Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Make America Great Again

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • T. A. Gardner
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    his trailer/media on "Death of a nation" show nazis

    https://twitter.com/DineshDSouza

    ah yes, in bizarro world the "Leftist" Nazis make an appearance


    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    dinesh d'souza is a demented loon

    He just got pardoned by Trump so he's grateful

    "Death of a Nation is a 2018 American political documentary film by conservative political commentator Dinesh D’Souza. It is scheduled to be released August 3, 2018, just three months before the 2018 midterms."

    "Death of a Nation" appears to be a play on words on "Birth of a Nation"

    Interestingly enough he was not doing Birther propaganda; perhaps because of his own skin color



    Last edited by Cult Icon; 15 Jul 18, 00:50.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    "people's community" (based on race with the "best blood" "most racially valuable" rising to the top (like social darwinist/libertarian thinking)). The subhumans were not part of the people's community.


    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Well then, you are studiously ignoring what the Nazi party platform was:

    "[9.
    All citizens must possess equal rights and duties.
    10.
    The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.
    20.
    In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.
    22.
    We demand the abolition of the regular army and the creation of a national (folk) army. "


    http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar...r/25points.htm

    Sounds pretty much like elimination of social classes to me. The Nazis believed in social equality. They wanted everyone equal under the state which would then control their lives.

    Edit font to clarify enclosed quote


    Posses equal right is not equivalent to a classless society

    Do we believe in equal rights today in the US? Yes! Does this make us believers of a communist type ideology of equality? No!

    And as I said the Nazi state wanted to control all communities, including those of the workers and of the capitalists, and tell them what to do. The state was the guarantor of social peace in which "trains would arrive on time" because there would not be strikes and unrest as a result of confrontations between capitalists and workers. But the fascist and Nazi ideologies STILL accepted the idea that there will be classes of businessmen and workers. It did not arrest those who controlled the means of production (capitalists) to attempt to create a single community in which everybody would be equal.
    Last edited by pamak; 15 Jul 18, 01:53.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Well then, you are studiously ignoring what the Nazi party platform was:

    9.
    All citizens must possess equal rights and duties.

    10.
    The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.

    20.
    In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.

    22.
    We demand the abolition of the regular army and the creation of a national (folk) army.

    http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar...r/25points.htm

    Sounds pretty much like elimination of social classes to me. The Nazis believed in social equality. They wanted everyone equal under the state which would then control their lives.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Let's see:

    You start off with an ad hominem

    Then you transition into a mischaracterization of what is said at that link and instead make an appeal to authority.

    Yes, you should make a YouTube video with your explanation. That way you can subject yourself to the ridicule and depredations of many, and not just me.

    Your post is irrelevant. What's to address?

    If it's this,



    Then it is wrong.

    For example, a central tenant of Nazi ideology was that of Volksgemeinschaft.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksgemeinschaft



    This was a breakdown of the previous aristocracy the "Junker" class in Germany. That is why the military became the Wehrmacht. It was to eliminate the officers being mostly aristocrats and the enlisted workers.

    So, whoever wrote what you quoted has never read, or if they did, understood what Hitler proposed in Mein Kampf. The Nazis not only questioned inequality, they made eliminating it a central tenant of their political platform, and would have over the long run made it part of German life under National Socialism.


    But, the Communists never achieved equality in actuality. The USSR was full of class structures, and racial divides. China too. So, the argument made in that paragraph is simply, and completely, wrong.
    People's community does not imply that the Nazi believed in the abolition of classes. Also, believing in a hierarchical society does not mean that one should accept traditional hierarchies. For example, modern capitalists obviously did not accept the class system of feudalism but they STILL believed in a society when there is a hierarchy and distinctive classes. So saying that Nazis did not like the old aristocracy means nothing.

    Unlike communism, Fascism and the close related Nazi ideology was never interested in creating classless societies. The presence of a big and powerful government in such systems was an end by itself for such ideologies which saw such presence as a necessary guarantor of social peace among the different classes. For this reason, all types of people's communities, from labor unions, to business communities were tightly controlled and monitored by a powerful state. By contrast, the powerful government in leftist ideologies was just a mean to an end and had theoretically the role of providing leadership during a transitional period towards a classless society when at that time even the idea of a central powerful government would become irrelevant. This is why the Soviet Union with its still strong government was still called "socialist" and not "communist."

    The fact that the communists never achieved equality does not mean that their ideology is the same to that of those who did not believe in such equality. This is like saying that the Christian ideology is similar to a violent ideology because Christian fundamentalists of the past to only failed to accomplish the objective of non violence, but they actually spread more violence. Even if it is true, this does not imply that modern Christians believe in violence. At least today, modern Christians have been successful in controlling violence . In the same way, modern socialists in Europe, despite failures of the past, have managed to better control inequality compared to the non-socialists in the US.

    Here is some information...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wither...y_of_the_state

    "Withering away of the state" is a Marxist concept coined by Friedrich Engels referring to the idea that, with realization of the ideals of socialism, the social institution of a state will eventually become obsolete and disappear, as the society will be able to govern itself without the state and its coercive enforcement of the law....


    ...

    Although Engels first introduced the idea of the withering away of the state, he attributed the underlying concept to Karl Marx; other Marxist theorists—including Vladimir Lenin—would later expand on it.[1][3] According to this concept of the withering away of the state, eventually a communist society will no longer require coercion to induce individuals to behave in a way that benefits the society.[1][2] Such a society would occur after a temporary period of the dictatorship of the proletariat.[2]
    Last edited by pamak; 15 Jul 18, 03:42.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Let's see:

    You start off with an ad hominem

    Then you transition into a mischaracterization of what is said at that link and instead make an appeal to authority.

