But, Aren't Nazis and Fascists Really Left-Wingers?

[tooAlive]

I can't help but laugh when I (or another fellow conservative) get called a Nazi or a Fascist.

Aren't Nazism and Fascism on the far left of the political spectrum?

The Political Spectrum Easily Explained - Basic Forms of Government - YouTube

no

They are authoritarians

you can have those on the left and right.

But isn't it odd that from socialism to libertarianism you have a consistent decrease in government control, and then suddenly you have fascism which is nearly complete government authority?

 

[francoHFW]

multiple murders? lol

 

[tooAlive]

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily

I think liberals just can't handle having all the horrible isms on their side of the playground.

 

[Political Junky]

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily

OMG a total right winger, from Pepperdine yet.

 

[francoHFW]

I can't help but laugh when I (or another fellow conservative) get called a Nazi or a Fascist.

Aren't Nazism and Fascism on the far left of the political spectrum?

The Political Spectrum Easily Explained - Basic Forms of Government - YouTube

no

They are authoritarians

you can have those on the left and right.

But isn't it odd that from socialism to libertarianism you have a consistent decrease in government control, and then suddenly you have fascism which is nearly complete government authority?

communism<socialism<liberal<center>conservative>fascist
often in horseshoe shape as communism and fascism are both totalitarian.

Libertarianism is just a new BS "form" of conservativism.

Socialism and liberalism have no more "control" than conservatism, they PROTECT the citizenry from the excesses of capitalism, and give its victims a good safety net.

Change the channel. Conservative control is worse, see rules for gays, women, minorities, pacifists- it's called governmental discrimination, and like communism, seems to rely on lies and big lies- see sig pp3.

 

[tooAlive]

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily

OMG a total right winger, from Pepperdine yet.

Why'd you un-thank me?

 

[Political Junky]

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily

OMG a total right winger, from Pepperdine yet.

Why'd you un-thank me?

I hit the wrong button.

 

[francoHFW]

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily

I think liberals just can't handle having all the horrible isms on their side of the playground.

It's called BS RW propaganda, dingbat tinfoiler. Don't try it in polite society.

 

[tooAlive]

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily

I think liberals just can't handle having all the horrible isms on their side of the playground.

It's called BS RW propaganda, dingbat tinfoiler. Don't try it in polite society.

Yes, I know that anything that makes liberals look bad is propaganda.

 

[Black_Label]

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily

I think liberals just can't handle having all the horrible isms on their side of the playground.

It's called BS RW propaganda, dingbat tinfoiler. Don't try it in polite society.

Yes, I know that anything that makes liberals look bad is propaganda.

It makes right wingers look like idiots as they use sources spreading lies and false information to program the sheep.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I can't help but laugh when I (or another fellow conservative) get called a Nazi or a Fascist.

Aren't Nazism and Fascism on the far left of the political spectrum?

The Political Spectrum Easily Explained - Basic Forms of Government - YouTube

no

They are authoritarians

you can have those on the left and right.

But isn't it odd that from socialism to libertarianism you have a consistent decrease in government control, and then suddenly you have fascism which is nearly complete government authority?

No

Assholes always want to lead and cling to power for powers sack.

libers will never win b/c they are unwilling to grasp power.

conservatives get fucked with the religious right who want people to live the way they live and liberals are nothing but sheep for their power masters. None of them will have a thought that is not told to them.


just look around at the posts, they never ever disagree with each other or say anything different.

 

[jillian]

I can't help but laugh when I (or another fellow conservative) get called a Nazi or a Fascist.

Aren't Nazism and Fascism on the far left of the political spectrum?

The Political Spectrum Easily Explained - Basic Forms of Government - YouTube

Statism/Totalitarianism=Coke/Pepsi.

Statism/Totalitarianism=Bud/Coors.

What's in a label? Be it, hand-cuffs, lead, or a body bag? Does it really matter at that point?

