Albert Einstein's phrase: “I fear the day when technology will overtake our humanity; the world will only have a generation of idiots”, reflected at the time the great concern of this genius when he saw the tendency of human beings with respect to the excesses in the use of technology.
In the 1950s, I read George Orwell's novel "1984," in which Winston Smith is a junior official in the Ministry of Truth, the propaganda ministry of the totalitarian regime, where he rewrites old newspaper reports to reconcile them with the last line of the single party. Orwell said when "1984" was published, that it was a fiction about the future, but based on a deeply researched story about the recent past; and any reader close in time to the publication of the literary work would have recognized that most of the events and practices in the novel echoed what had already developed in Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union.
This novel describes a world in which historical events have ceased to exist and the past is infinitely malleable; and in our days, we are living in a somewhat similar society, where information is manipulated by the media, practicing mass surveillance; as well as political and social repression, covertly; to which technology contributes greatly.
Currently, to the parts of the human body (head, trunk and extremities), in some people it is necessary to add one more: the smartphone, where it can be found a supplement of their brain, which is necessary for them, because they have been overwhelmed by the technology.
It is common that having developed a conversation on a topic between several people, one of them declares that he/she does not know about the topic; but immediately he/she asks for advice from his/her smartphone and a moment later, he/she begins to pontificate and lecture on the matter, based on the information obtained from that surrogate of his brain; without stopping to think if what is reported in that media may be flawed by political, social, economic or any other interests.
Consulting what Wikipedia (The "free" encyclopedia, under the dominance of the left) says on the smartphone, we can read: “Fascism is an ideology, a political movement and a form of government of a totalitarian, anti-democratic and ultra-nationalist character of EXTREME RIGHT”. Here the information has been vitiated for political convenience and three truths have been said, to finally cover a lie under the same cloak.
Everything that is said about Mussolini's Fascism can be said about Hitler's National Socialism: totalitarian, anti-democratic and ultra-nationalist; but NOT FROM THE EXTREME RIGHT, but from the extreme left.
To make believe that Nazi-fascism is an ideology of the extreme right is the greatest propaganda success of the socialist extreme left in all its history, thus creating an ideological mirage in order to confuse and divert attention from its crimes, which its "higher purpose" is to clean up its image a bit, which is quite stained by the more than 100 million deaths attributed to it, just in 70 years of the last century.
Objectively, Nazi-fascism is a socialist (Marxist) ideology, linked to nationalist sentiment; that did not arise on the right but within the socialist movement of the left, after the event of the Bolshevik coup d'état in October 1917, against the provisional government of the Russian Social Democratic Revolution of February of that year, that had overthrown the Tsar . This coup d'état served to propagate all kinds of revolutionary and anti-system socialisms, including those we know as Fascism or Nazism.
Joseph Goebbels, Propaganda Minister of the Third Reich between 1933 and 1945, one of Adolf Hitler's closest collaborators, confessed that: "The national-socialist movement has only one teacher: Marxism" - (Kampf um Berlin, p. 19 ); and coinciding with Marxist ideologues - he affirmed that "Socialism is the conception of the world of the future that can only be realized in the Socialist State" (Die Zweite Revolution). He also expressed the following: "We are socialists and mortal enemies of the capitalist economic system" (Der Nationalsozialismus, Die Weltanschaung des 20 Jahrhunderts).
For his part, Hitler, in his book Mein Kampf, admits that he has carefully read Das Kapital by Karl Marx: “I got to penetrate the content of the work of the Jew Karl Marx ... he was, among millions, really the only one who with the vision of a prophet has discovered in the mud of a gradually degraded Humanity, the germs of social poison, grouping them, like a genius of black magic, in a concentrated solution, to destroy, more quickly, the independent life of the sovereign nations of the world".
