Fascism

[Divine Wind]

So, depending who the ruling elite decides they don't like it is all equally bad. Is that what you're saying? The Soviets hated Jews every bit as much as the Germans did, so let's talk about them. What was the difference to a Jew between Soviet Russia, and Nazi Germany?

Partially. Dead is dead. It really matter if it's a revolutionary, a freedom fighter or a terrorist. Is that what you are saying? All it takes is one hole in your theory to deflate the entire balloon. I've done that.

Let it be noticed you are still dodging my questions even though I've done my best to answer yours.

Another link for your reading.

Stalin and Hitler: Differences and Similarities - GCSE History - Marked by Teachers.com
B. Beliefs

They had similarities in their ideas, but I think that the few differences, which differed them, are the most important.

While Hitler had racism beliefs, Stalin actually didn’t have any, because he was a Communist. And I think that the fact, that Hitler was National Socialist and Stalin Communist, is a very important difference, because this caused their hate against each other, what further probably prevented even more problems. Hitler killed millions of Jews, and other “non-Aryans,” while Stalin caused the death of millions of peasants, which died because of starvation – so on both sides millions of people died, because of the political ideas of their dictators. Both dictators wanted to industrialize their country, both used propaganda, and both wanted their country to be powerful again. But still, their beliefs were different, because even though the believed in the same topics, the context of their topics were different, again because of their political views. Also they had completely different ideas of women, Hitler’s idea of a woman were the three “K’s” (Kitchen, Children, Church) while Stalin thought of a woman equally to a man. So while women under Hitler were not allowed to work, but just to get children and take care of them and their husband, and to go to church, women under Stalin were allowed to do the same work as men, they got support for children, but though they weren’t forced to get some, and also the church was strictly forbidden. Furthermore both used education, to make children believe their political ideas, so both used school for propaganda, though children in the USSR were taught Communistic ideas, while children of Germany were taught Nazi ideas....

...E. Home front Life

They used the same methods to control people, but though there are more differences.

While Hitler thoughts of women were, that she has to stay at home, has to get a lot of children, and has to take care of her children and her husband, and has to go to church (known as the three “K’s”), Stalin thought of a woman equal to a man. So women under Stalin were allowed to work, women under Hitler not. But both taught children their ideas in school, and outside school. But Hitler concentrated more on children than Stalin did, because under Hitler there were man youth organisations, while under Stalin there weren’t any, or just few. Also both made good use of censorship and propaganda, both erased everything what was against them, they controlled the radio, the newspaper, books, cinema, schools, and so on. Also the people were frightened by the secret police, people spied on each other, even within families, that’s how they made sure, that there wasn’t any opposition. Furthermore under Stalin church was forbidden, while under Hitler church was meant to be very important.

Conclusion

Fact is that Hitler and Stalin were the two biggest mass murderers in history, they both caused the death of millions of people, and I think that the fact, that Hitler was National Socialist and Stalin Communist, is a very important difference, because this difference probably prevented a even bigger mass murder, and of course Russia played a main rule in the second world war and the defeat of Hitler. If they have more differences or similarities, is of course very difficult to say, but I think the main difference is their political view, but how they tried to spread their ideas and to control their country, their methods, shows many similarities, but also many differences.

So all together I think that they have more differences than similarities, because the things where they differ from each other, are probably the most important things, such as racial or economy thoughts.

 

[bripat9643]

After America spent all those lives and money fighting fascism and now so many Americans don't even know what fascism might be, and worse, try to make it into a political philosophy that aids their political party.

That's what the left has been doing since 1945, douche bag.

 

[bripat9643]

You love to hurl insults but don't expect them back...

Incorrect, but I can see why you want to believe this. How else can you justify constantly posting ad hominems?

Not sure why you are so vested in believing unfettered capitalism never existed, but obviously you won't be dissuaded regardless of facts or links presented.

I think the Nazi party beat them to it. You seem to know their party better than they did.

Nazis have always been seen as RWers until the last decade or so. People over 50 know this to be true. As several have posted on this and similar threads, a more accurate viewpoint is that fascism was highly authoritarian with some elements of socialism, but definitely leaning right. Why the far Right seeks to label fascists as far Lefties is interesting even though it is wrong.

