There is no use arguing against people on here. Jonah points out that the American "Left" and the "Right" both have elements of fascism. Its hard to find any political system that doesn't have some kind of similarities. Fascism had to develop from something, right? Jonah's point, and I agree completely, is that the Progressivists or the American "Left" are closer to actual fascism than the "Right." Their policies and means of influencing those policies and culture are very fascistic.
@kilox10001 You posted nothing but a statement of your own perfect stupor over my last reply, yet oddly you pretend you are prepared for more discourse.
Whether your bout of stupor is genuine or just a ruse to avoid my point, I suggest you rethink your political notions. Perhaps you can start by watching this video series.
"linear progressive evolution" -- monotonic happy-sounding change? Regardless, yours is an odd term for the world's most genocidal and otherwise regressive politics.
The listing of words you strangely equate to "fascism" are applicable to anything remotely related to what's called "a civilization". It is also devoid of any distinctive trait of fascism, like a command economy. Mussolini, the Atheist LABOR LEADER, actually bragged about his.
Tell that to the self professed Liberal who coined the term, genius.
Beyond that, modern Liberals are as much an advocate of unlimited government as are any other type of fascist OR communist. All of which are opposites of classical liberalism.
The oxymoron is in equating right-wing socialism with Conservatism. They are polar opposites. That fact remains even after a half century of Liberals trying to erase the noun modified by the adjective "right-wing".
@tylernull, @sowellfan333, @dagwoodb, @dafunkmonster, @seersucker1981, Any 'coercive socialism' is unethical. And it's almost always the Leftists who organize 'thug groups'('brown shirts/ UAF') to disrupt, dis-invite, shout-down, or push-around dissenting speakers, demonstrations, etc.
Ask Ward Connerly re his efforts to offer ballot referendum questions against anti-White/anti-male policies.
I love how liberals subtly suggest or make correlations between cultural taboos and their opposition. It's quite pathetic, but effective. What's ironic though is how they try and project these brainwashing tactics on to their adversaries.
Fascism has leftist origins in the Italian syndicalist movement, but it is a very syncretic ideology, it is impossible to categorise as either left or right wing. Only a libertarian could compare liberalism and fascism, in my opinion that is offensive to both liberals and fascists alike.
@TashkentFox Not really...you said it yourself Facism has leftist origins...and Facist governments have "absolute-power" as a matter of definition. They both were socialists...yes communists were more extreme in their socialism, but they were both socialists....like even Jonah says here what is the name of the nazi party???? The National SOCIALISTS party...which was formerly The German Workers' Party....
Listen to Goldberg's entire speech, not just 2 mins, or just this segment.
It's good to hear someone speak out against 'Liberalism'. They have slowly come to power in recent decades and unfortunately they have started to abuse that power, so that they hide behind the 'progressive', 'good guys' image and use that positive stereotype to denounce anyone who challenges their stance on anything as being 'Nazis' or 'fascists', or 'right wing scum'. The Liberals have now started to manifest into what they initially were campaigning against. They are what they allegedly 'hate'
I'm currently arguing with a liberal moron who honestly believes (bless his little heart) that the person who cooks your burger at McDonald's is more valuable to society than doctors and astrophysicists who send satellites into outer space. WOW!!! And then they wonder why we call them DUMB! I could learn any position at McDonald's in seven minutes, but it would take me several years to learn what it takes to become an astrophysicist. Hello? Anybody in there?
You are missing the point. You need a burger flipper, you need a cleaning lady etc. These people help society to run and are very important to society. Not everybody has the choice to become an astrophysicist or doctor, no one has a choice in life and its people like you that think they do. Not everyone can get an Education and yet a bus driver works harder then a doctor yet he earns less because society is messed up.
@rutgerh9 Life isn't fair. Get over it. Liberals believe in an "equality of outcomes" (something that will never happen) while conservatives believe in an "equality of opportunity". Not everyone will succeed, but everyone should be given a chance...
this is retarded, and so are the people commenting. I mean, really? Really? Mussolini said, and i quote: "Fascism should be called Corporatism, because it is a merger of corporations and the state."
Does that sound like liberalism? or unionism? Mussolini adopted far right beliefs, and both Hitler and Mussolini were revered by the far right and the corporations in america. You people are a joke! Hahaha!
"merger of corporations and the state" -- i.e., Fannie Fascism, which Liberals adore, foster, spread and ferociously defend,. from Fannie Mae to Freddie Mac to Community Reinvestment Act to Public-Private Partnerships to sponsoring labor price-fixing cartels.
"far right ..." ... SOCIALISM.
You L-word apologists keep reciting the adjectives but you oddly forget to mention the noun which they modify.
@TylerNull umm...so one minute you call the liberals fascists, the next its socialists, then marxists, then communists....you are all a bunch of pathetic name callers. youre a joke. You bring up fannie mae and freddie mac..wasnt it the republicans who bailed out the banks to the tune of 700 billion dollars? Mussolini left the socialists party, then had members of them killed and arrested. He, hitler and japan ran a campaign against communism and liberalism. i mean...this is text book stuff...
umm... if socialists hadn't manifested such genocidal nightmares under whatever prior name you invented for yourselves, then you wouldn't have to whine whenever civilized man references them long after we defeated its prior plague(s).
As for your other blather, yes, the various sects of socialists vascilate between aligning with, and warring against, each other, as do Sunni v. Shia Islam. So, what ?
@TylerNull the socialists werent militaristic and were anti-war. they didnt manifest any genocidal nightmares. I guess the founding fathers and colonists were socialist as well because of the genocide they committed on the native indians, as well as the enslavement of blacks...?