Although Hitler added to his socialism a racist and anti-Jewish component; recognizing the evil that the author of Das Kapital put in his work (and how useful it was for him) to destroy individual freedom, he had no qualms about applying the theory of this renegade Jew; leaving his position on capitalism clearly established in his speech delivered on Workers' Day in 1927, when he said: “We are socialists, we are enemies of the current capitalist economic system, because it exploits the weak from the economic point of view, with its unequal salaries, with their indecent valuation of a human being according to whether or not he has wealth, instead of evaluating the responsibility and performance of the person, and we are determined to destroy this capitalist system in all its aspects ”.
Unquestionably, this is a speech of the EXTREME LEFT, which in our days could have been delivered by Mr. Bernie Sanders, a well-known Marxist-Leninist, admirer of the Soviet Union, defender of Cuban Castroism and promoter of “Democratic” Socialism, which follows the guidelines of the Sao Paulo Forum.
It is history, that Communist fellow travelers joined the Nazis in the Reichstag to elect Hitler as Chancellor, when the Pravda newspaper of Moscow praised Nazism, stating that Nazi behavior was more proletarian (read more Marxist) than that of the Social Democrats, such propaganda made many communist militants join the ranks of Nazism, which had equally Marxist workers' slogans; being shown, that Marxist socialism in all its forms: international (Leninist socialism) or national (Nazi-fascism), is the same poison with a different label on the packaging.
Mussolini, creator of fascism, recalcitrant Marxist, whose father was a friend of the author of Das Kapital in the First International, is pleased to affirm that Marx is his spiritual father. (Mussolini and fascism. Ed. Que sais-je, p.31); and his friend Lenin (another Marxist), gave favorable praise to the Duce, even scolding members of the Italian Communist Party in 1922 during a visit they made to Moscow, for having let such a revolutionary go, who in the words of the Russian satrap was the man capable of seizing power in Italy before 1914.
Leninist Socialism, Fascism and Nazism are born children of the marriage between the mother of these systems, the Hegelian doctrine (which considers the State as its god); and his father socialist Marxism.
Of course, for those who use the smartphone as a complement to their brain, none of the above makes them think that Hitler and Mussolini were far-left Marxists; for them these characters were from the extreme right, although they wanted to destroy capitalism, like Marx, because they were his disciples; since Wikipedia reports something different through the smartphone, product of the rewriting of old newspaper reports by someone like Winston Smith, a minor official in the Ministry of Truth on the far left, to convince idiots of what is convenient for those who promote Marxist totalitarianism.
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
I have lived in China for the past 17 years going on 18 this January...
Almost half of my life...
I didn't read the longer part of your post... The lack of paragraph spacing made it difficult...(alcohol related)
It is a pity that a man in his 30s is so dominated by alcohol that it does not allow him to read the paragraphs that are well separated by dash lines.
I think it is an excuse at the style of permafrost, who locks himself in a vicious circle without reason for not accepting what is exposed.
Considering your problem with alcohol, I am going to put it in a nutshell, what you do not want to learn.
1 - Hitler was a leftist and he considered himself "the true director of Marxism" (H. Rauschning, in Hitler, De
Cooperation, Paris, 1939, p.112)
2 - Goebbels confessed that - "The national-socialist movement has only one teacher: Marxism" - (Kampf um
Berlin, p.19).
3 - Hitler, in his book Mein Kampf, admits that he has thoroughly read Karl Marx's Das Kapital: “I came to
penetrate the content of the work of the Jew Karl Marx… he was, among millions, really the only one who with
a prophet's vision discovered in the Mud of a gradually debased Humanity, the germs of social poison,
grouping them together, like a genius of black magic, in a concentrated solution, in order to destroy, more
quickly, the independent life of the sovereign nations of the world”.
4 -Mussolini is pleased to affirm that Marx is his spiritual father. (Mussolini and fascism Ed. Que sais-je, p.31).--
As you see, these Nazis and the father of Fascism accept that they are Marxists.
Milosia2 wrote:
The Class War—Waged and Being Won by the Rich—Is Destroying US Democracy
The US has become a country of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich and we remain in the throes of a struggle to overcome decades of political corruption and social neglect.