I've always seen Nazi's and Fascists stuck in the extreme rightwing category and Stalinists in the left. But some political theorists consider Hitler and Stalin to be their own category since they employed a mix of left and right ideologies.

Agreed, which is why a simple "Left-Right" scale is woefully insufficient. Even the L-R, Authoritarian-Libertarian scale has limits.

Stalin was a brutal dictator who used the Communist system of government to turn it into a Totalitarian Socialist state. Hitler used the Weimar Republic to turn it into a Fascist dictatorship. Both were highly authoritarian, but their states were not the same. The Commies still had the Politburo and Hitler was "Der Fuhrer" and answered to no one.

Even the US is difficult to quantify on such limited scales. Technically, we're a Federal Constitutional Republic, but we have several areas of strong authoritarianism, other areas of strong liberalism (classic type), strong capitalism but also elements of socialism.

Our nation is increasingly authoritarian. The struggle isn't between Authoritarianism vs Libertarianism as much as it is between LW authoritarianism vs. RW authoritarianism.

A more accurate method of quantifying a nation's government might be three dimensional like this:

The problem with your cube is that the "bigger government/smaller government" axis measures the same thing as "economic left/economic right" axis.

 

[bripat9643]

I see trump as more of a Stalinist. He's already getting business to kowtow to his wishes. Though I suppose that is also a form of fascism.

ROFL You vote for Hillary and Obama, but Trump is the Stalinist?

You make it apparent that a fundamental requirement for being a leftist is a capacity for entirely ignoring reality.

 

[bripat9643]

The point being is that Hitler was a fascist, not a socialist. Fascism isn't anymore socialism than North Korea is a Democratic Republic. I'm sorry you cannot seem to comprehend this point.

I've been fascinated over the past few years when the far Right meme that Hitler was a socialist surfaced. Anyone know who said it first? Was it Beck? He's pretty fucked up and it sounds like something he'd say. Rush?

I think it first surfaced with one Goldberg's book - Liberal Fascism. He tried to make a case that fascists and Hitler were all leftwing The idea that it is leftwing is new revisionism. It's kind of like the current attempt to claim Islam is not a religion.

No ma'am. The revisionism occurred back sixty and more years ago when the fabians convinced the world that you could have left wing socialism, and right wing socialism. The common denominator being socialism. We are merely trying to set the record straight. There can be only TWO government types. Collectivist, and individualist. That is simple logic. The question about socialist vs fascist is merely the degree along the teeter totter you have traveled.

I think we are bound to disagree on this one....as, I see it squarely on the right side of the teeter with the fascists themselves even stating they were right wing

Except for that "socialism" part in the very name of their Party. Just sayin....

Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

People's Republic of China.

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.


None of those are/were Republics by any stretch of the imagination. A name means nothing, but actions mean everything.

Wrong, actually, we don't need a mix. Socialism provides nothing that individuals can't provide for themselves.

 

[westwall]

I think it first surfaced with one Goldberg's book - Liberal Fascism. He tried to make a case that fascists and Hitler were all leftwing The idea that it is leftwing is new revisionism. It's kind of like the current attempt to claim Islam is not a religion.

No ma'am. The revisionism occurred back sixty and more years ago when the fabians convinced the world that you could have left wing socialism, and right wing socialism. The common denominator being socialism. We are merely trying to set the record straight. There can be only TWO government types. Collectivist, and individualist. That is simple logic. The question about socialist vs fascist is merely the degree along the teeter totter you have traveled.

I think we are bound to disagree on this one....as, I see it squarely on the right side of the teeter with the fascists themselves even stating they were right wing

Except for that "socialism" part in the very name of their Party. Just sayin....

Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

People's Republic of China.

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.


None of those are/were Republics by any stretch of the imagination. A name means nothing, but actions mean everything.

Wrong, actually, we don't need a mix. Socialism provides nothing that individuals can't provide for themselves.

I disagree. The best countries in the world, for the citizenry, have a healthy mix of capitalist, and socialist policies. That is a fact.