And what do you mean "for ourselves"? I'm not a socialist. Just because im not a fucking idiot that thinks fascists and liberals arent exactly the same doesnt make me a socialist, sorry retard.
By "weren't militaristic", the socialist apologist is referring to the USSR socialists that warred against their neighbors & entirely obliterated the peoples of 12 nations.
By "genocide ... on native indians", the illiterate dolt is referring to the betrayals and treachery thereof by president Andrew Jackson (D). Socialists are theologically required to smear our nation's founders with Dem'rat stink.
Shame of your own political bent is your lone, residual sign of sanity. Start there.
Mussolini WAS a socialist and the major difference between the socialists and his party at the time was that his party supported WWI, that was the ONLY difference.
Meanwhile Hitler and other Nazis came out and said "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalist society."
Goebbels even said if he had to side with the Bolsheviks or the capitalists, then he'd side with the Bolsheviks for socialism. Because capitalism would destroy what the Nazis fought and stood for.
So horribly wrong. Hitler named his party the socialist party because socialism meant more freedom, hope and revolution during that time. It was extremely popular especially during the first world war were people suffered so much and realized something had to change in society. During that time Liberalism/ Socialism and Communism grew massively and was hugely popular which Hitler used as his advantage.
@SeerSucker1981 Socialists not militaristic? Ask Soviet Russia, Pol Pot's Cambodia and then the killing fields, Mao's China, and all the other dictatorships around the world that rule in the name of Socialism. Don't try and act like socialists are historically a bunch of harmless hippies.
@SeerSucker1981 ...Text book and you still failed to get it right. Republicans, for what they're worth, raised objection MANY times to the Democrat's relationship with Fanny and Freddie - this includes Bush himself!
Now, Bush was an idiot, and the democrats were once again face-down in the loot. But at the same time, there were those of us who were objecting - perhaps like you - to the bailouts that Bush and Obama put in place.
Stop the looting, no matter what side it's coming from.
@SeerSucker1981 The only reason Hitler went after the communists was that he thought they were infiltrated with Jews, that they were part of a Jewish conspiracy. However, Hitler agreed with many of the communists philosophical points.
@TylerNull Yes. It is strange that we have to debate with half-wits about where socialism fits in our political compass. I guess they want to use the Big Lie theory to wash down the Fascist Fantasy.
Double plus good, I'd say.
No really, National Socialism displays the inability of liberals to face personal responsibility. Their ideas killed how many millions and they blame everyone but themselves?
Wow.
More right-wingers may consider drawing the line at altruism vs America.
@TylerNull Very nice comment. I just gave that douche bag the same lesson; then I read your response and see you beat me too it. I love being called a ‘retard’ and a ‘joke’ by some second-rate asshole that drops quotes that inadvertently destroy the very position they were trying to take. Only a Liberal could be that confident in his unintelligence.
Unable to discriminate between government force and private citizens exercising their liberties over their own stuff, Liberals always brag about getting it perfectly back-ass-wards.
Whether calling themselves Liberals, or calling themselves "Sowell Fan", even their names are lies.
The flaw in your logic is that you are using Mussolini as a point of reference. As a person whos word and philosophy we should look to and trust. and thats FUCKING FAIL.
@SeerSucker1981 Only a fool assumes that conservatives are the official deal makers with corporations. Look at all the private corporations that donated money to Obama's campaign. Look at the liberal union between Goldman Sachs and Fannie and Freddie. A true free market society ( a conservative one) is one where corporations stay out of government and government stays out of corporations. Look at the auto bailout! and bank bailout proposed by a liberal congress and president.
What about what happened with the Affordable Care Act? It basically says that by 2014 health insurance has to be implemented according to the dictates of a federal agency. For those who don't enroll in health insurance, the IRS will collect the penalties and pay them to the insurance companies as proxy premium payments. Sounds like a merger of corporations and the state to me.
@SeerSucker1981 I believe you are incorrect. Mussolini heavily admired Wilson and the "Progressive Movement." There were corporate men(such as H.Ford)that admired the fascist movement, yet it was heavily "liberal"organizations such as the Times. WEB Dubious(a self defined Marxist) himself admired Mussolini and Hitler(he gave a speech in 1937 that praised Hitler).
@SeerSucker1981 Do Conservatives push to merge Government and Corporations? I mean Conservative’s have been begging Congress for less government regulation and State-mandated Industry standards in the private sector; for years now! Democrat's have created true quazi-government/corporatate institutions including FNMA, GNMA, FHLMC and FINRA. I don’t know what Unionism is; but Government/Corporate mergers are, without question, a Liberal initiative. "Retards" and "Jokes;" Really? Really?
This guy is spot on. He accurately describes the mind set of the left wing loonies that post on YouTube, spouting the bilge and vile of the socialists.
The Libs. who like to throw around terms like Fascism at Conservatives (or anyone who disagrees with them) & are simply "Projecting" their own proclivities.
@jdggearhead not to mention there are whites being screwed over like others even in european history you see these tight grip groups in many different forms just like other cultures
@jdggearhead type faster and accurate so i apologize if my mistakes offend you.by the way a.i.d.s started in africa because of the usa/cia polluting the water .well according to some(i didnt believe this).but with the whole guatemala syphilis event.it might be true.also i dont hate on whites i just give credit where it is really do.europeans also came up with inventions.in my view there isnt really a white man its more like tight grip groups.you see them in almost every culture known so far.
