If You Couldn't Decide Between Bolsheviks And Nazis....

[PoliticalChic]

....as to which the current Democrat Party shares closer kinship, evidence of these last two years makes clear which it is.

Nazis.



1. Those who have studied the Democrat Socialist Party have concluded that it is now closer to the National Workers Socialist model than the Soviet Socialist model. This based on their being wedded to many industries as allies rather than taking them over outright, as the Bolsheviks did.


2. The more things change, the more they remain the same. The quibble is what is meant by 'control of industries.' The Nazis controlled industries rather than owned them.
What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis …The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."
"Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman


3. But it was mainly steel production, locomotives, airplanes, etc. that were the interest of the Nazis.
That was then, 20th century.
In the 21st century, information is more, most, essential, its control and dissemination.
And it is newpapers, social media, cable news that are under the Democrat Socialist Party control


4. The Democrat regime need not outright 'own' the information highway, as long as those who do bend the neck and the knee to the regime. The allies determine what views are sold to the populace, and what is to be censored.
Anne Applebaum, who observes about Soviet-era suppression: “Actual censors were not always needed. Instead, a form of pervasive peer pressure convinced writers, journalists and everyone else to toe the party line; if they did not, they knew they risked being ejected from their jobs and shunned by their friends.”


5. JONATHAN TURLEY: I want to emphasize that a lot of people on the left that have said if it's not prohibited on the First Amendment, it's not a free speech issue. That's not true. The First Amendment is not the exclusive domain of free speech. What they are doing is shutting down free speech. The left has come on to a winning strategy. …. they've discovered that if they use corporations to control speech, it falls outside the First Amendment. But it's not true that what they're doing is not a free speech attack. It is. They're trying to stop people from speaking on these platforms….





Soo......Sieg Heil, Democrat voters.

Look at what you have become.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If You Couldn't Decide Between Bolsheviks And Nazis....then you ain't black?​

 

[shoshi]

Fascism is the marriage of state and cooperate interest. Said Benito Mussolini

 

[Likkmee]

If You Couldn't Decide Between Bolsheviks And Nazis....then you ain't black?​

But if you B half black ? Confusion ensues.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Fascism is the marriage of state and cooperate interest. Said Benito Mussolini

Said Obama and Zuckerberg

 

[PoliticalChic]

Fascism is the marriage of state and cooperate interest. Said Benito Mussolini

Perhaps you missed this in the OP:


1. Those who have studied the Democrat Socialist Party have concluded that it is now closer to the National Workers Socialist model than the Soviet Socialist model. This based on their being wedded to many industries as allies rather than taking them over outright, as the Bolsheviks did.


2. The more things change, the more they remain the same. The quibble is what is meant by 'control of industries.' The Nazis controlled industries rather than owned them.
What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis …The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."
"Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman





There is hardly 1° of difference between Fascism, Nazism, and the current Wehrmacht....er, Democrat Party.

 

[shoshi]

Perhaps you missed this in the OP:


1. Those who have studied the Democrat Socialist Party have concluded that it is now closer to the National Workers Socialist model than the Soviet Socialist model. This based on their being wedded to many industries as allies rather than taking them over outright, as the Bolsheviks did.


2. The more things change, the more they remain the same. The quibble is what is meant by 'control of industries.' The Nazis controlled industries rather than owned them.
What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis …The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."
"Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman





There is hardly 1° of difference between Fascism, Nazism, and the current Wehrmacht....er, Democrat Party.

So it is a marriage of state and corporate interest? Nazis National Socialists whatever you call them were Fascists.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So it is a marriage of state and corporate interest? Nazis National Socialists whatever you call them were Fascists.

Nazis National Socialists whatever you call them were Fascists aka Leftists

 

[westwall]

So it is a marriage of state and corporate interest? Nazis National Socialists whatever you call them were Fascists.

Sort of, it is the State, taking control of corporations (which still nominally belong to the owners, but what they produce, where they obtain their raw materials, how much they can sell their product for, etc. is controlled by the State) to further their goals. In Communist States the government completely takes over whatever companies there were and runs them. Usually very poorly.

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. In the 21st century, totalitarians have learned that control of the message is more important than control of war industries. The latter follows the former just as day follows night.



We saw this this week, as Durham exploded a news-bomb that erased four years of Democrat lies…..and the silence from the Democrat media was deafening.

“Just when people, including Donald J. Trump, have written him off, complaining that he wasn’t doing anything, that his investigation was a sham, he quietly dumps information that creates a political earthquake.

Jack Phillips reported right here in The Epoch Times.
“Special counsel John Durham’s team alleged on Feb. 12 that a tech executive aligned with the Democratic Party spied on former President Donald Trump’s residences and the White House when Trump was president,” Phillips said.



“Durham said in a court filing that the spying took place in order to establish an “inference” and “narrative” to tie Trump to the Russian government.”
Electronic spying on the White House at the behest of the Democratic Party? It’s what you would expect from Chinese or Russian intelligence. And we thought the Mueller investigation was bad.

That those known Trump–Russia liars—The New York Times and The Washington Post—have, as of this writing, and it’s been a few days, not even dared to report Durham’s latest court filing is a sure sign that it’s indeed a serious quake, with potential aftershocks to come.”
Durham Reveals Democrats Behaving Like KGB; Is More Coming?

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. Difference between Watergate and the Obama Spying? Watergate was a failed attempt by a political party to spy on their political enemies.



“Trump himself responded that this is worse than Watergate, and he’s surely correct.

It was clearly aimed at destroying that presidency, sabotaging from within—a genuine insurrection, instead of the phony one we know about. Nothing remotely like that has happened in our history.