 

[westwall]

So, depending who the ruling elite decides they don't like it is all equally bad. Is that what you're saying? The Soviets hated Jews every bit as much as the Germans did, so let's talk about them. What was the difference to a Jew between Soviet Russia, and Nazi Germany?

Partially. Dead is dead. It really matter if it's a revolutionary, a freedom fighter or a terrorist. Is that what you are saying? All it takes is one hole in your theory to deflate the entire balloon. I've done that.

Let it be noticed you are still dodging my questions even though I've done my best to answer yours.

Another link for your reading.

Stalin and Hitler: Differences and Similarities - GCSE History - Marked by Teachers.com
B. Beliefs

They had similarities in their ideas, but I think that the few differences, which differed them, are the most important.

While Hitler had racism beliefs, Stalin actually didn’t have any, because he was a Communist. And I think that the fact, that Hitler was National Socialist and Stalin Communist, is a very important difference, because this caused their hate against each other, what further probably prevented even more problems. Hitler killed millions of Jews, and other “non-Aryans,” while Stalin caused the death of millions of peasants, which died because of starvation – so on both sides millions of people died, because of the political ideas of their dictators. Both dictators wanted to industrialize their country, both used propaganda, and both wanted their country to be powerful again. But still, their beliefs were different, because even though the believed in the same topics, the context of their topics were different, again because of their political views. Also they had completely different ideas of women, Hitler’s idea of a woman were the three “K’s” (Kitchen, Children, Church) while Stalin thought of a woman equally to a man. So while women under Hitler were not allowed to work, but just to get children and take care of them and their husband, and to go to church, women under Stalin were allowed to do the same work as men, they got support for children, but though they weren’t forced to get some, and also the church was strictly forbidden. Furthermore both used education, to make children believe their political ideas, so both used school for propaganda, though children in the USSR were taught Communistic ideas, while children of Germany were taught Nazi ideas....

...E. Home front Life

They used the same methods to control people, but though there are more differences.

While Hitler thoughts of women were, that she has to stay at home, has to get a lot of children, and has to take care of her children and her husband, and has to go to church (known as the three “K’s”), Stalin thought of a woman equal to a man. So women under Stalin were allowed to work, women under Hitler not. But both taught children their ideas in school, and outside school. But Hitler concentrated more on children than Stalin did, because under Hitler there were man youth organisations, while under Stalin there weren’t any, or just few. Also both made good use of censorship and propaganda, both erased everything what was against them, they controlled the radio, the newspaper, books, cinema, schools, and so on. Also the people were frightened by the secret police, people spied on each other, even within families, that’s how they made sure, that there wasn’t any opposition. Furthermore under Stalin church was forbidden, while under Hitler church was meant to be very important.

Conclusion

Fact is that Hitler and Stalin were the two biggest mass murderers in history, they both caused the death of millions of people, and I think that the fact, that Hitler was National Socialist and Stalin Communist, is a very important difference, because this difference probably prevented a even bigger mass murder, and of course Russia played a main rule in the second world war and the defeat of Hitler. If they have more differences or similarities, is of course very difficult to say, but I think the main difference is their political view, but how they tried to spread their ideas and to control their country, their methods, shows many similarities, but also many differences.

So all together I think that they have more differences than similarities, because the things where they differ from each other, are probably the most important things, such as racial or economy thoughts.

So, what you are saying is there is NO difference to any one particular individual if they live in a "right wing" authoritarian, or a "left wing" authoritarian country. If you happen to be one of those that that particular elite group hates, then it is bad news for you. So....here's the money shot. You have a "right wing" authoritarian country that hates Jews. They run out of Jews to kill. So they decide that the next group they hate are Baptists. They vilify them till there are no more of them left. So then they decide that gays are bad because a gay person hit on one of their kids, and the ruling elitist didn't liek that......do you see where I am going?

I will spell it out for you....... There is NO difference to an individual whether they live in a "left wing" authoritarian country, or a "right wing" authoritarian country. Ultimately they are AUTHORITARIAN. Which is the OPPOSITE of NO government.