@jdggearhead well for your game there are so many but instead i will skip to what i guess one can say we see everyday in life.currency believe it or not started in middle east.paper,Compass,printing(Woodblock printing),again gunpowder etc in china.Nepohualtzitzin(calculator or computer),roads systems,etc in maya/south america.as for africa since it was were our species began there are the wheel,Yam cultivation,Glass tools used for shaving,etc.also reason for my mispellings is im practicing to
@jdggearhead i never said they were a utopian society.what i am saying is things got alot worse when euros brought capitalism.though what would be the point in trying to show proof to someone who doesnt want to hear,see,think and i guess some would say is self hating person.natives probably did advance its just europeans rewrote history.euros have a nac for trying to take credit for other cultures achievements they tried to steal gunpowder/other stuff from china ,astrology from maya,etc
@jdggearhead one more thing with all due respect you due know the word indian is the improper word and sometimes is used as an insult(like the n word for african americans and s word for mayan and other south american descendents) the europeans wanted to go to india but ended up in america and only reason they refered to the natives as indians cause they thought it was india
@jdggearhead two for your information usa is not capitalist it hasnt been capitalist since well atleast the native american genocide(such as manifest destiny) and the iron fist control(like monroe doctrine) of its southern bloc(so called latin america).whether liked or hated it has had socialism for quite sometime.basically its mixed.and three the ussr was not communist it never achieved it no surprise.obama is an ass but paylin(especially)and bush are even bigger dumbasses.also no socialist
@jdggearhead for the record one capitalism yes is economic idea.but even economic ideas have effects on societys way of life and mentality.second whether accepted or not capitalism does create its own totalitarian dictatorship system only instead of one like other ideas its more than two and instead of the gov(state) its different forms of businesses.look at the way the states considered dictators and businesses especially in mexico and colombia operate and youll notice theyre very similar
1. Liberals are PROUD to judicially segregating a citizenry into protected and unprotected classes by commandeering federal muscle. They call it Protected Class Law.
2-3. Liberals LOVE warfare. They're only upset when America fights back to defend herself.
4. Alex Jones called. He wants his hoax back.
5. Aiding the wartime enemy, as your ilk do, is high treason. You're giggling because you get away with it, not because it isn't high treason.
1-3. Your baseless decree isn't a rebuttal, jackass. As I pointed out, the only lesson your kind learned from the horrors of Nazi socialism is to use better marketing for the toxic stuff.
5. You fail to address Dem'rat high treason. Distracting with a fresh lie, as you did, doesn't revitalize your stale lie.
And spreading your idiocies out from your original batch, like to your Wolf gal, clearly demonstrates that you wouldn't know lies if you proselytized wad after wad of them.
What the liberal Democrats impose on America, the colonists kicked out the British over much less! They would have tarred and feathered Pelosi, Reed, and Boxer and ran them out of town!
uh this guy does know that theres never been a comunist country.they are socialist./fascist. also there were jews in nazi(Erik Jan Hanussen,the ss did have Mischling).also there are those that say jew bankers had a hand in hitler rule/rise.but im skeptic on this part.
What socialist apologists would say in that regard, if their politics allowed reality to seep in, is their Utopian fantasy fails to manifest, even partially, here in the real world; that their politics are so toxic to humanity that the host civilization collapses within about one generation of its attempted implementation.
@TylerNull well if you look at what communism really is youll notice there never was a com country.it was only a promise land from the state like what heaven is to control christians/others by the church.but unlike heaven communism can be achieved maybe not as a country but by oneself.also while on the issue of toxic to humanity maybe you should look at capitalisms own dictatorships no im not just talking about corporations im talking about the mafia/gangs/(especially)cartels
Muddling gov't authority with religious belief is a mainstay of socialist apologetics. There too, even within their framework, we witness that socialists establish their politics as THE gov't enforced religion, and then work to criminalize the competition. The exquisite bestseller, "Godless; the Church of Liberalism" details that of the USA case.
The liberty of a free people to engage in free enterprise is a prerequisite of capitalism, so your capitalist-dictatorship notion is absurd.
@TylerNull um look socialist have theyre own counter views on why it works and why they dont or werent dictatorships but facts is facts whether it wasnt suppose to happen it happened and like socialism.out of capitalism dictatorships have risen out of it.like i said both ideas suck especially capitalism people die/live worser.i know you might say oh but the usa is capitalist.interesting fact the usa hasnt been capitalist since well even before cold war.which yes i believe was a false war.
"facts is facts" -- and baseless decrees are baseless decrees.
"risen out of"
Do you believe that dictatorships have "risen out of" the bread that bakers theretofore sold prior to their business being nationalized? Do explain your "risen out of" claim.
Totalitarian regimes are not the spawn of liberty. Find a less lunatic claim with which to proselytize your stale socialist agitprop.
@TylerNull maybe not the bread but definitely the cocaine,counterfited money,prostitutes,firearms,recently carbombs etc.they may not be the spawn of liberty but they are from freedom and the actions they take are totalitarian dictatorial threatening the media(control),killing some to use as examples,supression of the masses.its the same thing you read about in socialist/fascist societys only worse and there is plenty of evidence on the web.even here on youtube.
"cocaine,..." -- that's just a list of bad things. You offer zero reasoning for your indictments of capitalism.
In fact, the narco-states have "risen out of" centrally-planned socialist cesspools, e.g. Columbia and Mexico. As for counterfeiting, Iran was dominant there for decades, and that had "risen out of" Islamic style socialism. Global criminal organizations had "risen out of" the USSR, from its inception. So, don't blame capitalism for criminal enterprises.
