American Nazis In Mufti

[PoliticalChic]

What political ideology is immune to misuse? It doesn't matter what it's called, as soon as the ideology needs to be protected to survive it is counterproductive to its initial ambition.

We need to be constantly aware of this, not blindly support a label no matter how society changes.

In practice most, if not all, ideologies seems to be on a scale from here to there, from time to time.

Problem of the day: totally polarised climate of discussion. Not being able to discuss or listen. That's not an ideology.

Fence sitters get splinters.

"There's Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos"

So, half of the population shouldn't take interest in the needs and thoughts of the other half? Polarity is good?

The only actions the government is authorized to perform are listed in Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution.


You've never read it, have you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Im not sure, not every authoritarian or totalitarian government form is fascism though. Fascism per definition has socially conservative ideas, but the government form is totalitarian. There is left-right and authoritarian-libertarian. Fascists are right-authoritarian, while Republicans are Right-Libertarian. Communists are Left-Authoritarian, but there are also anarcho-leftists who are left-libertarian etc.

The further right you move, the less government there is. The fact that you're looking at the definition instead of applying rational thought only shows you're a Liberal at heart. Considering the Republicans are the ones who freed the slaves while the Democrats were the ones fighting them to keep races in bondage while YOU'RE claiming that Republicans or Conservatives are somehow inherently racists and racist policies, like the Jim Crow laws, also put in place by Democrats, are somehow Socially Conservative only goes to show how confused you are. You really should stop asking the Liberal Establishment what you should think, because they may convince you up is down next.

Im not radical liberal Im moderate, Im neither right nor left, I would describe myself as politically unaffialiated free thinker, Im just applying mainstream definitions.

Au contraire....

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.


Your thought processes have been bought and paid for by the Left.


Can I guess?
Government school grad?

You say that "liberals are fascists" which you mean radical and intolerant of political opponnents but now you are the same, you attack me and put a label on me which I said Im not. Im not even "liberal". For you if Im not right wing or conservative enough you will dismiss me.

You are wasting your time mate. They have a whole industry built up around this nonsense because the more civilised among them recoil from any idea that their views come with swastikas.Its dumb America at its finest.

Swastikas are reserved for the other totalitarian beliefs....like Liberalism and Progressivism.

You know....like you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump. ...

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

Gads, you're a moron.

Read Kirsten Powers' .....a long time Liberal.....view of exactly that.....if you ever pick up a book that doesn't require crayons.


In her new book, "The Silencing: How The Left Is Killing Free Speech," she makes these remarks:


1. The Left is opposed to all sorts of things, but the behavior that is most harmful to American values is the attacks on free speech, debate, and dissent.

There is no possibility, for the Left, that any disagreement is acceptable, and, in fact, may be correct.

a. The Left survives on demonization of the Right…rather than debating ideas: they teach their drones that the Right is not wrong, but evil…

b. Those with the highest level of education have the least exposure to people with conflicting points of view

c. Given the choice between having all the gun laws you want…vs. all the religious folks I want…which would produce a better nation?


2. "...an alarming level of intolerance emanates from the left side of the political spectrumtoward people who express views that don't hew to the 'settled' liberal worldview."
Powers, Op. Cit.



3. As has been posted before in these threads, and proven by Liberal/Progressive acolytes on this board, we regularly find an "aggressive, illiberal impulse to silence people." Kirsten Powers, "The Silencing: How The Left Is Killing Free Speech"


4. Why do they find it necessary? Because, in the market place of ideas, the Left cannot compete. Ask them to explain their disagreement with the principles of conservatism, based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government, and there is no cogent reply.
Any narration of their doctrines and aims, when compared with the results of same, shows a categorical record of failure, oppression, and slaughter.

 

[PoliticalChic]

@4:51 "...Do you think it's OK to refuse to do business with people they disagree with?...Absolutely!!"



'Self-righteousness' is cat-nip for Liberals.
But they are soooooo stupid.


Now....get this irony: what do you suppose would be this Hillary voter's response if asked about a baker not wishing to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding...

...or a florist who declined to provide flowers for a gay wedding.....

