Hitler, Fascism and the right wing

[francoHFW]

Ice Weasel....John J. Ray is a great source on this stuff...thanks for posting it....have you read his other works on leftism....?

JJRay is a scumbag who will write anything to make money off you idiots. Has no standing in polite society. This bs is a great reason to defund Keystone, which is a front for the Kochs that will make them tens of billions. Hater dupes!

 

[2aguy]

Soviet Communist were left wing and Nazi Germany was right wing......as everyone obviously already knows. Well.....almost everyone.

Except for the fact that it isn't true...they were both forms of left wing socialism...with stalin defining the national socialists as "facsists" because they were his competition...There is nothing in the nazi program that separates them from the communists other than that they wanted socialism for Germans and didn't care about socialism of an international variety...

 

[francoHFW]

His fascist RW beliefs are just an inch to the right of the worst of the GOP.

Oh...you were educated in a government school run by the education wing of the democrat party....so sad....

No, I went to Prep schools run by pompous GOP a-holes lol...The dumb and dumber public schools' curriculum are the result of loudmouth RW censorship. You people suq in every possible way.

 

[francoHFW]

Soviet Communist were left wing and Nazi Germany was right wing......as everyone obviously already knows. Well.....almost everyone.

Except for the fact that it isn't true...they were both forms of left wing socialism...with stalin defining the national socialists as "facsists" because they were his competition...There is nothing in the nazi program that separates them from the communists other than that they wanted socialism for Germans and didn't care about socialism of an international variety...

Sure, Beckbot. Time for more tinfoil.

 

[2aguy]

Here is more for your John Jay Ray love.....

FrontPage Magazine - The Psychology Underlying Liberalism

Here is a look at "Rightism"

So what are Rightists?

The prime focus in this paper has been on defining and explaining what Leftism is. It would nonetheless be remiss not to give also at least a skeletal outline of what Rightism is so I will now do that. If Leftism and Rightism are NOT mirror-images, as this paper asserts, some such account does appear necessary in order to complete the picture. I have, however, written one book and many previous papers for those who wish to study conservatism at greater length (See Ray, 1972b, 1973, 1974, 1979 & 1981).

Military Dictators?

In the late 20th century, it was a common rhetorical ploy of the more "revolutionary" Left in the "Western" world simply to ignore democracy as an alternative to Communism. Instead they would excuse the brutalities of Communism by pointing to the brutalities of the then numerous military dictatorships of Southern Europe and Latin America and pretend that such regimes were the only alternative to Communism. These regimes were led by generals who might in various ways be seen as conservative (though Peron was clearly Leftist) so do they tell us anything about conservatism?

They were an attempt to fight fire with fire. In Argentina of the 60s and 70s, for instance, Leftist "urban guerillas" were very active — blowing up anyone they disapproved of. The nice, mild, moderate Anglo-Saxon response to such depredations would have been to endure the deaths and disruptions concerned and use police methods to trace the perpetrators and bring them to trial. Much of the world is more fiery than that, however, and the Argentine generals certainly were. They became impatient with the slow-grinding wheels of democracy and its apparent impotence in the face of the Leftist revolutionaries.

They therefore seized power and instituted a reign of terror against the Leftist revolutionaries that was as bloody, arbitrary and indiscriminate as what the Leftists had inflicted. In a word, they used military methods to deal with the Leftist attackers. So the nature of these regimes was only incidentally conservative. What they were was essentially military. We have to range further than the Hispanic generals, therefore, if we are to find out what is quintessentially conservative.

A Conservative Revolution

And the parliamentarians who were responsible for beheading King Charles I in 1649 were perfectly articulate about why. They felt that Charles had attempted to destroy the ancient English governmental system or "constitution" and that he had tried to take away important rights and individual liberties that the English had always enjoyed — liberty from the arbitrary power of Kings, a right to representation in important decisions and a system of counterbalanced and competing powers rather than an all-powerful central government. It is to them that we can look for the first systematic statements of conservative ideals — ideals that persevere to this day. And they were both conservatives (wishing to conserve traditional rights and arrangements) and revolutionaries!

So right back in the 17th century we had the apparent paradox of "conservatives" (the parliamentary leaders — later to be referred to as "Whigs") being prepared to undertake most radical change (deposing monarchy) in order to restore treasured traditional rights and liberties and to rein in overweening governmental power. So Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were not at all breakaways from the conservatism of the past. They had very early and even more determined predecessors. Nobody who knew history should have been surprised by the Reagan/Thatcher "revolution".

And it was in deliberate tribute to the parliamentarians of Cromwell's day and their immediate successors that two of the most influential conservative theorists prior to Reagan and Thatcher both described themselves as "Old Whigs" — Burke (1790) and Hayek (1944). Hayek described Whig ideals as "the only set of ideals that has consistently opposed all arbitrary power" (Hayek, 1960).

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Losing their media monopoly was the worst thing that ever happened to Progressives. They used to get away with their Big Lies: Hitler Right Winger, McCarthy's Red Scare, LBJ Civil Rights Hero, FDR Economic greatness -- but no more

 

[2aguy]

Yeah....when all you had were books written by leftist historians...no wonder the lies were spread so universally....