And that is the difference between a collectivist vs an individualist type of government. In a ultimate right wing government....well, there is no government so I guess you can ignore that. So let's go in the opposite direction, in a ultimate authoritarian State the only difference to the individual is whether your group just happens to be on the shit list of the ruling elite on that particular day.

 

[Divine Wind]

Wrong, actually, we don't need a mix. Socialism provides nothing that individuals can't provide for themselves.

Awesome that you can build your own continental railroad and highway system plus have your own army to protect you from invaders. How many hours a day do you work?

Don't forget to volunteer for the burial detail to get rid of all the bodies from the sick, elderly and starving poor.

 

[westwall]

Wrong, actually, we don't need a mix. Socialism provides nothing that individuals can't provide for themselves.

Awesome that you can build your own continental railroad and highway system plus have your own army to protect you from invaders. How many hours a day do you work?

Don't forget to volunteer for the burial detail to get rid of all the bodies from the sick, elderly and starving poor.

The continental railroad was built by chinese labor for the most part. and that paid for by the railroad companies involved. The only thing the government did to help it along was grant rights of way that extended for several miles away from the actual route of travel. About as far away from socialism as you can get.

 

[Divine Wind]

I disagree. The best countries in the world, for the citizenry, have a healthy mix of capitalist, and socialist policies. That is a fact.

Agreed. A Constitutional Republic with regulated Capitalism (e.g. you can't sell rat poison and call it a health supplement) with a socialist safety net for the sick, elderly and minors seems to work best.

 

[Divine Wind]

The continental railroad was built by chinese labor for the most part. and that paid for by the railroad companies involved. The only thing the government did to help it along was grant rights of way that extended for several miles away from the actual route of travel. About as far away from socialism as you can get.

Only from the West. From the East it were ex-soldiers from North and South, Irish emigrants and ex-slaves.

Don't underestimate the Feds giving away land to the railroads. That land was worth billions in today's dollars. The Feds also issued bonds to pay the railroads for track laid. It certainly wasn't solely built by Howard Roark and a few other rugged individualists.

Transcontinental Railroad - Inventions - HISTORY.com
The two lines of track would meet in the middle (the bill did not designate an exact location) and each company would receive 6,400 acres of land (later doubled to 12,800) and $48,000 in government bonds for every mile of track built.

 

[bripat9643]

I disagree. The best countries in the world, for the citizenry, have a healthy mix of capitalist, and socialist policies. That is a fact.

Agreed. A Constitutional Republic with regulated Capitalism (e.g. you can't sell rat poison and call it a health supplement) with a socialist safety net for the sick, elderly and minors seems to work best.

"Seems to work best?" Obviously you don't have any actual evidence that it works best.

 

[bripat9643]

The continental railroad was built by chinese labor for the most part. and that paid for by the railroad companies involved. The only thing the government did to help it along was grant rights of way that extended for several miles away from the actual route of travel. About as far away from socialism as you can get.

Only from the West. From the East it were ex-soldiers from North and South, Irish emigrants and ex-slaves.

Don't underestimate the Feds giving away land to the railroads. That land was worth billions in today's dollars. The Feds also issued bonds to pay the railroads for track laid. It certainly wasn't solely built by Howard Roark and a few other rugged individualists.

Transcontinental Railroad - Inventions - HISTORY.com
The two lines of track would meet in the middle (the bill did not designate an exact location) and each company would receive 6,400 acres of land (later doubled to 12,800) and $48,000 in government bonds for every mile of track built.

You're forgetting the Great Northern, which was built without any government assistance of any kind, and it didn't go bankrupt like the other two transcontinental lines.

 

[westwall]

The continental railroad was built by chinese labor for the most part. and that paid for by the railroad companies involved. The only thing the government did to help it along was grant rights of way that extended for several miles away from the actual route of travel. About as far away from socialism as you can get.

Only from the West. From the East it were ex-soldiers from North and South, Irish emigrants and ex-slaves.

Don't underestimate the Feds giving away land to the railroads. That land was worth billions in today's dollars. The Feds also issued bonds to pay the railroads for track laid. It certainly wasn't solely built by Howard Roark and a few other rugged individualists.