JEFFREY D. SACHS
December 15, 2021 by Project Syndicate
Almost a year after Joe Biden's narrow election victory over Donald Trump, the United States remains on a knife-edge. Many political outcomes are possible. These range from the gradual economic and political reform that Biden is seeking to the subversion of elections and constitutional rule that Trump attempted last January—and that he and the Republican Party are still intent on pursuing.
America's turmoil has disturbing international implications. The US cannot lead global reforms when it cannot even govern itself coherently.
It's not easy to diagnose exactly what ails America at its core so deeply that it incited the Trump movement. Is it the ceaseless culture wars that divide America by race, religion, and ideology? Is it the increase in inequality of wealth and power to unprecedented levels? Is it America's diminishing global power, with the rise of China and the repeated disasters of US-led wars of choice leading to national agony, frustration, and confusion?
All of these factors are at play in America's tumultuous politics. Yet in my view, the deepest crisis is political—the failure of America's political institutions to "promote the general Welfare," as the US Constitution promises. Over the past four decades, America's politics have become an insider's game to favor the super-rich and corporate lobbies at the expense of the overwhelming majority of citizens.
The 1% Above the Rest
Warren Buffett homed in on the essence of the crisis in 2006. "There's class warfare, all right," he said, "but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning."
The main battlefield is in Washington, DC. The shock troops are the corporate lobbyists who swarm the US Congress, federal departments, and administrative agencies. The ammunition is the billions of dollars spent annually on federal lobbying (an estimated $3.5 billion in 2020) and campaign contributions (an estimated $14.4 billion in the 2020 federal elections). The pro-class-war propagandists are the corporate media, led by mega-billionaire Rupert Murdoch.
Nearly 2,500 years ago, Aristotle famously observed that good government can turn into bad government through a flawed constitutional order. Republics, governed by the rule of law, can descend into populist mob rule, or oligarchic rule by a small and corrupt class, or a tyranny of personal, one-man rule. America faces such possible disasters unless the political system can detach itself from the massive corruption of corporate lobbying and campaign financing by the rich.
America's class war on the poor is not new but was launched in earnest in the early 1970s and implemented with brutal efficiency over the past 40 years. For roughly three decades, from President Franklin D. Roosevelt's inauguration in 1933 in the midst of the Great Depression to the Kennedy-Johnson period of 1961-68, America was generally on the same development path as postwar Western Europe, becoming a social democracy. Income inequality was declining, and more social groups, most notably African-Americans and women, were joining the mainstream of economic and political life.
Then came the revenge of the rich. In 1971, a corporate lawyer, Lewis Powell, laid out a strategy to reverse the social democratic trends toward stronger environmental regulation, worker rights, and fair taxation. Big business would fight back. President Richard Nixon nominated Powell to the US Supreme Court in 1971, and he was sworn in early the next year, enabling him to put his plan into operation.
Under Powell's prodding, the Supreme Court opened the floodgates to corporate money in politics. In Buckley v. Valeo (1976), the court struck down federal limits on campaign spending by candidates and independent groups as violations of free speech. In First National Bank of Boston v. Belotti (1978), Powell wrote the majority opinion declaring that corporate spending for political advocacy was free speech that could not be subjected to spending limits. The Court's onslaught on campaign finance limits culminated in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission (2010), which essentially ended all limits on corporate spending in federal politics.
When Ronald Reagan became president in 1981, he reinforced the Supreme Court's assault on the general welfare by cutting taxes for the rich, waging an assault on organized labor, and rolling back environmental protections. That trajectory has still not been reversed.
As a result, the US has diverged from Europe in basic economic decency, well-being, and environmental control. Whereas Europe generally continued on the path of social democracy and sustainable development, the US charged ahead on a path marked by political corruption, oligarchy, an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor, disdain for the environment, and a refusal to limit human-induced climate change.