....or a photographer ....chose not to attend and facilitate a gay wedding?


As Carlson states @7:39: The Left has promoted the doctrine, for 8 years....that if you disagree with someone...you're not allowed to decline to do business with him: that is discrimination.

 

[ErikViking]

What political ideology is immune to misuse? It doesn't matter what it's called, as soon as the ideology needs to be protected to survive it is counterproductive to its initial ambition.

We need to be constantly aware of this, not blindly support a label no matter how society changes.

In practice most, if not all, ideologies seems to be on a scale from here to there, from time to time.

Problem of the day: totally polarised climate of discussion. Not being able to discuss or listen. That's not an ideology.

Fence sitters get splinters.

"There's Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos"

So, half of the population shouldn't take interest in the needs and thoughts of the other half? Polarity is good?

The only actions the government is authorized to perform are listed in Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution.


You've never read it, have you.

There's no constitution that regulates what governments are allowed to do?

Perhaps I misunderstood, thought you were discussing different ideologies. Sorry.

 

[owebo]

What political ideology is immune to misuse? It doesn't matter what it's called, as soon as the ideology needs to be protected to survive it is counterproductive to its initial ambition.

We need to be constantly aware of this, not blindly support a label no matter how society changes.

In practice most, if not all, ideologies seems to be on a scale from here to there, from time to time.

Problem of the day: totally polarised climate of discussion. Not being able to discuss or listen. That's not an ideology.

Fence sitters get splinters.

"There's Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos"

So, half of the population shouldn't take interest in the needs and thoughts of the other half? Polarity is good?

The only actions the government is authorized to perform are listed in Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution.


You've never read it, have you.

There's no constitution that regulates what governments are allowed to do?

Perhaps I misunderstood, thought you were discussing different ideologies. Sorry.

Our Constitution is a charter of negative rights, of the .gov....

 

[SAYIT]

I think Fascist is the wrong term, but they are radical. Fascists is per definition right wingers

You couldn't be more wrong.
You could try to be...but you wouldn't be successful.

For your education:

In a letter written on March 19, 1944, Ayn Rand remarked:
“Fascism, Nazism, Communism and Socialism are only superficial variations of the same monstrous theme—collectivism.” Rand would later expand on this insight in various articles, most notably in two of her lectures at the Ford Hall Forum in Boston: “The Fascist New Frontier” (Dec. 16, 1962, published as a booklet by the Nathaniel Branden Institute in 1963); and “The New Fascism: Rule by Consensus” (April 18, 1965, published as Chapter 20 in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal [CUI] by New American Library in 1967).

As Rand put it in “Conservativism: An Obituary” (CUI, Chapter 19):
The world conflict of today is the conflict of the individual against the state, the same conflict that has been fought throughout mankind’s history. The names change, but the essence—and the results—remain the same, whether it is the individual against feudalism, or against absolute monarchy, or against communism or fascism or Nazism or socialism or the welfare state.


Modern Liberalism....the Democrat Party, specifically, stands for the very same doctrines and principles of the Communist Party,USA.


Don't make that mistake again.

One (but not the only) definition of fascism is "an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization." In that context, it is just a word and its meaning. The reality is not all RWers are fascists and many on the left exhibit some tendencies of fascism.

I find the more extreme the ideological slant - left or right - the more fascism is involved.

 

[SAYIT]

How's it feel to be on the receiving end of things this time. Same thing happened over Obama in 2008 and still continues to this day. While I don't mind someone talking disparingly, I do draw the line in the suggesting that OUR President needs to be Assassinated... I am a Progressive Conservative ALA Eisenhower and Teddy R. You know, what the GOP was founded on and stayed until about 1980.

"How's it feel to be on the receiving end of things this time." WHAT??????

I get Hunt's point. The venom spewed at Trump by loony, hair-on-fire leftists is similar to that spewed at Obama. Hunt says our presidents are his presidents and the vehement reactions of loons both left and right is inappropriate.

 

[owebo]

I think Fascist is the wrong term, but they are radical. Fascists is per definition right wingers

You couldn't be more wrong.
You could try to be...but you wouldn't be successful.

