Not the Nazis....Stalin's Soviets....and this went on for years, well before FDR embraced the USSR.

"Hang at least 100 hostages, execute the kulaks, do it in such a way that people for hundreds of miles around will see and tremble." Lenin (document shown) He took power in 1917.
From the documentary "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
Both, of course, of The Left.....not the Right.

"Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983

You can view it in its entirety, here:
http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==

http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==



3. "Early socialists publically advocated genocide, in the 19th and 20th centuries. It first appeared in Marx's journal, Rheinishe Zeitung, in January of 1849. When the socialist class war happens, there will be primitive societies in Europe, two stages behind- not even capitalist yet- the Basques, the Bretons, the Scottish Highlanders, the Serbs, and others he calls 'racial trash,' and they will have to be destroyed because, being two stages behind in the class struggle, it will be impossible to bring them up to being revolutionary."
George Watson, Historian, Cambridge University.

a. "The classes and races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way...they must perish in the revolutionary holocaust." Karl Marx, People's Paper, April 16, 1856, Journal of the History of Idea, 1981

b. "Before Marx, no other European thinker publically advocated racial extermination. He was the first."
George Watson.



And in a far off part of the world, yet, another totalist proclaimed: “We love death. You love your life!”

I like to post that clip about the "primitive societies" that marx deemed to far behind the historical curve......the people who openly march as communists in these protest movements should be shamed the same way the left wing nazis are....

 

[David_42]

Does all the OP know how to do is copy and paste drivel?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Does all the OP know how to do is copy and paste drivel?

Close to it!

 

[ChrisL]

I think the OP is just a lost cause. The hate has taken over, like so many others. Their lives revolve around this kind of stuff. Who else devotes so much time and energy into demonizing one group or another like this? Someone who has issues, that's who.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I think the OP is just a lost cause. The hate has taken over, like so many others. Their lives revolve around this kind of stuff. Who else devotes so much time and energy into demonizing one group or another like this? Someone who has issues, that's who.

You are not eligible to use the first two words in your post.....fact not in evidence.

 

[g5000]

4. Which is based on the collective over the individual?

And, of course, they all are do.

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism

And now we demonstrate PC often bloviates on matters of which she is entirely ignorant. Her claim, for example that, "Nazism is based on the collective over the individual".

I will let Adolf take it from here.

The following excerpts are from Mein Kampf, Vol II, Chapter 4:


All of human civilization is the result of the creative activity of individual persons who direct the national community and especially those who act as leaders. But in politics, the most important principle becomes the strength of the majority. From the top it trickles down, and it gradually begins to poison all life and ultimately dissolves it. Even the destructive effect of Jewry’s activity, which we can see in other nations, result from its constant effort to undermine the importance of the individual person in those nations hosting their presence. The Jew seeks to replace the power of the individual by the domination of the masses.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________


Marxism is the pure essence of the Jew’s attempts to eliminate the importance of character in every aspect of human life and replace it with the numerical power of the masses. Its political counterpart is the parliamentary form of government whose disastrous work we can see going on from the tiny nucleus of the village all the way up to the top of the Reich. Their economic counterpart is the system of trade union movements, which do not serve the true interests of the wage-earner, but only the destructive purposes of the international world Jew. The farther our economic system moves away from the influence of the character principle, the more it surrenders itself to the effects of the masses.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

They harm the total production system and, in turn, harm the individual worker. The members of the nation cannot be satisfied in the long run by fancy theoretical phrases. They will only be satisfied when they receive the goods they need to carry on their daily lives, and through this process they create a collective conviction among the national community that results in the interests of the community being guarded by the individual, and the interests of the individual being upheld by the community

________________________________________________________________________________________________

What most clearly distinguishes the new race-based World-Concept from the Marxist World-Concept is the fact that the new race-based World- Concept recognizes the value of race and the importance of the individual and makes these the pillars of its whole structure. These are the most important factors that carry its World-Concept .

If the National-Socialist movement failed to understand the fundamental significance of this essential principle-of-character and instead only outwardly patched up the present State or actually considered the mass-rule standpoint as its own, it would then be nothing more than another party competing with Marxism on its own principles. It would no longer have a right to call itself a World-Concept . If the National Socialist program sought to crowd out individuals and replace them with the masses, that would mean National Socialism itself was already eaten away by the poison of Marxism, just as the world of our privileged-class political parties are today.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
For that reason, the new race-based State must remove the current obscene political leadership, especially the highest leadership positions, from the grip of majority rule by parliament. This will assure that it will be replaced by the right of the individual, and personal responsibility will be placed there instead.