@TylerNull well on the centrally planned thing if you think about it all economies are centrally planned only difference is who is doing the planning and how many.also socialism is for the state or group and clearly in mexico/other latin countrys weve seen it is mainly the state(until recently that citizen militias/mobs or vigilante groups like in guatemala)have been the only ones that have stood up to these tyrrants.yes i realize there is corruption but believe it or not there is still loyalty
No, all are not centrally planned. In market-based economies, producers and sellers determine what they make and at what price to sell it, competing for buyers. Central planning is when government bureaucrats usurp the plans of both buyers and sellers.
@TylerNull in the state to its people.these cartels are not socialist since they dont want egalitarian/equality.they dont want redistribution of anything except bullets to anybody.the state isnt really getting a profit(also most corrupt politicians are forced to cooperate at gun point).they believe and practice private ownership not just of land(even public),things like weapons,but also of people.they definitely believe in freedom not liberty,they keep profit to themeselves,there is competition,
@TylerNull they are against the state even though they controled some of it.socialism has the state and all(people) as whole as an important piece in the system.capitalism has individuals and groups(businesses).cartels/mafia/gangs etc dont really have anything socialist about them.if it was the mexican federal gov that was commiting those atrocitys then it would probably be socialist.but it is individuals/groups doing this.with intention to keep profit for self not redistribute
@TylerNull also in the ussr you had the censorship of the press/media were the group(state) didnt allow the journalist to report on what is really going on and even told them what to do/control the media like music,movie etc,right.well guess what the same thing is happening in mexico only instead of the state(group) its well lets just call them businesses(groups).by the way instead of putting journalists in asylums/prison like ussr did.they torture/kill/use them as examples to control the masses
@TylerNull when it goes wrong socialism sucks but capitalism is a b**ch. both ideologys suck mainly cause a few jaxs end up as dictators of the many.also on the collapse thing yes ussr collapsed but atleast its not in a hellhole situation like real capitalist countrys like colombia and mexico the state plays very little role in economy/society and private interest groups run the country/other countrys even at others expense.also no socialist
You're confusing capitalism with narco-nanny-state cesspools.
All the problems of "capitalism" can be traced to government functionaries usurping the will of the private citizen on matters of commerce.
E.g., the Medi-scare (nationalizing medicine), Fannie Mayhem (nationalizing mortgages), Social Insecurity (nationalizing pension funds) in which we're all now ensnared.
Socialism "never goes" right, because socialists eventually run out of other people's money. It's INVIABLE.
@TylerNull well true.but capitalist always try to take other peoples money and unlike some socialist(not all)they dont give anything back or if they do its usually something just as bad as socialist give.
That's a nonsensical mantra of socialist proselytism., and evidences an immaculate economic illiteracy.
EVERY transaction between free people entails something "given back" by both parties, e.g., money for goods.
Corporate profits are the sum give-back of those who work there. If they were as greedy as socialists, they would suck every last nickel out and go bankrupt, as socialists invariably do.
@TylerNull well socialist say the same thing people get something back(usually free education,healthcare,some forms of security,etc).also on the subject of the so called free peoples.it turns out not all are always free sometimes one forces the other to buy/sell/do.like i said capitalism is just like socialism well they both have totalitarian dictatorships.socialism is suppose to be egalitarian/equal its proven it cant.capitalism is suppose to be freedom/choice its proven it cant.they both suck
Anyone can say anything (as long as we don't let socialists criminalize speech with Hate Crime laws & such); however, only some statements have any veracity. Theirs have none:
Neither school nor medicine nor any other industry is "free", especially when commandeered by gov't. And the more the gov't intrudes into an industry, the quicker such costs SKYROCKET (hyper-inflate). And gov't alone forces all to pay. Your 3 are examples of such catastrophes.
@TylerNull true but samething goes for capitalist.i believe theres things called cornering the market,buying out,and outsourcing.also if i forgot to mention when speaking of socialism and capitalism sucking im mainly talking about the mentality/way of life that spawns out of them .i honestly think the idea of economy or currency is stupid.another thing if you really believe capitalist economy is better than socialist maybe you should debate a person who knows alot about it like MaoistRebelNews2
@TylerNull cause im pretty sure ive mentioned before im against both.just cause one defends something doesnt neccessarily mean there for it.both have good and bad things.but from what ive seen and researched from both capitalism seems like worst when it goes wrong and in some cases live in.
You appear to be oblivious that you are reciting stale socialist agitprop with your muddled equivocations, even as you post your belief that you are offering some kind of objective analysis.
The superiority of capitalism to socialism is so spectacular, and so well evidenced by both the historical record AND current events, that socialism requires 12+ years of proselytism to everyone's kids just to keep its vile hoax on life support.
@TylerNull well tell that to the cartels/mafia/gangs/corporations victimes across the planet.and the native americans(well at least whats left of them) and others that were murdered.capitalist are so in denial.this is one of the reason why i keep saying capitalism is crapier than socialism.at least socialist admit the terrors that system caused and some try to modify it while capitalist deny deny deny.look for escape goats.and worst do the same thing/promote the system that caused the problems.
@TylerNull please stop with your capitalist propaganda cause ive seen what it can do and how it lies.especially the ones its used to gain for itself.manifest destiny kill so called indians for private gain,slavery of so called animals,whats next use illegals as escape goats only instead spread it to all those who have origins in those country to cover up its faults and gain a profit/land
That's the no-I'm-not-but-you-are rebuttal. Your claim is also ironic due to the quantity & composition of your posts in response to any one of mine.
