Hemiman Loc: Communist California

Very true.

Hemiman Loc: Communist California

Excuse me but the sewers are already occupied by liberals.

PeterS

And all that could have been avoided by not putting them in the concentration camps to begin with. I've met very few Hitler apologists but you make it sound like he was doing them a favor! And if the furnaces couldn't dispose of 6 million corpse's how many could they dispose of? Oh, and did the Israelis take account for the smaller size of women and children when they were figuring out the capacity of the Nazi disposal machine? What if they were run 24/7 365 days a year? That might be needed to stop the spread of disease you know!


So you're going to set here and claim the the reason for the round up of Jews was because Hitler needed the labor? Too bad the Jews weren't farmers then he could have used them to feed the country too!


What final solution? You said the Jews were rounded up to provide labor. What kind of final solution is that? And because Hitler tended matter's of war does that make him less guilty for the atrocity committed under him? Kill the Russian Bear indeed--which is incredibly ironic since so many think Germany a Socialist country at that time...

PeterS

Oh, I measured them and there's plenty of room for her.

saltwind 78 Loc: Murrells Inlet, South Carolina

straightUp, George Orwell called it newspeak in his classic novel, 1984. In the world he created, the English language was reduced every year by the authoritarian government led by Big Brother in order to lessen the chances of any kind of revolt. Right on, George!

pafret Loc: Northeast

Let me ask you some simple questions. Why was it necessary to have riot police for any speaker on the Berkeley campus? Why were there riots, beatings of Conservative students and destruction of property by Berkeley students opposed to their views? If the University is so supportive of all speech, why did they tell one of their own campus organizations they could not hear a speaker in Berkeley’s facilities?

kemmer

Hahahahahaha.... Yeah, Breitbart, InfoWars, and Fox. They're responsible for Trump's approval rating to skyrocket all the way up to 32%.

Loki Loc: Georgia

Unlike Hillary's whose ratings are somewhere south of a cockroach with AIDS.

kemmer

It's sorta funny how Republicans are the only ones who care about Hillary.

straightUp Loc: California

Aw... is someone not happy with how I consistently prove my points? You folks can always improve your arguments... Just do more research and develop your sense of logic.

straightUp Loc: California

Why would I want to stifle the leaks? As far as I am concerned the government is supposed to be serving the people not hiding things from them.

kemmer

Face it, the Trump WH is a snakepit, where everyone thinks everyone else is either a Trump spy or a leaker.

Jean Deaux

I should have known that your true occupation is measuring sewers. It certainly fits your mentality!

Jean Deaux

You should know by now that your hissy pit is nothing but a nest of leftover obama vipers, doing their utmost to destroy everything the President has accomplished. But then that is all that can be expected from liberal intellects, more devoted to party allegiance than to the success of the Republic.

pafret Loc: Northeast

Straight up wrote:
Communism is indeed socialist and therefore leftist, but I'm betting you have no clue why. So I'll tell you. Socialism aims to give workers a share in the means of production that's why. Democratic societies will typically implement this through government ownership, which means the workers, who are also citizens, will have some voice in matters pertaining to the means of production.

But is communism totalitarian? No, it's not. In fact totalitarianism defeats the entire purpose of socialism (and therefore communism) because totalitarian systems deny the voices of citizens. Now, the reason why so many people like yourself *think* communism is totalitarian is because instead of reading Karl Marx to understand the theory they associate the word "communism" with it's failed implementations, such as the Soviet Union and People's Republic of China.

From Karl Marx Manifesto:
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels tract “The Communist Manifesto” concludes with a discussion about the role of the Communists as they work with other parties. The Communists fight for the immediate aims of workers, but always in the context of the entire Communist movement. Thus, they work with those political parties that will forward the ends of Communism, even if it involves working with the bourgeoisie. However, they never stop trying to instill in the working class a recognition of the hostile antagonism between bourgeoisie and proletariat, and to help them gain the weapons to eventually overthrow the bourgeoisie.
Thus, "the Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things." They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by forcibly overthrowing all existing social conditions. The Manifesto ends with this rallying cry: "Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE!"

This final section reveals the political agenda of the Communists. Their final goal is always a proletariat revolution and the abolition of private property and class antagonism.

Now, is this Totalitarian? Consider
Totalitarianism in simple terms is “of, relating to, being, or imposing - a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed: “A totalitarian regime crushes all autonomous activity on the part of its citizens.

Some Totalitarian Leaders:
Joseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler, Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Abraham Lincoln, Benito Mussolini, Hideki Tojo, Ataturk, Genghis Khan, Timur-i Leng (Tammerlane)

Straight up wrote:
On the other hand, Nazism is a German implementation of fascism and fascism is on the extreme right. Obviously, you don't why this is the case either. So. I'll tell you. Fascism is deeply nationalist and often racist, two conditions based on the exclusion of others, using the Nazi example, these others would be Jews, Romano, Homosexuals and any other ethnic group considered to be inferior to the "master race". It's this exclusion that makes fascism a right-wing ideology.

