Stone to rehablitate Hilter Stalin and Mao.

[Baruch Menachem]

Your argument is circular, which is probably the reason you seem so dizzy.

class is no longer relevant in today's societies... except as a java construct. What matters is the freedom o the individual. That is where most modern battles are fought... the right of the individual vs the authority of the state.

Talking of 14th century ideas as important in modern battles.... it makes as much sense as to argue about the strenths of the pike vs the armored knight in terms of the modern battlefield.

All this talk of class obscures the important issues and makes for muddy thinking.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Your argument is circular, which is probably the reason you seem so dizzy.

class is no longer relevant in today's societies... except as a java construct. What matters is the freedom o the individual. That is where most modern battles are fought... the right of the individual vs the authority of the state.

Talking of 14th century ideas as important in modern battles.... it makes as much sense as to argue about the strenths of the pike vs the armored knight in terms of the modern battlefield.

All this talk of class obscures the important issues and makes for muddy thinking.

Well, I believe he DID claim to be an academic, and that's what they specialize in: way too many words to say abso-frigging-lutely nothing, for the express purpose of muddying the thinking and preventing any real discourse from happening.

 

[garyd]

And you can't let go the antiquated notion of left and right to save yourself can you soda?

There are divisions -way points if you'd like - between anarchy and totalitarianism. Various governmental types occupy them but the line does not extend infinitely in both directions because you can not get more anarchic than anarchy nor can you go beyond complete control. Everything else fall somewhere in between these two positions. Get your head out of that damn box for a minute if you can.

Gads I feel like Gallileo talking to the inquisition or Socrates right before he was compelled to drink the hemlock. The only thing more conservative (in the dictionary since of clinging to the status quo) than the Catholic Church are modern day academics

For another thing if one goes by actual definitions the number of actual conservatives in this country probaly would fill up a foursome for bridge. I don't know of anyone actually likes the status quo. As for liberals liberals were originally people who thought government was to damn big and cumbersome and too involved in their daily lives 220 years ago.

 

[L.K.Eder]

No, the definitions I am using are the only ones that are used.

In your mind. Typical ivory tower 'intellectual' elitist progressive.

This is one thought terminating cliche that isn't getting a pass. Not so easy indoctrinating those who do not fear an "F" in your class, is it? Tenured I assume. I doubt a competent member of a university poli-sci faculty with this attitude would survive long without it.

Any poster here can check those models, and find I'm correct.

Quite dubious and highly assumptive. We can check them, and make up our own minds. Your point of view is not unequivocally part and parcel.

your a true scoler! but, can you knit?

And he's a jurnalist two!

you make my mocking of the great scholar garyd look like i am mocking sodafin. needless to say, i don't approve.

 

[L.K.Eder]

And you can't let go the antiquated notion of left and right to save yourself can you soda?

There are divisions -way points if you'd like - between anarchy and totalitarianism. Various governmental types occupy them but the line does not extend infinitely in both directions because you can not get more anarchic than anarchy nor can you go beyond complete control. Everything else fall somewhere in between these two positions. Get your head out of that damn box for a minute if you can.

Gads I feel like Gallileo talking to the inquisition or Socrates right before he was compelled to drink the hemlock. The only thing more conservative (in the dictionary since of clinging to the status quo) than the Catholic Church are modern day academics

For another thing if one goes by actual definitions the number of actual conservatives in this country probaly would fill up a foursome for bridge. I don't know of anyone actually likes the status quo. As for liberals liberals were originally people who thought government was to damn big and cumbersome and too involved in their daily lives 220 years ago.

your crutch is an arbitrary line, where someone put totalitarianism on the left and anarchism on the right. this line relies on one parameter, extent of governmental control, and the left-right poles are chosen to put the evil dictators on the left. this is cherry picking, transparent and moronic. pinochet is a lefty!

the system is more complex than that. on the other hand, you are quite one-dimensional. so it is understandable that you can't follow.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you CAN make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is”, said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master – that’s all.”

Despite all that spinning, Soda remains up on that wall of his, redefining all kinds of language to force the universe to conform to his fancy

Alice laughed. “There’s no use trying,” she said, “one can’t believe impossible things.”
“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why sometimes I believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!”

Soda in this modern democratic age is able to do far better than the queen. Of course, he gets more practice as well.

 

[L.K.Eder]

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you CAN make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is”, said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master – that’s all.”

Despite all that spinning, Soda remains up on that wall of his, redefining all kinds of language to force the universe to conform to his fancy

Alice laughed. “There’s no use trying,” she said, “one can’t believe impossible things.”
“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why sometimes I believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!”