For your education:

In a letter written on March 19, 1944, Ayn Rand remarked:
“Fascism, Nazism, Communism and Socialism are only superficial variations of the same monstrous theme—collectivism.” Rand would later expand on this insight in various articles, most notably in two of her lectures at the Ford Hall Forum in Boston: “The Fascist New Frontier” (Dec. 16, 1962, published as a booklet by the Nathaniel Branden Institute in 1963); and “The New Fascism: Rule by Consensus” (April 18, 1965, published as Chapter 20 in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal [CUI] by New American Library in 1967).

As Rand put it in “Conservativism: An Obituary” (CUI, Chapter 19):
The world conflict of today is the conflict of the individual against the state, the same conflict that has been fought throughout mankind’s history. The names change, but the essence—and the results—remain the same, whether it is the individual against feudalism, or against absolute monarchy, or against communism or fascism or Nazism or socialism or the welfare state.


Modern Liberalism....the Democrat Party, specifically, stands for the very same doctrines and principles of the Communist Party,USA.


Don't make that mistake again.

One (but not the only) definition of fascism is "an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization." In that context, it is just a word and its meaning. The reality is not all RWers are fascists and many on the left exhibit some tendencies of fascism.

I find the more extreme the ideological slant - left or right - the more fascism is involved.

Actually, fascism is, and only can be, of the left.....

Ignore the liberal propaganda....

 

[2aguy]

I think Fascist is the wrong term, but they are radical. Fascists is per definition right wingers

That is incorrect....fascism is a type of socialism...and that makes it left wing...the left has tried to tie fascism to the Right since Mussolini, a communist kicked out of Italy's communist party, created the term to describe his new brand of socialism.

Why have they tried to tie it to the Right....because the national socialists in Germany drove out the international socialists...and Stalin wanted to differentiate his socialism from theirs......

Secondly, the mass murder of the national socialists was exposed for the whole world to see in the Neremberg Trials.....the much worse mass murder of the international socialists, in Russia and CHina was hidden behind their walls of secrecy......so the left, uses the nazis to smear their opponents, because if they don't, people might just realize that the greatest mass murderers in history, were all left wing socialist states..........

 

[2aguy]

I think Fascist is the wrong term, but they are radical. Fascists is per definition right wingers

No, they're not. Fascism, socialism, etc. are all collectivist governmental systems and classified as left wing. Individualist (or in its extreme form anarchy) are right wing.

I define right wing by the content of its ideology not by the government form. Fascism is socially conservative, nationalistic, racialist etc. Thats right wing ideas to me. Read also my post about right-left and authoritarian-libertarian. There was a political compass out there, where you can see where you stand.

And that is what the Fabian socialists have been indoctrinating you with for decades. They don't want you to think for yourself. Think about it though. How can fascism ad socialism be different systems when they both advocate maximum government control over the individual? Does that make any sort of sense to you? They have tried to convince you that government types are a circle endlessly chasing one another. But they're not. They are actually quite simple. Anarchy on one extreme, and totalitarian on the other. Individualist vs collectivist.

Do some reading and think for yourself.

You want to dissasociate yourself from fascism, Im not saying Republicans or conservatives are fascists, but fascists have been conservative too, for example religious (aligned with church and having religious ideas), nationalistic etc.

Here is one of the best definitions of Fascism.......and please, the superficial things often confuse people.......the core of fascism is government control of the economy.......the left uses the superficial costumes and attitudes to hide this...

Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie.


Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.


Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners.

Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.)

Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically.

In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace.Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.

 

[2aguy]

No, they're not. Fascism, socialism, etc. are all collectivist governmental systems and classified as left wing. Individualist (or in its extreme form anarchy) are right wing.

I define right wing by the content of its ideology not by the government form. Fascism is socially conservative, nationalistic, racialist etc. Thats right wing ideas to me. Read also my post about right-left and authoritarian-libertarian. There was a political compass out there, where you can see where you stand.