And you keep pointing to unhappy events to claim it is "capitalism". Here, you lean on American Indians to do so. As silly as that is all by itself, any comparison of that clash of civilizations to any other, e.g., Islam v. Africans, Russians v. Ukrainians, etc., will highlight just how silly your notions are.
@TylerNull well thats the sort of response ide expect for capitalism using escape goats.yet ironically always making big deal on socialisms/others crimes even though there is much controversy on it.capitalist seriosly need to stop talking of why other systems are bad considering they suck just as bad.government /businesses both suck.also native americans arent just the only ones you must of forgotten cartels/businesses across planet like latin america.to put it simply both suck,both dont work,
@cooks1234 Actually cooks, you're right. Capitalism is failing as badly as socialism now and that's something that even the right wing elites in this country can't argue against competently. The right wing elitists with all the money will point to flaws in socialism as our debt soars to record highs from poor management of resources and endless wars. We are hypocrites at best and doomed at worst. Like you said,"both suck, both don't work." I do think socialism can be modified to work properly.
@cooks1234 However, capitalism is a lost cause because it has broken too many dreams and promises and the people are weary and numb from it's empty words. Think about it, info-mercials that play day and night suckering people in, false advertising for disease cures, and the biggest offender of reason and decency? RELIGION. This form of capitalism makes you want to throw up all over these idiots.
@cooks1234 Just a side note, the conservatives have outsmarted themselves by adopting this perversion of the truth when it comes to liberal fascism because #1 most people don't understand what they are talking about and don't have the patience to bother. #2 they don't have ONE credible university that will endorse this nonsence. With the exception of Goldberg, not one credible historian will acknowledge his insane theories as legitimate.
@cooks1234 So you see, adopting Saul Alinskys tactics only works if you have an educated public and if, and only IF you are willing to invest in the resources to forward this propaganda. In other words, they don't have the staying power and the left made progress calling them the nazis much earlier and the people are already sold on it. They might as well give up, because they've already lost this game. Tea baggers come off as insane when they show up at their reich wing rallies with nazi signs.
@cooks1234 No, they'll use homosexuals as scapegoats, the republicans will take congress and pass some watered down version of immigration reform that will leave the right wing with no choice, but to accept it and move on from that subject. It will be a major miscalculation on their part and half the steam will be gone from the movement. After that it's the gays. . . AGAIN! Unfortunately, for them, the American people are not on their side on that one, but they'll persecute them anyway.
'I'm not calling liberals fascists, but i'm gonna go all over fox news and connect liberals to fascists and not expect anyone to think liberals are fascists because of that.'
lol, this guy is a joke and half of the garbage in his book is simply wrong.
@nonpartpundit --The more I read the book, the more I really appreciate it. Notice, he talks about national movements at critical times (WWI Wilson, WW II FDR, the Communist postwar scare, etc.) But he also speaks of fascistic themes in our history,not that the Left are fascists. There I think he is right. Where you had il Duce and the Fuhrer, you know have a larger than life figure whom you don't dare criticize. If you're smart, you get with the program.
@nonpartpundit --Hello, but I have to take issue with the Left allowing free speech. From the University to the common liberal, free speech is permitted as long as it is the politically correct thing to say. If I have some objection to things printed by Gore, Lester Brown, Rachel Carson, or Profs. Erlich or Singer, I must be ignorant. Instead of dialoging, invariably people try to silence me. Where is this coveted freech speech the Left touts?
Fine I won't ignore them. The press freedom index is based on the subjective opinions of people from Reporters without borders. I'm a little skeptical of that one because the US ranks below Canada which is a little silly since they have a national speech code. As far as the democracy index goes were not a democracy were a constitutional republic. I don't want to be on the top of that list. The top spot goes to Sweden where government consumes over 50% of GDP. Sounds lovely.
Liberals are basically fascists. They want to control every aspects of our lives. Just look at all the laws the impose, especially in California, they dictate what we should eat, drive, shove eco green bullshit down our throats, ban light bulbs, guns, etc. They hate freedom of speech if it does not agree with their views. Look at the censorship doctrine! They would love that so silence conservative views!
Hitler was a socialist. Nothing right-wing about it. Hitler hated communists because he thought that marxism was a jewish conspiracy. But he agreed with the principles of marxism. Conservatism is about as far from nazism as it's possible to get.
By "Real left", you mean the unreal kind that exists only in your fantasies.
Instead, I'm pointing to the REAL Left. You know, the kind that has a historical record. The kind that manifests here in the real world.
Beyond that, what was once left-wing socialism and right-wing socialism have long since morphed into a toxic rainbow of disparate socialist sects who all march in lock-step together in what's broadly known today as the political Left.
@TylerNull The 'left' in modern day America is much further to the right than it was even a century ago. Unions are beaten down because the organizing of working people is a threat to the powerful private sector who rely on their exploitation to keep things running smoothly. If you think the left he is referring to doesn't have a historical record, it's apparent you aren't looking.
Your fantasy of some kind of immaculate socialist ideal is the "fact" here. No problem, I got that upon reading your 1st post.
Let's examine your last labyrinth of apologetics. You point to some claimed imperfection of capitalism, including a baseless indictment of Reagan (nice touch), only to use THAT to absolve socialism of its own history of horrors, under the fantasitical claim that if socialism's realities differ from your fantasy world version, then it wasn't socialism.
Jonah is just a political hack trying to make some dishonest money, but I'm surprised that there are enough gullible/ignorant people that make hs venture profitable. LIberals have more interest in protecting individual right (speech, searches...), while conservatives express more interest in property rights. Would Hitler have supported Miranda rights? :) Who is more likely to support Miranda: a liberal or a conservative? Obviously, a liberal.