    Yes, you should make a YouTube video with your explanation. That way you can subject yourself to the ridicule and depredations of many, and not just me.

    Your post is irrelevant. What's to address?

    If it's this,

    It is from this perspective that the Nazi ideology belongs to the right wing spectrum because unlike the leftist communist ideology, the Nazi's did not question inequality and certainly never aimed at the elimination of social classes. On the contrary, they wanted a very rigid and hierarchical socioeconomic structure in which a powerful state would make sure that everything runs smoothly and there will be no social unrest among the different classes.
    Then it is wrong.

    For example, a central tenant of Nazi ideology was that of Volksgemeinschaft.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksgemeinschaft

    Volksgemeinschaft
    (
    German pronunciation:
    ) is a
    German
    expression meaning "people's community".
    This expression originally became popular during
    World War I
    as Germans rallied in support of the war, and it appealed to the idea of breaking down elitism and uniting people across class divides to achieve a national purpose.
    This was a breakdown of the previous aristocracy the "Junker" class in Germany. That is why the military became the Wehrmacht. It was to eliminate the officers being mostly aristocrats and the enlisted workers.

    So, whoever wrote what you quoted has never read, or if they did, understood what Hitler proposed in Mein Kampf. The Nazis not only questioned inequality, they made eliminating it a central tenant of their political platform, and would have over the long run made it part of German life under National Socialism.

    But, the Communists never achieved equality in actuality. The USSR was full of class structures, and racial divides. China too. So, the argument made in that paragraph is simply, and completely, wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Fascism is a construct of the Left...

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/24305...ft-jacob-airey



    http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-fa...-right-wing-no

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_fascism


    How does the Left respond to this? With a 23 minute long ad hominem



    or this 18 minute harangue of ad hominems




    Nice to see bringing into the conversation the credentials of right wing hacks convicted for campaign finance fraud (D'Souza) instead of the credentials of people like political scientists.

    Also, even your link admits that Fascism has historically been considered a far-right ideology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_fascism). So, most political scientists and academics must not agree with you (even though there are always exceptions).The same link also mentions the historical development of that term which has its origins with criticism by Vladimir Lenin of the threat of anti-Marxist ultraleftism.
    It is sooo ironic to see you agree with Lenin when he was trying to call his left-wing critics fascists in order to crash them...

    By the way, should I create a youtube video with my explanation regarding why fascism is a right-wing ideology? Since I have not been convicted for campaign finance fraud, I have better credentials that D'Souza...

    Here is again the post with my explanation which you (or any of the links) have not addressed yet...

    https://forums.armchairgeneral.com/f...50#post5047150
    Last edited by pamak; 14 Jul 18, 23:17.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Fascism is a construct of the Left...

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/24305...ft-jacob-airey



    http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-fa...-right-wing-no

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_fascism


    How does the Left respond to this? With a 23 minute long ad hominem



    or this 18 minute harangue of ad hominems





    Leave a comment:


  • Karri
    replied
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

    If anything, I'd think the Russians would have wanted Bernie Sanders in the WH. He has more ideological in common with them and could have been easier manipulated.
    This sounds like you are still stuck in cold war...you do know it ended? Russia is pretty much an oligarchy, which in turn is perfect ground for Trump.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    Their argument makes as much sense as saying that advertisement is not important because it does not physically buy the product for you. They know it is a weak argument, but it is the only thing with which they are left because now they cannot rationally deny that the Russians tried to help Trump.
    If anything, I'd think the Russians would have wanted Bernie Sanders in the WH. He has more ideological in common with them and could have been easier manipulated. I wouldn't be surprised they were hoping the stuff on RHC would have resulted in investigations and actions where DNC would have removed Hillary and given the slot to Bernie.

    I've no doubt that if the Russian hacking found "dirt" on the GOP, they would have "leaked" that as well.

    BTW, the purpose of advertisement is to get you to select the advertiser's product rather than the competitor's. Political campaigning is just another for of advertisement effort.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by Anthrax View Post

    Well, I guess it's how you look at it. How many minds were changed as a result of tampering?
    You're trying to make it all about the physical ballot, but it's about a whole lot more.
    Would seem that's the whole purpose of campaigning, political ads, signs, etc. Each side will pint their candidate as the best choice and the other side's as not so. Jist of Russian "meddling" seems to be revealing things by HRC and her campaign that they should not have done, nor tried to hide. Many would say it's better this came out before the election rather than after.

    Major factor few pick up on is that HRC did get a few million more popular votes than Trump. But Trump got far more of the electoral votes. This would suggest that HRC and the DNP failed at proper strategy and planning while Trump and RNC had a better focus on where to campaign in order to win.

    Leave a comment:


  • Emtos
    replied
    On the other hand it's not reserved to conservatives but is present in many movements all around the globe. When the political direction of the country changes, it's normal that some don't want to accept the change.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    another aspect of conservative movements in general is the distorted rose-tinted fantasy of the "good old days", conveniently negating overwhelming bias and distorted memories. So what is precious now is to single mindedly work towards the perceived strengths of the "good old days".

    US conservatism worships a fantasy world of the Leave it to Beaver 1950s (apparently known primarily by watching re-runs of black and white films on AMC) when "America was Great"- conveniently forgetting that a big portion of the country would have been considered 3rd world today and didn't even have a high school education, running water, electricity, refrigeration, and plumbing among countless other problems.

    The Volkisch movement, then the SS were even more hardcore; their golden age was as far back as the middle ages when Germans and german society was racially pure and not weakened by racial degeneration and the chaos inflicted by their leftist enemies...
    Last edited by Cult Icon; 14 Jul 18, 22:42.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X