And that is what the Fabian socialists have been indoctrinating you with for decades. They don't want you to think for yourself. Think about it though. How can fascism ad socialism be different systems when they both advocate maximum government control over the individual? Does that make any sort of sense to you? They have tried to convince you that government types are a circle endlessly chasing one another. But they're not. They are actually quite simple. Anarchy on one extreme, and totalitarian on the other. Individualist vs collectivist.

Do some reading and think for yourself.

You want to dissasociate yourself from fascism, Im not saying Republicans or conservatives are fascists, but fascists have been conservative too, for example religious (aligned with church and having religious ideas), nationalistic etc.

Now, pay attention:

Let's begin with definitions.
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
9. Which restricts free speech and thought?
10. Which can be summed up in Hegel's “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest”



And, of course, they all are do...they are all consubstantial.

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.

Where did you get that. The GOP was founded on Progressive Conservatism.

Now, about Marx. He advocated the disallusion of government. He laid out how to do it. He never advocated the Government doing any violence. He advocated the absence of government. You are mixing up the bastardization that Lenon and Stalin did. They came up with a plan to get communism universally accepted through violent actions and overthrowing disagreeing governments. What you think of as Communism is completely foreign to Marx's teachings. Besides, like true Democracy, true Communism only works in small groups, very small groups. Both are ideal and the oposite ends of the spectrum and neither can exist as a national government.

Are you kidding......Marx believed that certain groups were too far behind the historical curve to catch up...and would need to be killed........

You don't understand communism do you...what do you think the plan is for over throwing capitalism to get to the intermediate state of socialism until they can move to true communism....violoent over throw of captalism....

 

[2aguy]

No, they're not. Fascism, socialism, etc. are all collectivist governmental systems and classified as left wing. Individualist (or in its extreme form anarchy) are right wing.

I define right wing by the content of its ideology not by the government form. Fascism is socially conservative, nationalistic, racialist etc. Thats right wing ideas to me. Read also my post about right-left and authoritarian-libertarian. There was a political compass out there, where you can see where you stand.

And that is what the Fabian socialists have been indoctrinating you with for decades. They don't want you to think for yourself. Think about it though. How can fascism ad socialism be different systems when they both advocate maximum government control over the individual? Does that make any sort of sense to you? They have tried to convince you that government types are a circle endlessly chasing one another. But they're not. They are actually quite simple. Anarchy on one extreme, and totalitarian on the other. Individualist vs collectivist.

Do some reading and think for yourself.

You want to dissasociate yourself from fascism, Im not saying Republicans or conservatives are fascists, but fascists have been conservative too, for example religious (aligned with church and having religious ideas), nationalistic etc.

Now, pay attention:

Let's begin with definitions.
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
9. Which restricts free speech and thought?
10. Which can be summed up in Hegel's “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest”



And, of course, they all are do...they are all consubstantial.

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.

Where did you get that. The GOP was founded on Progressive Conservatism.

Now, about Marx. He advocated the disallusion of government. He laid out how to do it. He never advocated the Government doing any violence. He advocated the absence of government. You are mixing up the bastardization that Lenon and Stalin did. They came up with a plan to get communism universally accepted through violent actions and overthrowing disagreeing governments. What you think of as Communism is completely foreign to Marx's teachings. Besides, like true Democracy, true Communism only works in small groups, very small groups. Both are ideal and the oposite ends of the spectrum and neither can exist as a national government.

Here....this is a discussion of Marx and his belief that some groups would need to be mass murdered.....the Racial Trash would need to be destroyed because they would be two stages behind the historical struggle......watch the video...

 

[2aguy]

Except they're not. Not a single trait in Fascists is Right Wing, you've just been tricked by the Liberals.

Im not sure, not every authoritarian or totalitarian government form is fascism though. Fascism per definition has socially conservative ideas, but the government form is totalitarian. There is left-right and authoritarian-libertarian. Fascists are right-authoritarian, while Republicans are Right-Libertarian. Communists are Left-Authoritarian, but there are also anarcho-leftists who are left-libertarian etc.