 

[francoHFW]

Nazi institutions barely changed from ours, except they got rid of all the left wingers, intellectuals, jews, communists and socialists- you hater dupes would love it...all the "socialist" aspects of Hitlerism were in his program for full employment, but it was all a war economy that would have collapsed without a war of conquest and usurption. The only reason it worked before that was that it was financed by confiscations from jews. NOT SOCIALIST AT ALL, hater dupe.

 

[2aguy]

Sure, Beckbot. Time for more tinfoil.

Actually, I listen to Rush and Dennis Miller and also enjoy Mark Levin for his understanding and defense of the Constitution...you know....the document that is supposed to limit centralized government power....the opposite of the government controlling the means of production.....

 

[frigidweirdo]

You mean like Democrats creating a Black welfare state in order to exploit it for votes? Also,government is never "there for the people." Government exist to create more government control.

Yeah, I'd say both parties are pretty much guilty of being there more for themselves than others.

 

[hipeter924]

Nazism is not Fascist, as there are clear differences between Italian Fascism, Spanish Fascism and Nazism. As for 'left' and 'right' scales, they are useless for anything but populist media debates. Authoritarian scales are better, but they don't allow the media to divide society into two camps.

Nazism is an example of fascism. You are right that there are minor differences between different examples of fascism.

One of the strange things on this thread is posters lining up to change the meaning of the word 'fascism' so that it fits their prejudices mor comfortably, but unable to explan where they would then place Antonescu, Stroessner or Franco on a political map.

There are good reasons why Hitler is considered right wing, and one of them is the clear links between fascism and strong right-wing administrations like those of Pinochet.

Nazism is not true 'Fascism', in fact that is a popular misconception. National Socialism was a unique political system, which while having Fascist attributes doesn't fall fully into that category.* Fascism in its pure form was a product of Mussolini (rather than Hitler), followed by Franco - and later in the 20th century by the likes of Pinochet.

*Fascism is not inherently genocidal or bound by race theory.

 

[francoHFW]

Beckbot brainwashed dingbats. You'd make great little Nazis. Keep it up, you're Dems greatest pals, and the USA's greatest enemies. Fascism will arrive here wrapped in the flag and the bible...and this bs propaganda. Half the hater dupes already believe in revolution against that evil racist commie dictator Obama...ay caramba, the poor USA. Bring back the Fairness Doctrine for a little truth and intelligence your idiotic movement couldn't survive.

 

[frigidweirdo]

He's not posing as a U.S. citizen. I have no problem with people from other countries participating in this forum. However, the fact that they are foreigners indicates a certain level of ignorance regarding this country and the principles it was founded on.

Does it?

I actually find plenty of Americans who have major ignorance of the principles the country was founded on.

In my life I've been told I shouldn't speak about places I've never been to. Why? Because supposedly I can't know anything about a place I've never been to. How's that? The same logic would be I couldn't talk about, say, WW2, because I wasn't there, wasn't born at the time. However someone who wasn't born there at the time can know more about what happened in WW2 than a person who participated in WW2. Being there doesn't necessarily mean you understand, doesn't mean you saw everything, doesn't mean you put it all together and doesn't mean you cared.

How many people were around in 1789 when the Constitution was passed? I'm going to stick my head out on this one and say very few to absolutely ZERO. Does that mean no one can talk about it? No it does not. Does that mean someone born in the US automatically has innate knowledge of the principles of the Constitution? No it does not. Does it mean they understand the principles and follow the principles? No it does not.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Someone should alert Webster's about making the necessary corrections.

Right wing - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

So it's Webster's fault that their definition doesn't sustain your silly ass'd argument?

LOL! I tell ya folks these people are wholly unqualified for freedom

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

He's not posing as a U.S. citizen. I have no problem with people from other countries participating in this forum. However, the fact that they are foreigners indicates a certain level of ignorance regarding this country and the principles it was founded on.

Does it?

Yes... it does,

 

[francoHFW]

He's not posing as a U.S. citizen. I have no problem with people from other countries participating in this forum. However, the fact that they are foreigners indicates a certain level of ignorance regarding this country and the principles it was founded on.

Does it?

Yes... it does,

There's that RW/Nazi ugly American nationalism/nativism/hate of furriners and minorities/love of ignorance, hate of intellectuals...ay caramba

 

[frigidweirdo]

He's not posing as a U.S. citizen. I have no problem with people from other countries participating in this forum. However, the fact that they are foreigners indicates a certain level of ignorance regarding this country and the principles it was founded on.

Does it?

Yes... it does,

Great post, well done.

 

[Discombobulated]

That makes number two on the ignore list....reserved for only the very stupidest people.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

That makes number two on the ignore list....reserved for only the very stupidest people.

Well, I really don't see that ya had any choice. Given that you lack the minimal intellectual means to sustain a dam' thing ya say.

You're among the weakest contributors on this site... you make Wry Catcher look like a genius!

So, I gotta say that was a good call.

 

[g5000]

A day in the life of a left winger:

"Honk if you support same-sex marriage!"