Who is more likely to criminalize dissent by indicting authors under Hate Speech laws? Oh, dhimmi Canada, thanks for sending us your best-selling "hate speech" author, Mark Steyn, and his Canadian-censored best-selling tome, America Alone.
HILARIOUS.
And yet you shameless scum come here to proselytize your socialist agitprop.
PRICELESS.
Leftists & Muslims -- Life Partners -- Hot for Jihad
By "quite supportive of capitalism", the socialist apologist is referring to Hitler's nationalizing of industries, confiscating the assets of businessmen, and exterminating them and their families.
By "denounce socialist class doctrines". the socialist apologist is referring to the fact that one tribe of socialists will alternately collude with and war against other socialist tribes, e.g., La Raza v. Black Panthers.
However, socialism is indeed warfare against language too.
Speaking of a "cursory reading of history", you pointed to one title yet missed the other:
NAZI = National SOCIALIST German Workers' Party
Hitler's party was the socialist party. Hitler was a labor union boss; a labor party leader. Sure, disparate tribes of socialists are always competing with each other. So, what?
Left, right and any other wing or sect of SOCIALISM share the signature trait -- the liberal use of government force into each & every dynamic of human existence.
Absolutely right! There are signs all over the place, if you look. The Auschwitz sign recently stolen reads 'Arbeit Macht Frei' meaning 'Work Makes You Free'. Straight outta the Communist Manifesto!
Clearly with the brainwashing and indoctrination, it's the 'liberals' who need to learn about their 'sacrosanct' ideology...
@ThatGuyWhoSucksBoobz That is simply not true. None of the major classical rightwing icons were sited by the nazis, nor do modern conservatives employ nazi arguments. Yet so many modern leftwing positions are identical to nazi thinking or the nazi platform: nationalization of select industries, the permanence of race, the obsession with public health, organic foods, animal rights, the abolition of sexual norms, the removal of public expressions of faith, the list goes on and on.
He said many times in his book that modern day liberalism, while totalitarian in many ways, is by no means "evil", or that what happened in Nazi Germany could ever happen in America. This is why he uses the smiley face to brand liberal-fascism. They might tell you what you can drive, what you can eat, where you can work, what light bulbs you may use, and the kind of health care you will receive- but it's not going to end up with death camps. It would be political totalitarianism.
It's no coincidence that Mussolini was originally a socialist. if you look at the origins of socialism and fascism, you'll see that they share many roots.
Adolf Hitlers party - National socialist party. That's like Oama's people- socialist, fascist, communist, atheist, controlling state. Now what do you do if your guilty, you call your accuser (conservative Americans) guilty of what your yourself are. then you let the confusion and lies do there damage and corrosion. That's how you destroy America. That's what they are doing.
Well, it's certainly very collectivist to claim a person has to prove their material worth to society first in order to have the right to live. That has definite fascist overtones. It's a "survival of the fittest" kind of social Darwinist world view and fitness is determined by social recognition.
They say a society's freedom is determined by how safe it is to be unpopular. Based on that measure the need to prove your worth doesn't sound very free at all...
We hereby declare that you may attack our nation with chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction to slaughter millions of U.S. civilians, without fear of nuclear retaliation, as long as we can find some lawyers in the aftermath to rubber-stamp our betrayal.
obama rhetoric included anti capitalism, especially anti finance capitalism. In attacking the ills of democracy, obama spoke of a pluto-democracy a conspiracy that favoured liberal democratic parties in order to maintain the integrity of capitalism
@AgeOfReclamation Early Nazi rhetoric included anti-capitalism, especially anti-finance capitalism.[16] In attacking the ills of Weimar democracy, Adolf Hitler spoke of a pluto-democracy Jewish conspiracy that favoured liberal democratic parties in order to maintain the integrity of capitalism
Early Nazi rhetoric included anti-capitalism, especially anti-finance capitalism. In attacking the ills of Weimar democracy, Adolf Hitler spoke of a pluto-democracy Jewish conspiracy that favoured liberal democratic parties in order to maintain the integrity of capitalism
worst part about all this, no liberals are going to research what this guy has to say about them! They just don't question themselves or their beliefs
Although he didn't predict such events would occur in the USA, it is scary how similar what he notes what they were afraid of then and is happening now! Government take over of banks, industry and service!
Your claim requires two fallacies. 1) That the politics of those who title themselves Liberal is in any way related to classical liberalism. 2) That the famous Liberal who coined the term "Liberal Fascism" knew less about his own politics than you do.
As notable, even if we overlook your fallacies, and mindlessly adopt your false measure and metrics, then it nullifies your last claim regarding "conservative totalitarianism".
@AgeOfReclamation Your wasting time on semantics the matter at hand is, these so called liberals, or progressives, or left nuts, or as I call them neo nazis, want to destroy America and destroy the constitution. This country has no self defense against people coming into this country to defeat it from within. That is the vulnerable nature of being the open armed loving country that we are. Liberal communists like Stalin were fascists I don't know what is hard to understand about that
@AgeOfReclamation The famous liberal that coined "liberal fascism" - H.g. Wells - was actually a Fabian socialist. His claim was that Bolsheviks had implemented socialism in Russia, Nazis had implemented socialism in German, and so the Fabians needed to be less passive and more aggressive in their press of socialism. Thus "liberal fascism".
Goldberg makes a very strong case for liberal fascism being a real, even dominant political philosophy, and not an "oxymoron". You should read his book.