The further right you move, the less government there is. The fact that you're looking at the definition instead of applying rational thought only shows you're a Liberal at heart. Considering the Republicans are the ones who freed the slaves while the Democrats were the ones fighting them to keep races in bondage while YOU'RE claiming that Republicans or Conservatives are somehow inherently racists and racist policies, like the Jim Crow laws, also put in place by Democrats, are somehow Socially Conservative only goes to show how confused you are. You really should stop asking the Liberal Establishment what you should think, because they may convince you up is down next.

Im not radical liberal Im moderate, Im neither right nor left, I would describe myself as politically unaffialiated free thinker, Im just applying mainstream definitions.

Au contraire....

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.


Your thought processes have been bought and paid for by the Left.


Can I guess?
Government school grad?

You say that "liberals are fascists" which you mean radical and intolerant of political opponnents but now you are the same, you attack me and put a label on me which I said Im not. Im not even "liberal". For you if Im not right wing or conservative enough you will dismiss me.

No...liberals believe that the state should control the economy....and from that it always leads to control over every aspect of life....from how much soft drink you can buy to what kind of toilet you can own......all the way up to how much you earn....every aspect of life begins to be controlled by the state...the complete opposite view of Conservative/Libertarian/Tea Party beliefs.....

 

[2aguy]

And that is what the Fabian socialists have been indoctrinating you with for decades. They don't want you to think for yourself. Think about it though. How can fascism ad socialism be different systems when they both advocate maximum government control over the individual? Does that make any sort of sense to you? They have tried to convince you that government types are a circle endlessly chasing one another. But they're not. They are actually quite simple. Anarchy on one extreme, and totalitarian on the other. Individualist vs collectivist.

Do some reading and think for yourself.

You want to dissasociate yourself from fascism, Im not saying Republicans or conservatives are fascists, but fascists have been conservative too, for example religious (aligned with church and having religious ideas), nationalistic etc.

Now, pay attention:

Let's begin with definitions.
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
9. Which restricts free speech and thought?
10. Which can be summed up in Hegel's “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest”



And, of course, they all are do...they are all consubstantial.

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.

Where did you get that. The GOP was founded on Progressive Conservatism.

Now, about Marx. He advocated the disallusion of government. He laid out how to do it. He never advocated the Government doing any violence. He advocated the absence of government. You are mixing up the bastardization that Lenon and Stalin did. They came up with a plan to get communism universally accepted through violent actions and overthrowing disagreeing governments. What you think of as Communism is completely foreign to Marx's teachings. Besides, like true Democracy, true Communism only works in small groups, very small groups. Both are ideal and the oposite ends of the spectrum and neither can exist as a national government.

Sometimes you run into a fool of your caliber....and it's best to simply roll one's eyes, pat 'em on the head, and move on.

I just corrected you that they are not fascists, but they are intolerant of political opponnents yes. Well its still much better then in real fascism. Do you consider Hitler a "liberal"? I dont think the right wing side is any more tolerant of political opponnents.

Hitler was a socialist, a left wing socialist.

 

[Eloy]

You mean like how you fascist liberals attacked his political speeches?

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

Sure are!!!!

They however are not allowed to be paid by democrat operatives to insight violence and terrorism upon innocent people....

See the difference?

Not really.
You mean when Donald Trump tells his mob to punch a citizen in the face this is not provoking violence???
Sorry, I don't get it.

He even offered to pay their legal costs I understand.

Yes he did.

So What...........That clown went in their to shout out BS and DISRUPT the Rally........so he would piss someone off to get hit............He instigated the BS. Just like MoveOn paid protesters to disrupt rallies and caused violence only to say it was those their for the Rally that started it. They later bragged about shutting down the Rally.

It is those types that are at fault for trying to violate the Constitutional Rights of Others. It is those that sparked the violence across this nation who want to blame others for getting TIRED OF THEIR CRAP.

Someone jumps in your face and calls you a Fascist, Hitler all the time and then try to sell the talking point of how the guy who puts them on their ASS is the problem.

Respect others views and protest all you want but do not get in their faces and PROVOKE A RESPONSE then they are the problem.

Sorry, if you keep getting in my face and threatening me I'm gonna put you on your ass and not lose a minutes sleep over it.