A few numbers spell out the differences. Governments in the European Union raise revenues averaging roughly 45% of GDP, while US government revenues amount to only around 31% of GDP. European governments thus are able to pay for universal access to health care, higher education, family support, and job training, while the US does not ensure provision of these services. Europe tops the World Happiness Report rankings of life satisfaction, while the US ranks only 19th. In 2019, life expectancy in the EU was 81.1 years, compared to 78.8 years in the US (which had a higher life expectancy than the EU in 1980). As of 2019, the share of the richest 1% of households in national income was around 11% in Western Europe, compared with 18.8% in the US. In 2019, the US emitted 16.1 tons of carbon dioxide per person, compared with 8.3 tons of CO2 per person in the EU.
Serving the rich while distracting the poor with xenophobia, culture wars, and a strongman's pose may be the oldest trick in the demagogue's playbook, but it still plays surprisingly well.
In short, the US has become a country of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich, with no political responsibility for the climate damage it is imposing on the rest of the world. The resulting social cleavages have led to an epidemic of deaths of despair (including drug overdoses and suicides), declining life expectancy (even before COVID-19), and rising rates of depression, especially among young people. Politically, these derangements have led in varied directions—most ominously, to Trump, who offered faux populism and a cult of personality. Serving the rich while distracting the poor with xenophobia, culture wars, and a strongman's pose may be the oldest trick in the demagogue's playbook, but it still plays surprisingly well.
Powerful Headwinds
This is the situation that Biden is trying to address, but his successes so far have been limited and fragile. The simple fact is that all congressional Republicans and a small but decisive group of Democrats (most notoriously Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona) are intent on blocking any meaningful increase in taxes on the rich and US corporations, thereby preventing the growth in federal revenues urgently needed to create a fairer and greener society. They are also blocking decisive action on climate change.
Thus, we are arriving at the end of Biden's first year with the rich still entrenched in power, and with obstacles in every direction regarding fair taxation, increased social spending, protection of voting rights, and urgently needed environmental safeguards. Biden could still eke out some modest wins, and then build on them in the coming years. The public wants this. Roughly two-thirds of Americans favor higher taxes on the rich and corporations.
Yet there is a real possibility that Biden's setbacks in 2021 will help the Republicans win control of one or both chambers of Congress in 2022. That would put an end to legislative reforms until at least 2025, and could even presage the return of Trump to power in the 2024 presidential election amid social disarray, violence, media propaganda, and voter suppression in Republican-controlled states.
America's turmoil has disturbing international implications. The US cannot lead global reforms when it cannot even govern itself coherently. Perhaps the only thing that unites Americans nowadays is an overwrought sense of threats from abroad, mainly from China. With America in domestic disarray, politicians of both parties have escalated their anti-China rhetoric, as if a new Cold War could somehow soothe America's homegrown angst. The only thing that Washington's bipartisan belligerence will produce, alas, is more global tension and new dangers of conflict (over Taiwan, for example), not security or real solutions to any of our urgent global problems.
The US is not back, at least not yet. It is still in the throes of a struggle to overcome decades of political corruption and social neglect. The outcome remains highly uncertain, and the outlook for the coming years is fraught with peril for both the US and the world.
The Class War—Waged and Being Won by the Rich—Is D... (
show quote)
In certain respects this article has reason; but I do not consider that any significant increase in taxes for the rich and corporations, but for the people in general, is being blocked, since the necessary urgency of federal taxes to create a "fairer society" is to finance projects favorable to the clientelism of the Democratic Party, help the economy of the states under their rule that they have destroyed with their failed policies and advance the New Green Deal scam in response to climate change; about which, the human being can do nothing.
It is also true, that we reached the end of Biden's first year with the rich still entrenched in power along with him, as they cooperated to "save Democracy" by helping him to get to the White House, according to the "anti-democratic" complot explained by Time magazine.