Soda in this modern democratic age is able to do far better than the queen. Of course, he gets more practice as well.

you have it backwards. the left-right definition is the old one. from the french revolution, and the seating order in the first assemblée nationale.

to put hitler on the left, and that is what i am talking about, you have to redefine by using different parameters, creating a line, and then choose to press this new model into the old left-right jacket.

i can make any person a lefty or righty by this method.

 

[Sodafin]

Despite all that spinning, Soda remains up on that wall of his, redefining all kinds of language to force the universe to conform to his fancy

This thread started at bizarre and seems to be heading south on the highway to laughable at a very fast rate!

As you could confirm in about 30 seconds on google - the definition I am using is not only correct - it is the only definition there is. I am not redefining language - I am using it accurately.

It really is not my fault if posters here do not know what words mean, and do not have access to dictionaries.

Gary -

You STILL have not answered the questions about Africa - despite being the one who raised the issue of Africa. Please answer the question, as it is much more interesting than watching the endless war or Gary versus Dictionaries.

And no my definition, it is not antiquated at all, obviously. It is still used in every dictionary, in every encyclopedia, and in every school and university in the world.

You really are not covering yourself in glory on the literacy stakes here, are you?!

 

[Sodafin]

Mr Grump -

I have found, generally, that the US Conservative - especially one to the extreme right - does not have the nouse or temerity to think deeper into different political systems. They have grown up with a choice of only two, and it is reflected in their posting. Gary is such a poster. He cannot see outside the limited political spectrum that the US provides.

This seems to be the case.

I have to say, I have found the posting on this thread to be quite disturbing. When apparently literate, intelligent people start arguing against dictionaries because the dictionaries do not confirm their own prejudices, I think we really have look at the education and cultural environment people are immersed in.

It's as if independent thought and research are simply no longer allowed.

 

[Sodafin]

your crutch is an arbitrary line, where someone put totalitarianism on the left and anarchism on the right. this line relies on one parameter, extent of governmental control, and the left-right poles are chosen to put the evil dictators on the left. this is cherry picking, transparent and moronic. pinochet is a lefty!

the system is more complex than that. on the other hand, you are quite one-dimensional. so it is understandable that you can't follow.

Excellent post - probably the best on this thread so far.

According to Gary's line of thinking - not only is Pinochet on the left, but so are half of the worlds dictators - including a number of US allies in the Cold War, such as Sese Mobuto (DRC), Cristiani (El Salvador) Rios Montte (Guatemala) and the Dirty Generals in Argentina.

These people all fought communism, all promoted Christianity and supported the US - but were apparently all communists themselves.

Anarchists meanwhile, who traditionally fight against the police, the military-industrial complex, who are often linked to environmental issues and animal rights - are on the right.

Go figure.

 

[Sunni Man]

Anarchists meanwhile, who traditionally fight against the police, the military-industrial complex, who are often linked to environmental issues and animal rights

Anarchists are as far Left as you can get.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

your crutch is an arbitrary line, where someone put totalitarianism on the left and anarchism on the right. this line relies on one parameter, extent of governmental control, and the left-right poles are chosen to put the evil dictators on the left. this is cherry picking, transparent and moronic. pinochet is a lefty!

the system is more complex than that. on the other hand, you are quite one-dimensional. so it is understandable that you can't follow.

Excellent post - probably the best on this thread so far.

According to Gary's line of thinking - not only is Pinochet on the left, but so are half of the worlds dictators - including a number of US allies in the Cold War, such as Sese Mobuto (DRC), Cristiani (El Salvador) Rios Montte (Guatemala) and the Dirty Generals in Argentina.

These people all fought communism, all promoted Christianity and supported the US - but were apparently all communists themselves.

Anarchists meanwhile, who traditionally fight against the police, the military-industrial complex, who are often linked to environmental issues and animal rights - are on the right.

Go figure.

Quote for posterity

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Compare the role of class in Nazism with that in socialism, and you have your answer.

Accordingly a human community is well organized only when it facilitates to the highest possible degree individual creative forces and utilizes their work for the benefit of the community.
Adolf Hitler

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs)
Carl marx

 

[L.K.Eder]

Compare the role of class in Nazism with that in socialism, and you have your answer.

Accordingly a human community is well organized only when it facilitates to the highest possible degree individual creative forces and utilizes their work for the benefit of the community.
Adolf Hitler

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs)
Carl marx

Accordingly a human community is well organized only when it facilitates to the highest possible degree individual creative forces and utilizes their work for the benefit of the community. The most valuable factor of an invention, whether it be in the world of material realities or in the world of abstract ideas, is the personality of the inventor himself. The first and supreme duty of an organized folk community is to place the inventor in a position where he can be of the greatest benefit to all. Indeed the very purpose of the organization is to put this principle into practice. Only by so doing can it ward off the curse of mechanization and remain a living thing. In itself it must personify the effort to place men of brains above the multitude and to make the latter obey the former.