Speaking out and even heckling has been part of American tradition for decades. Every candidate for office, even the Oval Office, has been well able to handle it without calling for assault.

 

[2aguy]

I think Fascist is the wrong term, but they are radical. Fascists is per definition right wingers

Except they're not. Not a single trait in Fascists is Right Wing, you've just been tricked by the Liberals.

Im not sure, not every authoritarian or totalitarian government form is fascism though. Fascism per definition has socially conservative ideas, but the government form is totalitarian. There is left-right and authoritarian-libertarian. Fascists are right-authoritarian, while Republicans are Right-Libertarian. Communists are Left-Authoritarian, but there are also anarcho-leftists who are left-libertarian etc.

Dear Pumpkin Row and Mortimer
I'd have to disagree with PR. Saying Rightwing cannot be fascist
is like saying Blacks cannot be racist and only whites have power and privilege to discirminate against minority races.

Militant Zionists who preach armageddon to bring on the Kingdom of God
are an example of rightwing extremism, similar to Jihadist terrorists.
Look up post-millenial dispensationalists as one rightwing religious cult like this.

There are even Buddhists who have turned their affiliation political and even resorted to violence. ANY group ideology can be twisted to turn extreme, or abused
to impose authoritarian or fascist dictatorship by one party over another,
even if it contradicts the original message of that group!

Pumpkin Row the same way Muslims will say
the "Jihadists" are not real Muslims, you can say
these political fighters are NOT practicing real Buddhism,
so if that's what you mean by the real rightwing not being
compatible with fascism, you would be right, that if you really
believe in limited power of govt and anti-statism then rightwing
would all be for liberty and justice by consent of the governed
and not support anything fascist that is abuse of power.

The Right in America can't be fascists since the Right in America believes in limited government...that is the exact opposite of socialism and the type of socialism called fascism.....

If you believe the government should direct the economy...then you are a fascist....if you believe the opposite, you are a conservative.......the thing is...if you believe the government is wise and smart and needs to direct the economy for our own good...then you also believe it should tell people how to do other things in their lives.....and slowly you allow the government more and more control as you allow the government to grow bigger and bigger to achieve those ends....

 

[2aguy]

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump. ...

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

Wrong.....the democrats using bob craemer, and scott foval to send people to Trump rallies to incite violence is classic socialist/fascist tactics........they shut down his rally in chicago, blocked roads leading to his rallies.....and instigated violence against Trump supporters...this is not a theory, this is directly from bob craemer and scott foval...who admitted on under cover video that they recieved money and orders from the Democrat National Committee....directly from the Director of Special Events......the DNC recieved their money and orders directly from the hilary campaign....they also used the AFL-CIO when they needed professional thugs to do more specific violence......they admitted to this on video......I have posted this video...it is not a myth or a fabrication......

 

[2aguy]

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump. ...

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

Here is the video of bob craemer and scott foval admitting they organized violence at Trump rallies under orders from the Democrat National Committee, via the Hilary campaign and that they even had the approval of obama...since bob craemer went to the white house 300 times and met with obama 42 times.....all on video......

 

[PoliticalChic]

What political ideology is immune to misuse? It doesn't matter what it's called, as soon as the ideology needs to be protected to survive it is counterproductive to its initial ambition.

We need to be constantly aware of this, not blindly support a label no matter how society changes.

In practice most, if not all, ideologies seems to be on a scale from here to there, from time to time.

Problem of the day: totally polarised climate of discussion. Not being able to discuss or listen. That's not an ideology.

Fence sitters get splinters.

"There's Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos"

So, half of the population shouldn't take interest in the needs and thoughts of the other half? Polarity is good?

The only actions the government is authorized to perform are listed in Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution.


You've never read it, have you.

There's no constitution that regulates what governments are allowed to do?

Perhaps I misunderstood, thought you were discussing different ideologies. Sorry.

"There's no constitution that regulates what governments are allowed to do?"

Do you speak English?
Why the question mark there?????

In my country, America, the Constitution is known as the 'law of the land.'

In what country do you reside?
On what planet?