Transcontinental Railroad - Inventions - HISTORY.com
The two lines of track would meet in the middle (the bill did not designate an exact location) and each company would receive 6,400 acres of land (later doubled to 12,800) and $48,000 in government bonds for every mile of track built.

It was worth nothing back then. It was merely land in the middle of nowhere. The government gave away as much as they did in the hope that the railroad companies would build the railroad, which they did (the railroad companies were hoping to find mineral wealth) and that way the government wouldn't have to carry the enormous cost of linking the west with the east coast.

In fact, the railroads were so aggressive in their building that it took an Act of Congress to order them to link up at Promontory Point. They had already built dozens of miles past each other to claim as much land as they could.

 

[westwall]

I disagree. The best countries in the world, for the citizenry, have a healthy mix of capitalist, and socialist policies. That is a fact.

Agreed. A Constitutional Republic with regulated Capitalism (e.g. you can't sell rat poison and call it a health supplement) with a socialist safety net for the sick, elderly and minors seems to work best.

"Seems to work best?" Obviously you don't have any actual evidence that it works best.

No, there is loads of evidence that it does.

 

[Divine Wind]

sa If you happen to be one of those that that particular elite group hates, then it is bad news for you. So....here's the money shot. You have a "right wing" authoritarian country that hates Jews. They run out of Jews to kill. So they decide that the next group they hate are Baptists. They vilify them till there are no more of them left. So then they decide that gays are bad because a gay person hit on one of their kids, and the ruling elitist didn't liek that......do you see where I am going?

I will spell it out for you....... There is NO difference to an individual whether they live in a "left wing" authoritarian country, or a "right wing" authoritarian country. Ultimately they are AUTHORITARIAN. Which is the OPPOSITE of NO government.

And that is the difference between a collectivist vs an individualist type of government. In a ultimate right wing government....well, there is no government so I guess you can ignore that. So let's go in the opposite direction, in a ultimate authoritarian State the only difference to the individual is whether your group just happens to be on the shit list of the ruling elite on that particular day.

Again, it depends on which individual and which type of government as the links I provided stated.

Yes, they are authoritarian. There is also LW authoritarianism and RW authoritarianism as previously posted several times.

Can we at least agree Authoritarians are assholes, regardless if they are Left or Right?

The Political Compass

The Political Compass


The Political Compass

 

[westwall]

sa If you happen to be one of those that that particular elite group hates, then it is bad news for you. So....here's the money shot. You have a "right wing" authoritarian country that hates Jews. They run out of Jews to kill. So they decide that the next group they hate are Baptists. They vilify them till there are no more of them left. So then they decide that gays are bad because a gay person hit on one of their kids, and the ruling elitist didn't liek that......do you see where I am going?

I will spell it out for you....... There is NO difference to an individual whether they live in a "left wing" authoritarian country, or a "right wing" authoritarian country. Ultimately they are AUTHORITARIAN. Which is the OPPOSITE of NO government.

And that is the difference between a collectivist vs an individualist type of government. In a ultimate right wing government....well, there is no government so I guess you can ignore that. So let's go in the opposite direction, in a ultimate authoritarian State the only difference to the individual is whether your group just happens to be on the shit list of the ruling elite on that particular day.

Again, it depends on which individual and which type of government as the links I provided stated.

Yes, they are authoritarian. There is also LW authoritarianism and RW authoritarianism as previously posted several times.

Can we at least agree Authoritarians are assholes, regardless if they are Left or Right?

The Political Compass

The Political Compass


The Political Compass

No, it doesn't. The common denominator is the systems are AUTHORITARIAN. You can't get past that simple fact.

 

[Divine Wind]

It was worth nothing back then. It was merely land in the middle of nowhere. ....

These guys would disagree.

 

[Divine Wind]

No, it doesn't. The common denominator is the systems are AUTHORITARIAN. You can't get past that simple fact.

Never denied they were authoritarian. Only denying your black and white view of the world as either Authoritarian or, according to the scale above, Libertarian.

 

[Divine Wind]

"Seems to work best?" Obviously you don't have any actual evidence that it works best.

The United States of America. Perhaps you can give the name of a country which is better.....in your opinion.