I also agree that there is a real possibility that Biden's setbacks in 2021 will help Republicans gain control of one or both houses of Congress by 2022. That would put an end to legislative reforms until at least 2025, and could even herald Trump's return to power in the 2024 presidential elections, despite social disorder, violence, media propaganda, voter and vote fabrication; as well as, with the manipulation of the voting machines in the states controlled by the Democrats.
America's turmoil has disturbing international implications. The United States cannot lead global reforms when it cannot even consistently govern itself. (This is totally true, the President is incoherent) Perhaps the only thing that unites Americans today is an exaggerated sense of threats from abroad, mainly from China (and the one to be created by the Democrats, accusing Russia). With the United States in internal chaos, politicians from both parties (united to produce an anti-democratic coup to "save Democracy") have stepped up their anti-China rhetoric, as if a new Cold War could somehow ease America's local anguish. The only thing that Washington's bipartisan belligerence will produce, sadly, is more global tension and new dangers of conflict (over Taiwan, for example), not security or real solutions to any of our pressing global problems.
The United States has not returned, at least not yet. It is still in the midst of a struggle to overcome decades of political corruption (increasing the Chinese economy to the detriment of the US through greed, having an example in Hunter Biden) and social neglect (allowing theft, destruction of property as part of protests created artificially for political purposes. ). The outcome remains highly uncertain, and the outlook for the next few years is fraught with dangers for both the United States and the world.
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
I repeat, China has shown no aggression towards any nations.. Hence, not expansionist...
Nor was Hitler a Marxist...
Canuckus Deploracus
Dec 13, 2021 19:16:37 I'd be the ideal subject of a totalitarian government... Because I believe in
totalitarianism...
Dec 13, 2021 19:34:46 I prefer China... I'm more of a fascist than a communist...
These statements allow me to understand you better. You would certainly prefer to live in China, never North Korea or Cuba; but you live in Canada. Maybe in China you are a person to respect.
The answer Blade_Runner gave you about China's expansionism is correct. It is unacceptable that China intends to take away their rights to the contiguous maritime zone and the exclusive economic zone to: Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei in the southern zone of the China Sea, going against the Convention on the Rights of the Sea. This just to insist on one case.
As for Hitler not being a Marxist, once again I will show that he was.
Let's see what Wikipedia says about Fascism: “Fascism is an EXTREME RIGHT-WING authoritarian ultra-nationalism form characterized by dictatorial power, the forced repression of the opposition and the strong regulation of society and the economy that became prominent to early 20th century in Europe ”. --------------
---------In this definition, a manipulation is made when the words: “extreme right-wing” are inserted, since the rest of what is written is not questionable, a falsehood is introduced into what is real, covering up a lie by placing it among various truths. --------Precisely we are facing the greatest propaganda success of the left in its entire history, having made believe that Fascism is an ideology of the extreme right when in reality it is a socialist ideology united to nationalist sentiment, that did not arise on the right but within of the left socialist movement after the event which supposed the coup against the social democrat Russian Revolution of February 1917, that served to propagate all kinds of revolutionary socialisms contrary to capitalism, among which we include what we know as Fascism. -------------On the other hand, the fascist leaders themselves always denied the label of belonging to the right, stressing their anti-capitalist positions, and flaunting their socialist programs and measures in favor of the workers. It is somewhat cynical that an ideology is included within a label that its promoters vehemently deny. ------------- Fascism is unquestionably the son of Marxism, noting that its founder, Benito Mussolini, was in the early twentieth century very close to Lenin and also leader of the recalcitrant Italian socialist party being a furious Marxist; he created fascism to show himself as the most revolutionary of all, since within the socialist party he expelled the so-called "revisionists" from the Social Democracy.