..

Marxism represents the most striking phase of the Jewish endeavour to eliminate the dominant significance of personality in every sphere of human life and replace it by the numerical power of the masses. In politics the parliamentary form of government is the expression of this effort. We can observe the fatal effects of it everywhere, from the smallest parish council upwards to the highest governing circles of the nation. In the field of economics we see the trade union movement, which does not serve the real interests of the employees but the destructive aims of international Jewry. Just to the same degree in which the principle of personality is excluded from the economic life of the nation, and the influence and activities of the masses substituted in its stead, national economy, which should be for the service and benefit of the community as a whole, will gradually deteriorate in its creative capacity. ~A. Hitler same chapter, 3 paragraphs later

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

So the difference is folk philosophy is socialism sans jews.

 

[L.K.Eder]

So the difference is folk philosophy is socialism sans jews.

aryan exceptionalism with focus on rugged individualism and raging against the current political system.

 

[Big Fitz]

We will place at one end - which end matters not for the purposes of this exercise Anarchism. At the other we will place totalitarianism. ( If you can't figure out that totalitarianism are polar opposites you have no place in this debate in the first place.)

r.

I don't think it is fair to say that you should not be in this debate in the first place, Gary, but it is astonishing that you can't wrap your head around the idea that totalitarianism can - and does - appear at both ends of the two dimensional spectrum, but in different manifestations.

Anarchism and left wing totalitarianism share a lot of ideological elements - such as both being traditionally claiming to be voices of the 'people'

Democracy also appears in more than place, i.e. the variation between SDP/Labour and Conservatism, does it not?

I have found, generally, that the US Conservative - especially one to the extreme right - does not have the nouse or temerity to think deeper into different political systems. They have grown up with a choice of only two, and it is reflected in their posting. Gary is such a poster. He cannot see outside the limited political spectrum that the US provides.

SOmeone grab my epi-pen! I am having anaphylactic shock from exposure to too much Elitism!

Ack!

 

[garyd]

LK you idiot since you didn't seem to get it the first time. The line I have drafted has nothing to do with left or right and measures neither. What it attempts to measure is the level of totalitarianism presnt in a given society based upon the number of behaviors they try to control.

Is that simple enough for you idiot or should I go to a thesaurus in search of single syllable words to replace all the ones containing multiple syllables.

 

[Sodafin]

Is that simple enough for you idiot or should I go to a thesaurus in search of single syllable words to replace all the ones containing multiple syllables.

Gary -

Given your definitions contradict every dictionary or encyclopedia I have ever seen, this seems a strange line of reasoning to take.

Let's look at a couple of dictionary definitions for 'fascism' for instance:

- an adherent of fascism or other right-wing authoritarian views

- A system of government that promotes extreme nationalism, repression, anticommunism, and is ruled by a dictator.

- a philosophy or system of government that advocates or exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right,

And you still haven't answered the points about Africa.

 

[L.K.Eder]

LK you idiot since you didn't seem to get it the first time. The line I have drafted has nothing to do with left or right and measures neither. What it attempts to measure is the level of totalitarianism presnt in a given society based upon the number of behaviors they try to control.

Is that simple enough for you idiot or should I go to a thesaurus in search of single syllable words to replace all the ones containing multiple syllables.

aha.

Sorry no the appropriate model has totaliatarianism at one end of the scale and anarchism at the other.

The closet thing we have to anarchism in this country is libertarianism which wants the least amont of government possible while maintianing an orderly and just society.

Governments exist solely to exert control over human behavior and make no mistake some behaviors need to be controlled . The more behaviors you seek to control the closer you get to totalitarianism.

The left with its desire to control far more behaviors than any one on the right considers either necessary or worthwhile thus the left is the end of the spectrum uponwhich totalitarianisms of what ever stripe must lie.

I am after all quite familiar with the horse shoe concept. Some would even go so far as to make it a circle. Hell I even bought into it myself 30 or so years ago. Then I began to read more and more history and the horse shoe/circle began to make less and less sense and seemed to me to be both completely illogical and holy unjustified by the facts.

you did exactly what i wrote you did. someone cherry picked one parameter, probably someone here: extent of gov. control. you parroted it and applied the old left right model to it. you are not the first to do it, you will do it again, and a lot of other speshial intellechsuals will do it again and again and again, too. outside of the rightwingnut echo chamber your little delusions don't matter. have a nice day.