And it was all instigated by people close to Hillary Clinton or quite possibly by Clinton herself. We don’t know yet. One of the people involved that we do know about was Jake Sullivan, currently our national security adviser, charged with overseeing the conflict on the Ukraine–Russia border. Think about that. What a disgrace to our country that is. If you and I know about it, every nation in the world knows about it.”
Durham Reveals Democrats Behaving Like KGB; Is More Coming?

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. The Washington Examiner’s Byron York writes in his influential Daily Memo:

OF COURSE THEY SPIED ON TRUMP. One of the most contentious claims Donald Trump ever made was his insistence that he had been the target of spying. He made the charge in several different ways. For example, in March 2017, Trump, just two months in office, tweeted, "Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my 'wires tapped' in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!" Two years later, in April 2019, he was less specific but equally adamant when he said, "There was absolutely spying into my campaign." In August 2020, during his Republican National Committee acceptance speech, he said, "Remember this: They spied on my campaign."



Each time, all the usual anti-Trump voices rushed to accuse the president of lying. But over the years, a series of facts emerged that, while they did not support some of Trump's most specific charges — Obama did not wiretap Trump in Trump Tower — did support the larger idea that Trump was indeed the target of spying.



We learned that in the final days of the 2016 presidential race, when the Clinton campaign came up with the Steele dossier, a collection of sensational and unsupported allegations about Trump and Russia, the FBI used the dossier to win approval to wiretap Carter Page, a low-level former Trump campaign adviser. Then we learned that also in 2016, the FBI used a confidential informant, a professor named Stefan Halper, to spy on Page and George Papadopoulos, another low-level Trump adviser. Then we learned that in 2016, the FBI sent an undercover agent — a woman who used the alias Azra Turk — to secretly record conversations with Papadopoulos.”
Of course they spied on Trump

 

[OldFlame]

I give you kudos for trying to educate these fools, PC, I feel as though it's a losing battle however. When someone such as yourself can so completely and eloquently document their point with facts that can't be denied, and yet they attempt to argue against them, we're a doomed society. Some will never learn, all we can do is hope that those on the fence choose the right path.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I give you kudos for trying to educate these fools, PC, I feel as though it's a losing battle however. When someone such as yourself can so completely and eloquently document their point with facts that can't be denied, and yet they attempt to argue against them, we're a doomed society. Some will never learn, all we can do is hope that those on the fence choose the right path.

That was lovely, and much appreciated, OF!

My mission here is education, as you mention, and to bring same to the poor government school grads who have been so deprived.

And never forget, 5 to 10 times as many read a thread than post in one.....and those readers are my target.
They must see how indefensible the Lefts positions, lies, are when confronted.

Also playing into my plan are the inveterate liars who we expose.

It must be my Asian background: lighting that one candle.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I give you kudos for trying to educate these fools, PC, I feel as though it's a losing battle however. When someone such as yourself can so completely and eloquently document their point with facts that can't be denied, and yet they attempt to argue against them, we're a doomed society. Some will never learn, all we can do is hope that those on the fence choose the right path.

And, yes....I agree that ultimately we are a doomed society.

Pessimists unite!!!

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. This was posted March 29, 2017


"UPDATE: President Obama’s Own Defense Deputy Admits Obama White House Spied on Candidate/President-Elect Trump…
...Obama administration official Evelyn Farkas (Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense) appearing on MSNBC and admitting first hand knowledge the Obama administration spied on candidate and president-elect Donald Trump’s transition team to gather “intelligence” for political use.

....significant admissions she was making about the Obama administration spying on Donald Trump’s team and generating classified intelligence for Ms. Farkas (and others) to spread to Capitol Hill politicians.




'I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.
Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.

So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to [Democrat politicians].'

...Farkas outs herself as the key source for a New York Times report which discussed President Obama officials leaking classified information to media."
UPDATE: President Obama’s Own Defense Deputy Admits Obama White House Spied on Candidate/President-Elect Trump…

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[PoliticalChic]

10. “How do we know the new developments in special counsel John Durham’s investigation are important?

Answer: Because the New York Times and Washington Post claim they aren’t important.



Big Media’s messengers for the Deep State are nothing if not consistent. For years they sold the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax as the greatest story ever told. And now that the entire story is being unmasked as a figment of Hillary Clinton’s presidential ambition, the same suspects insist there’s nothing to see here.

Move along, they say.



It is awfully late in the game to be surprised that our national press corps puts its political agenda ahead of the national interest, but the refusal to treat the Durham probe with the seriousness it deserves takes the dereliction to a new level. The refusal involves deliberate attempts to mislead the public.

Then again, the motive is obvious. Giving Durham his due would require the media to re-examine its role in perpetuating the dirtiest dirty trick in American political history.

They won’t do that re-examination now for the same reason they wouldn’t do it after Robert Mueller couldn’t find the Trump-Russia collusion the press and Democrats insisted was in plain sight. The truth of how they screwed up would destroy careers and ruin reputations.



Asked the name of his client, Sussmann allegedly said no one, he was there on his own as a private citizen. In fact, Durham alleges, Sussmann was working to help Clinton get the FBI to investigate Trump. As proof, the indictment says Sussmann billed the Clinton campaign for his FBI meetings.”

The lefty press is giving Hillary Clinton a pass for Russiagate

Big Media’s messengers for the Deep State are nothing if not consistent.

nypost.com

And observe those posters, the psychotics, who still deny the facts that we on the Right claimed from the start.

 

[bodecea]

Nazis National Socialists whatever you call them were Fascists aka Leftists

Nope...Communists were Left....Fascism is Right.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Nope...Communists were Left....Fascism is Right.

....proving your ignorance on a daily basis.