-----------------Nicola Bombacci, founder of the Italian Communist Party in 1921, later came to the ranks of the Duce movement, stating that he found no difference between fascism and totalitarian communism, having written: “fascism has made a great social revolution, with Mussolini and Lenin, Soviet and corporate fascist state, Rome and Moscow, we had to rectify a lot, nothing to make us forgive, because today as yesterday we are driven by the same ideal, the triumph of work ". Both Mussolini and Bombacci were executed in 1945. --------------------------------- -----------------------Hitler was a leftist and he considered himself "the true director of Marxism" (H. Rauschning, in Hitler, De Cooperation, Paris, 1939, p.112); and none other than Goebbels, it was he who confessed that - "The national-socialist movement has only one teacher: Marxism" - (Kampf um Berlin, p.19); and coinciding with Marxist ideologues, he affirmed that "Socialism is the conception of the world of the future that can only be realized in the Socialist State" (Die Zweite Revolution). And it also expresses: - "We are socialists and mortal enemies of the capitalist economic system" - (Der Nationalsozialismus, Die Weltanschaung des 20 Jahrhunderts). For his part, and to be no less eloquent, Mussolini is pleased to affirm that Marx is his spiritual father. (Mussolini and fascism Ed. Que sais-je, p.31).-------------------- -------------Marxism is the source from which Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini and Hitler drank; who were the developers of all socialist systems. Marx is responsible for all the misfortunes that these systems have promoted since the Bolshevik coup in October of 1917, with his totalitarian doctrine framed in the aberration of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat .------------------------------- The relationship of these characters of history with Marxism is beyond doubt. The so-called "Marxism-Leninism" is a well-known doctrine. ------------------------------------------For his part, Hitler, in his book Mein Kampf, admits that he has thoroughly read Karl Marx's Das Kapital: “I came to penetrate the content of the work of the Jew Karl Marx… he was, among millions, really the only one who with a prophet's vision discovered in the Mud of a gradually debased Humanity, the germs of social poison, grouping them together, like a genius of black magic, in a concentrated solution, in order to destroy, more quickly, the independent life of the sovereign nations of the world. ”.----------------------------------Despite the racist, anti-Jewish component that Hitler added to his socialism; recognizing the evil that the author of Das Kapital put in his work, he had no problem putting the theory of the Jew into practice; making his position regarding capitalism clearly established in his speech delivered in 1927 on Workers' Day, when he said: “We are socialists, we are enemies of the current capitalist economic system because it exploits the one that is weak from the economic point of view, with their unequal wages, with their indecent evaluation of a human being according to whether they have wealth or not, instead of evaluating the responsibility and the performance of the person, and we are determined to destroy this capitalist system in all its aspects”. ----------------These words could have been spoken, without surprise to any person, by the young congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, supporter of socialism, or by her guru, the Marxist-Leninist comrade, Senator Bernie Sanders, an admirer of the Soviets, enemies of the United States, although in the USSR there was no "paradise" for workers or the "democratic socialism" that he now proposes; knowing that socialism is contrary to democracy when the Dictatorship of the Proletariat is established, which should not be confused with social democracy. It should be remembered that Gorbachev tried to give Socialism a "human face", but failed; without forgetting that this idea produced more than 100 million deaths in only 70 years of the last century, according to “The Black Book of Communism ".----
guzzimaestro wrote:
How can a criminal be against crime? Conflict of interest
He is amoral, he changes his way of thinking as appropriate at all times. At that time he would have convicted George Floyd and acquitted Derek Chauvin. Today he does the opposite.
AmericanMadeMary wrote:
The Constitution protects the People's right to challenge their electors and they did on Jan 6. It was no coup, just the people representing the millions of voters who demanded a voice to challenge the integrity of the voting process and results. The "coup" was attempted and achieved by the electors denying their voices and killing one and arresting the others brave enough to challenge the despots in charge.
When, or if, there's a coup, it won't be instigated by Antifa, it will be by Americans woken up to the fact that this isn't their America anymore that they are being enslaved to support by 70% of their money and 100% of their souls. When they realize they have gotten to the point of fighting for the Country they love against those that are destroying it, it will look nothing like Jan6.