From that, we can draw the following conclusion: The best state constitution and form of state government are those that give the greatest importance and governing influence to the best minds of the national community.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________


The more I read PC's screeds, the more she sounds like a Nazi to me, right down to the fear and loathing of other races and their cultures.

This is why it is so important to people like her to convince themselves that Nazis are left wing so as to willfully blind themselves to the fact they are walking down the same path as Adolf, hand-in-hand.

 

[PoliticalChic]

4. Which is based on the collective over the individual?

And, of course, they all are do.

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism

And now we demonstrate PC often bloviates on matters of which she is entirely ignorant. I will let Adolf take it from here.

The following excerpts are from Mein Kampf, Vol II, Chapter 4:


All of human civilization is the result of the creative activity of individual persons who direct the national community and especially those who act as leaders. But in politics, the most important principle becomes the strength of the majority. From the top it trickles down, and it gradually begins to poison all life and ultimately dissolves it. Even the destructive effect of Jewry’s activity, which we can see in other nations, result from its constant effort to undermine the importance of the individual person in those nations hosting their presence. The Jew seeks to replace the power of the individual by the domination of the masses.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________


Marxism is the pure essence of the Jew’s attempts to eliminate the importance of character in every aspect of human life and replace it with the numerical power of the masses. Its political counterpart is the parliamentary form of government whose disastrous work we can see going on from the tiny nucleus of the village all the way up to the top of the Reich. Their economic counterpart is the system of trade union movements, which do not serve the true interests of the wage-earner, but only the destructive purposes of the international world Jew. The farther our economic system moves away from the influence of the character principle, the more it surrenders itself to the effects of the masses.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

They harm the total production system and, in turn, harm the individual worker. The members of the nation cannot be satisfied in the long run by fancy theoretical phrases. They will only be satisfied when they receive the goods they need to carry on their daily lives, and through this process they create a collective conviction among the national community that results in the interests of the community being guarded by the individual, and the interests of the individual being upheld by the community

________________________________________________________________________________________________

What most clearly distinguishes the new race-based World-Concept from the Marxist World-Concept is the fact that the new race-based World- Concept recognizes the value of race and the importance of the individual and makes these the pillars of its whole structure. These are the most important factors that carry its World-Concept .

If the National-Socialist movement failed to understand the fundamental significance of this essential principle-of-character and instead only outwardly patched up the present State or actually considered the mass-rule standpoint as its own, it would then be nothing more than another party competing with Marxism on its own principles. It would no longer have a right to call itself a World-Concept . If the National Socialist program sought to crowd out individuals and replace them with the masses, that would mean National Socialism itself was already eaten away by the poison of Marxism, just as the world of our privileged-class political parties are today.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
For that reason, the new race-based State must remove the current obscene political leadership, especially the highest leadership positions, from the grip of majority rule by parliament. This will assure that it will be replaced by the right of the individual, and personal responsibility will be placed there instead.

From that, we can draw the following conclusion: The best state constitution and form of state government are those that give the greatest importance and governing influence to the best minds of the national community.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________


The more I read PC's screeds, the more she sounds like a Nazi to me, right down to the fear and loathing of other races and their cultures.

This is why it is so important to people like her to convince themselves that Nazis are left wing so as to willfully blind themselves to the fact they are walking down the same path as Adolf, hand-in-hand.

Watch me whip you again:

Communism, socialism, Nazism, Liberalism, Progressivism...are all 'fruit of the same poison tree.'



Nazism, communism, socialism..Liberalism, Progressivism,.and fascism....

1. Which stem from the works of Karl Marx?
2. Which is a form of command and control big government?
3. Which has no problem with genocide, actual or figurative, as an accepted procedure on its political enemies?
4. Which is based on the collective over the individual?
5. Which oppresses and/or slaughters its own citizens as pro forma (including depriving them of a living)....?
6. Which represents totalitarian governance?
7. Which believes that mandating/dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives is their prerogative?
8. Which aims for an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life



And, of course, they all are do.

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism






How about pointing out which of them are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society?
Right....none of 'em.
Only right wing philosophies...i.e., conservatism.


Afraid of my little quiz?
You can run, but you can't hide.