@DrCruel I have been reading the book, dictionary in tow of course, and I am glad to have a real perspective of liberalism in America and how it was incrementally but at the same time suddenly implemented into American politics. Liberals don't have a leg to stand on.
The problem with this debate seems to be a definition of terms.
Socialism is a state in which the workforce owns the means of production, ie the state owns the MoP, and the government is a strong democracy (otherwise its just the USSR).
In practise what we (and Jonah) associate with Socialism is China, Russia, Cuba and N Korea, which resemble Nazi Germany rather closely. This is not proof that socialism is nazism. Nazism only declared itself socialist to appear more populist than it was.
Gee, so this is where the whole notion of Nazis being left-wingers comes from. Funny that he didn't mention that Strasser was purged from the Nazi party. Everything about Nazism was anti-left. Here's a quote from Hitler that puts it into perspective:
Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true Socialism is not.
When in power, the Nazis launched a mass privatization scheme (like the Italian fascists).
Yes, the left-wing socialists were "anti" right-wing socialists, and visa verse. Much like the Shia Muslims are "anti" Sunni Muslims. And the one sect is often claiming the others aren't "true".
So, what?
The fact that left wing and right wing socialists are socialists is a bit more than a "notion". All are fascistic.
Beyond that, your claim that one sect of socialism "has nothing to do with" another is nonsensical. All socialists share the common signature traits, as Goldberg discusses.
These terms get so confused, and are used to confuse us. The division we need to understand is the fact of the increasing concentration of power and money at the top of the pyramid and the withering away of the middle class. This is not happening because of some fundamental economic law of the universe but by the design of the powerful. The government should not try to force everyone to be equal but it must redistribute power to make all citizens less unequal or our democracy is doomed.
Power is distributed among the 3 branches, but there are no provisions of the redistribution of the power among the 3 branches. I believe that is what you are attempting to explain.
You're referring to the "co-equal" property of the three branches, which is another, somewhat related issue.
The fellow to which I replied is proselytizing the Democrat party's long-running national fraud that the US Constitution grants them an open-ended totalitarian mandate to tax and spend on anything and everything their big-pimping hustlers can get away with, such as wealth REDISTRIBUTION programs -- taking money from earners to pay non-earners, in exchange for nothing whatsoever.
Lol. As I mentioned, Strasser and friends were purged, as Goldberg conveniently left out. There is no such thing as right-wing socialism. Nazism and Marxism never have had anything in common. By saying that, you've turned the word socialism into a meaningless term. Does socialism mean capitalism? Because Nazi Germany was capitalist. Only the truly misinformed would equate Nazism with Soviet or Cuban socialism, flawed as they were/are.
You keep leaning on the exposed idiocy that tribe A can't be a tribe if it's opposed to tribe B.
Worse yet, you do so even after the idiocy was explained to you, chuckles.
As for common signature traits between Marxists, Nazis, Green, Labor, La Raza, and all other disparate tribes of socialists, they all favor socialism, with its fascistic injection of government force into each and every facet and dynamic of human endeavors.
They all march in lock-step agreement against the G7, literally.
No. You missed my point. I said they have NOTHING to do with each other. By your logic I could say Nazism and libertarianism are fundamentally the same, since they both display an extremely arrogant social-darwinist mentality. Government involvement in human affairs is not "fascistic" or "socialistic." Your shallow terminology is entertaining, but not surprising considering the right-wing's fetish for name calling. La Raza socialist? HAHAHAHA
Debunking your point, as I did, is the opposite of "missing" your point, as you just now claimed. Do attempt lucidity.
"I said" -- and I debunked.
"both display ... arrogant..." -- your subjective metric is just that. Contrarily, I pointed to an objective measure. Socialists -- ALL SECTS, wings, and branches -- enforce their mandates with as much corrupted federal muscle as they can commandeer.
Oh, and La Raza (The Race) isn't a label of my invention, genius.
Not true. Marxism and Nazism favored government control of industries and Nazi Germany wasn't capitalist. Hitler also was strongly antipathetic toward business people just as Marx was.
Nazism just didn't go into complete control of all industries as Marxism did, but only certain industries, while in other industries prices and other aspects were dictated.
Don't bother. Marxists are inoculated from reason. Directly answer a question, and they merely ask it again.They have no ability to discuss politics. They merely proselytize.
And I allow them to proselytize only long enough to document that fact..
@Aegius Hitler went directly after Unionists.Just like today's CONservatives.
Dubya took a new Cadillac that he got from Slick Willie - poured gas/lit it - drove it into a brick wall at 97mph - had a bulldozer shove it into a ditch - then tossed the keys to Obama and told him to "Drive safe".
The king of England attacked the kind of France, so they can't both favor kingdoms?
The logic and reasoning of you labor price-fixing thugs never quite rises above that of your carbon residue. No wonder you socialists are so enchanted with the stuff.
Hitler was a labor union leader. The Nazi party was THE labor union party.
As did their communist brethren, Nazis and all other labor union leaders attack other labor unions once they get control of all the machine guns.
yes, its a house divided, it is what you call a duplex..and those damn liberals are so damn loud at night that I can't get to sleep.
allaboutdatGDA 1 week ago
There is no use arguing against people on here. Jonah points out that the American "Left" and the "Right" both have elements of fascism. Its hard to find any political system that doesn't have some kind of similarities. Fascism had to develop from something, right? Jonah's point, and I agree completely, is that the Progressivists or the American "Left" are closer to actual fascism than the "Right." Their policies and means of influencing those policies and culture are very fascistic.
THERepublic1971 1 month ago
Love the book, but am terribly saddened that you do not let my kindle read it for my low vision self.