The Constitution protects the People's right to ch... (
show quote)
Well said. I can add that the coup that actually occurred was not on January 6, but during a few days after November 3. It is good to review the article published by Time magazine, where it is accepted that there was an anti-democratic complot to "save democracy", justifying the mediatic-cybernetic coup, which took place to take power away from Trump and impose a puppet.
rumitoid wrote:
Hoho, you are very good at what you say. Thank you.
Sometimes I think that what appears in your logo must be your photo, which is a very beautiful baby; but only a baby who has no use of reason.
permafrost wrote:
one of the pointless things OPP has decayed into is the absence of production of facts/links to the claims made by the trump inspired anti-Americans crowding the roster of OPP..
but once more.. I have asked this a number of times and yet no answer has ever been presented. just yes or no..
It is a waste of time to show you something of truth, because even if it is shown to you with proof, you end up in a vicious circle always saying the same garbage; and when even that ploy doesn't work for you, then you want your opponent to stop writing in OPP, as you tried to do when I showed you the lie about global warming, attributable to homogeneous CO2.
woodguru wrote:
FOX and right wing media is all the proof you need that freedom of the press is alive and well, including the right to spread disinformation and lies to people too ignorant and stupid to know what to believe.
Then Wolf counselor is absolutely right; and using your own words, it can be said that all the media from the left or the right are the proof that is needed to establish that press freedom is dead and buried, by including the right to spread misinformation and lies to people too ignorant and stupid, as is your case, who do not know what to believe.
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Sigh...
Hitler was a populist nominated by his party and elected by his nation... His platforms involved the vilification of the League of Nations and certain groups such as communists or Jews...
XiJinping rose to power via party vote..He's not a populist and was relatively unknown before his election... His platforms involve the strengthening of China's economics and strengthening the unity of China...
The two are extremely different individuals...
And Xi has already triumphed...
Sigh... br br Hitler was a populist nominated by... (
show quote)
These days 80 years ago, Hitler was at the height of success, he had Europe at his feet and had dealt a heavy blow to his "partner in crime", the Bolshevik Stalin. He had invaded the Soviet Union with great ease, reaching the gates of Moscow; but 5 years later he was a loser who had been dumped in the dustbin of history. He had made a serious mistake, had declared war on whom he should not, because like Mao later, he thought that the USA was a paper tiger. Mao was lucky that Nikita warned him of his mistake, as now Putin must be warning Xi, his "partner of convenience" (because he learned in the KGB that there is no honor among criminals and he remembers what happened to Stalin), to use as a weapon the greed of the politicians and capitalists, which gave Den Xiaoping such a good result.
Xi's story is currently being written. He has not succeeded as you say, because he is trying to expand like Adolf did, but the whole world is against him (even Russia); and that world is armed.
Both the top German Nazi leader and the Chinese fascist-communist share the fact of being genocidal Marxist totalitarian dictators, with expansionist pretensions.
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
I prefer China...
I'm more of a fascist than a communist...
I take advantage of your comment to request your help again to clarify my ignorance, about what you did not explain to me a few weeks ago. Here is what was written on that occasion:
Alber Nov 27, 2021 08:14:42 The reincarnation of the German Führer is Xi Jinping, now at the head of the ChCP………
Canuckus Deploracus Lol... Nov 27, 2021 08:19:03It was halfway decent until it attempted to equate Xijinping with Hitler...
Alber Please, enlighten me, I like to learn from those with more knowledge or experience. What is the difference between Hitler and Xi Jinping?
Canuckus Deploracus Start with how they came to lead their nations.. That should be enough...
Alber Honestly, I haven't learned anything from your answer.
Hitler came to power in Germany democratically and later became a dictator.
Xi Jinping, comes to power by having risen positions within the ChCP and from the moment he begins to preside, he is already a dictator.
I don't see that your answer is enough.
Perhaps the answer is that Adolf failed and according to the official version committed suicide; where Xi is in power and you expect him to triumph, as is the case with Mao, who despite all the bad things he did, is revered.