'statism' is a silly term with no meaning except as a way for extreme people on the right to try to disparage the government.

our founders didn't hate government.

and, as much as i love you, it isn't 'statism' that the right objects to, it's federalism.

words have meaning.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I can't help but laugh when I (or another fellow conservative) get called a Nazi or a Fascist.

Aren't Nazism and Fascism on the far left of the political spectrum?

The Political Spectrum Easily Explained - Basic Forms of Government - YouTube

Statism/Totalitarianism=Coke/Pepsi.

Statism/Totalitarianism=Bud/Coors.

What's in a label? Be it, hand-cuffs, lead, or a body bag? Does it really matter at that point?

'statism' is a silly term with no meaning except as a way for extreme people on the right to try to disparage the government.

our founders didn't hate government.

and, as much as i love you, it isn't 'statism' that the right objects to, it's federalism.

words have meaning.

stat·ism
[stey-tiz-uh&#8201;m] Show IPA
noun
1.
the principle or policy of concentrating extensive economic, political, and related controls in the state at the cost of individual liberty.
2.
support of or belief in the sovereignty of a state, usually a republic.



fed·er·al·ism
[fed-er-uh-liz-uh&#8201;m] Show IPA
noun
1.
the federal principle of government.
2.
U.S. History .
a.
advocacy of the federal system of government.
b.
( initial capital letter ) the principles of the Federalist party.


You are wrong, and wrong by definition.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Liberals have been telling big lies for generations: The New Deal saved the economy, McCarthy started a "Red Scare" and Hitler was a right winger.

Goebbels Big Lies all of them

 

[Newby]

Well check again.

The right support a gargantuan government so long as they are in charge.

Obama Care is bad. But if the exact program had been adopted by Bush then they right would claim that Bushcare is out sight.

Those ******* contradictions have made the republicans an ineffective opposition to the democrats.

.

I'm talking about ideologies.

The "right" we have representing our ideas today are just as bought out as the left.

The more extreme you get, the bigger the government, and the more similar the politcal parties become. Think circle, not line.

Not really. Not sure where you got your chart from, or what the website that was in the link represents other than some Australian journalist education website, but it wasn't notated as to who the author of the chart was or their affiliation with anything. Extreme government control is at one end of the spectrum, regardless of what that control entails, and anarchy (no government) would be the opposite extreme. Today, regardless of party affiliation, we are far more towards the left end of the spectrum (total government control) than we are towards the right. Both parties are sitting on that left side with barely millimeters separating them in ideology. Really the only thing that separates them is what they want to control, which is irrelevant when it comes to defining 'fascism'.

 

[jillian]

I'm talking about ideologies.

The "right" we have representing our ideas today are just as bought out as the left.

The more extreme you get, the bigger the government, and the more similar the politcal parties become. Think circle, not line.

Not really. Not sure where you got your chart from, or what the website that was in the link represents other than some Australian journalist education website, but it wasn't notated as to who the author of the chart was or their affiliation with anything. Extreme government control is at one end of the spectrum, regardless of what that control entails, and anarchy (no government) would be the opposite extreme. Today, regardless of party affiliation, we are far more towards the left end of the spectrum (total government control) than we are towards the right. Both parties are sitting on that left side with barely millimeters separating them in ideology. Really the only thing that separates them is what they want to control, which is irrelevant when it comes to defining 'fascism'.

that isn't correct. totalitarianism exists on both extremes of the political spectrum. it actually is more of a circle.

fascism has a different definition than totalitarianism. it is defined by a unity between CORPORATIONS and government. not the 'populace' and government (which defines communism).

one is extreme left, the other is extreme right... it is the totalitarian nature of both that have them close in that regard.

words have meanings. no matter how much you want to pretend that all evil emanates from the left.

extremism on both ends of the spectrum is dangerous.