Fascism is a form of government which is a type of one-party dictatorship. Fascists are against democracy. They work for a totalitarian one-party state. Such a state is led by a strong leader — such as a dictator and a martial government. Fascism is radical authoritarian nationalism, characterized by forcible suppression of opposition and control of industry and commerce.

The only official definition of Fascism comes from Benito Mussolini, the founder of fascism, in which he outlines three principles of a fascist philosophy.

1."Everything in the state". The Government is supreme and the country is all encompassing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator.

2."Nothing outside the state". The country must grow and the implied goal of any fascist nation is to rule the world, and have every human submit to the government.

3."Nothing against the state". Any type of questioning the government is not to be tolerated. If you do not see things our way, you are wrong. If you do not agree with the government, you cannot be allowed to live and taint the minds of the rest of the good citizens.

The use of militarism was implied only as a means to accomplish one of the three above principles, mainly to keep the people and rest of the world in line. Fascist countries are known for their harmony and lack of internal strife. There are no conflicting parties or elections in fascist countries.

Nazi Germany was extreme Fascism; better examples of fascist countries were Mussolini's Italy, Iraq, Iran, and most Middle Eastern countries.

So where in this credo is there any mention of suppression of Jews, Gypsies, and homosexuals (who mostly remained in the closet in that era) and are you unaware the Italy had a thriving Jewish community in Rome prior to the Birth of Christ? Have you ever eaten Carciofi alla Giudia or artichoke fried in the Jewish style? A dish, which like Judaism, has permeated throughout the Italian ethos. Jews were persecuted at the instigation and demand of Hitler. Italian Fascist persecution of Jews was not only mild but Mussolini, the Italian armed forces, Italian civilians, and many church officials consistently protected Jews throughout the war years

Straightup wrote:
So you may ask. How can Nazism be right-wing AND socialist if I just said socialism is leftist? Well things can get complex, which is why so many people get confused. But I'll try to make this as a simple as possible. Socialism is an economic system, not a political one. So in theory, you can have a left-leaning socialist system inside the political structure of a right-leaning government, in which case the workers that are NOT excluded by the right-wing political system are included in the process of governing the means of production.

The simple answer to this is that it cannot be right wing and Socialist; the two are antagonists and not compatible in any way. Your assertion that Socialism is not political is ludicrous. Any form of government is political. Your “theory is just so much jabberwocky

http://www.pocatelloshops.com/new_blogs/politics/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/left-vs-right-truth.jpg

http://www.pocatelloshops.com/new_blogs/politics/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Political-Spectrum-Essentialized6.jpg

Straightup wrote:
As it happened, the reality of socialism in Nazi Germany was never as big as it's promise and once the democracy (another leftist concept) was replaced by totalitarianism, socialism was hardly evident at all. The Nazis were far more capitalist than socialist. In fact many American capitalists including the Rockefellers and the Bush family expressed admiration for Hitler's economic views and developed business ties with his regime.

Is that because Hitler was a secret capitalist or was it because the Rockefellers and Bushes were crypto-Nazi’s

Straightup wrote:
What the Nazis are far more famous for is their ethnic, and frequently violent, purges... which is extremely right-wing, which is what any encyclopedia or text book will tell you.

Only those textbooks and encyclopedias written by left wing Socialist flacks. There are as many articles and books averring the opposite. As a reality check look at the nations which have engaged in violent purges of their own peoples and universally they will be totalitarian and Communist or Socialist. There has never been a right wing government because anarchy is as untenable as Nazi-ism. There have been relatively few Libertarian nations and those have been mostly benevolent monarchies. Fascism, Nazism, and Communism are all leftist, socialist, totalitarian forms of government.

Straightup wrote:
(Chart omitted) Notice how some of the political leaders line up... pretty much opposite to what you are suggesting and it makes sense too, at least in a somewhat democratic context such as our Republic because the farther right you go the more people you exclude, therefore the more value placed on the authoritarian approach to control. This is why you see the red dots representing Republicans lined up farther to the right AND closer to the authoritarian extreme.
Some of the people missing from this chart are Bill Mahr a self-professed Libertarian AND very left and even more to the point, Noam Chomsky, a self-professed anarchist and very, very left.

Your chart’s axes were selected to prove your point. As far as the individuals identified, it claims Clinton, Obama, Edwards and Biden are Rightists. We all can recognize that this must be an excellent chart; it reflects the left’s reality so well. Your deduction that by excluding people you value authoritarian leaders more is a non sequitur. This is your assertion, not evidence derived from logical deduction. Chomsky is as Communist as you can get and while he may self-identify as an anarchist, it is only in the sense that he is willing to destroy everything to impose his world view on others.