 

[Newby]

Conservatives seek to deny same-sex couples access to marriage, they seek to deny women their right to privacy with regard to family planning, they wish to single-out public assistance applicants for unwarranted drug testing, they seek to destroy unions and place working Americans at the mercy of their employers, they attempt to deny immigrants their due process rights, they attempt to conjoin church and state by codifying religious dogma, and they wish to enlarge the authority of the state by granting it ever greater police powers in an effort to ‘fight crime’ and ‘terrorism.’

I'm a libertarian, so I have nothing against homosexuals getting married; although I may not agree with their beliefs.

And how is drug testing unwarranted for public assistance applicants? I have to do it when I'm applying for a job, so why shouldn't they do it for getting a free check?

Oh, and God forbid an employer fires an unproductive employee..

If you were truly liberterian you would be against any government imposed drug test.

True, but then again there wouldn't be any govenment checks going out causing the need to be drug tested to begin with.

 

[Newby]

The more extreme you get, the bigger the government, and the more similar the politcal parties become. Think circle, not line.

Not really. Not sure where you got your chart from, or what the website that was in the link represents other than some Australian journalist education website, but it wasn't notated as to who the author of the chart was or their affiliation with anything. Extreme government control is at one end of the spectrum, regardless of what that control entails, and anarchy (no government) would be the opposite extreme. Today, regardless of party affiliation, we are far more towards the left end of the spectrum (total government control) than we are towards the right. Both parties are sitting on that left side with barely millimeters separating them in ideology. Really the only thing that separates them is what they want to control, which is irrelevant when it comes to defining 'fascism'.

that isn't correct. totalitarianism exists on both extremes of the political spectrum. it actually is more of a circle.

fascism has a different definition than totalitarianism. it is defined by a unity between CORPORATIONS and government. not the 'populace' and government (which defines communism).

one is extreme left, the other is extreme right... it is the totalitarian nature of both that have them close in that regard.

words have meanings. no matter how much you want to pretend that all evil emanates from the left.

extremism on both ends of the spectrum is dangerous.

Says who? It's a straight line in my opinion, where does 'total freedom' sit in your circle and how do you logically conclude or explain where it sits? The chart that tooAlive posted earlier would be the best representation that I've seen to date of it shown in a circular way, and really when it comes down to it, that is really a straight line as well. You can't take our current political labels that are used today, they're totally inaccurate and misrepresent quite a bit.

Total control <------ Center ------> Total Freedom

Neither end is good, but to have a 'spectrum' the one side has to be the opposite or reverse of the other. Both parties in our country are more towards the 'total control' end, they just disagree on the what's and the how's of how that control should be implemented and on what should be controled. And they spend millions on propaganda every year to indoctrinate the American people into believing that they need the government to protect them and provide for them in one way or another, hence moving towards total control more and more each day. I think the democrat party is farther along that line to the left, but the republicans aren't that far behind them, and as long as we continue to allow it or agree with it, they'll keep moving further and further left.

 

[edthecynic]

It's called BS RW propaganda, dingbat tinfoiler. Don't try it in polite society.

Yes, I know that anything that makes liberals look bad is propaganda.

It makes right wingers look like idiots as they use sources spreading lies and false information to program the sheep.

That is why the wing-nuts are known as 'Misinformation Voters.'

 

[BlindBoo]

The last time you checked was 1964?

The ‘right’ has changed a lot since then, they’ve become big government advocates. More government in your bedroom with their opposition to privacy rights, more government in your home and personal life with their opposition to due process and equal protection rights, more government agencies, and an ever larger military.

Indeed, the GWB administration brought us the Patriot Act, the TSA, and the Department of Homeland ‘Security.’ Between 2001 and 2007 alone the right made government larger and the deficit bigger while attempting to diminish our civil liberties.

So, no, the ‘right’ has nothing to do with ‘smaller’ government.

Well then, who is about smaller government? Both sides surely can't be "big government," otherwise what would the difference be?

Although I do agree with you; the right we have today (in power) is as much about big government as the left.

Sure they can, and very little.