LawrenceKennard 3 months ago
He is exactly right liberalism is effeminate fascism
MikeWebbsDead 3 months ago
@kilox10001 You posted nothing but a statement of your own perfect stupor over my last reply, yet oddly you pretend you are prepared for more discourse.
Whether your bout of stupor is genuine or just a ruse to avoid my point, I suggest you rethink your political notions. Perhaps you can start by watching this video series.
TylerNull 5 months ago
@kilox10001
"linear progressive evolution" -- monotonic happy-sounding change? Regardless, yours is an odd term for the world's most genocidal and otherwise regressive politics.
The listing of words you strangely equate to "fascism" are applicable to anything remotely related to what's called "a civilization". It is also devoid of any distinctive trait of fascism, like a command economy. Mussolini, the Atheist LABOR LEADER, actually bragged about his.
Sue your teachers' LABOR UNION.
TylerNull 5 months ago
@kilox10001
Tell that to the self professed Liberal who coined the term, genius.
Beyond that, modern Liberals are as much an advocate of unlimited government as are any other type of fascist OR communist. All of which are opposites of classical liberalism.
The oxymoron is in equating right-wing socialism with Conservatism. They are polar opposites. That fact remains even after a half century of Liberals trying to erase the noun modified by the adjective "right-wing".
LEARN.
At least TRY.
TylerNull 5 months ago 4
@kilox10001
"Fascism is a far right ..." -- wing of SOCIALISM, as the author discusses at length. (And wrote a book about.)
Thereby demonstrating that Liberalism forbids its devotees from learning.
ANYTHING.
EVER.
TylerNull 5 months ago 2
@tylernull, @sowellfan333, @dagwoodb, @dafunkmonster, @seersucker1981, Any 'coercive socialism' is unethical. And it's almost always the Leftists who organize 'thug groups'('brown shirts/ UAF') to disrupt, dis-invite, shout-down, or push-around dissenting speakers, demonstrations, etc.
Ask Ward Connerly re his efforts to offer ballot referendum questions against anti-White/anti-male policies.
ProNorden 6 months ago
their precious hero FDR let in 980 Jews total and sent the rest back to Hitler-democrats are bogus liars
dagwoodb 7 months ago
Awesome. Just flipping awesome.
Jaasau 10 months ago 2
This is the stupidist argument going back and forth.
What do conservatives stand for? Less govt and more personal responsibility. Lower taxes and less govt intervention in the indivuals life.
What do liberal (statists) stand for? Larger govt, high regualtion on business and individuals. Higher taxes, less responsibility.
Since when does facism require less intervention in people's lives.
EchoMike03 10 months ago 4
@EchoMike03 Never, exactly. The left is having a hard time coming to terms with what their ideals really involve, theft, force, and control.
bweazel 9 months ago
I love how liberals subtly suggest or make correlations between cultural taboos and their opposition. It's quite pathetic, but effective. What's ironic though is how they try and project these brainwashing tactics on to their adversaries.
AngerIsInMyBlood 10 months ago
Fascism has leftist origins in the Italian syndicalist movement, but it is a very syncretic ideology, it is impossible to categorise as either left or right wing. Only a libertarian could compare liberalism and fascism, in my opinion that is offensive to both liberals and fascists alike.
TashkentFox 11 months ago
@TashkentFox Not really...you said it yourself Facism has leftist origins...and Facist governments have "absolute-power" as a matter of definition. They both were socialists...yes communists were more extreme in their socialism, but they were both socialists....like even Jonah says here what is the name of the nazi party???? The National SOCIALISTS party...which was formerly The German Workers' Party....
Listen to Goldberg's entire speech, not just 2 mins, or just this segment.
EmptyBottleTherapies 10 months ago 3
It's good to hear someone speak out against 'Liberalism'. They have slowly come to power in recent decades and unfortunately they have started to abuse that power, so that they hide behind the 'progressive', 'good guys' image and use that positive stereotype to denounce anyone who challenges their stance on anything as being 'Nazis' or 'fascists', or 'right wing scum'. The Liberals have now started to manifest into what they initially were campaigning against. They are what they allegedly 'hate'
DancinJim 1 year ago
I'm currently arguing with a liberal moron who honestly believes (bless his little heart) that the person who cooks your burger at McDonald's is more valuable to society than doctors and astrophysicists who send satellites into outer space. WOW!!! And then they wonder why we call them DUMB! I could learn any position at McDonald's in seven minutes, but it would take me several years to learn what it takes to become an astrophysicist. Hello? Anybody in there?
DonnyDeutschisBigBro 1 year ago
@DonnyDeutschisBigBro
You are missing the point. You need a burger flipper, you need a cleaning lady etc. These people help society to run and are very important to society. Not everybody has the choice to become an astrophysicist or doctor, no one has a choice in life and its people like you that think they do. Not everyone can get an Education and yet a bus driver works harder then a doctor yet he earns less because society is messed up.
rutgerh9 1 year ago
@rutgerh9 Life isn't fair. Get over it. Liberals believe in an "equality of outcomes" (something that will never happen) while conservatives believe in an "equality of opportunity". Not everyone will succeed, but everyone should be given a chance...
MrGreenPoop1000 1 year ago
this is retarded, and so are the people commenting. I mean, really? Really? Mussolini said, and i quote: "Fascism should be called Corporatism, because it is a merger of corporations and the state."
Does that sound like liberalism? or unionism? Mussolini adopted far right beliefs, and both Hitler and Mussolini were revered by the far right and the corporations in america. You people are a joke! Hahaha!
SeerSucker1981 1 year ago
@SeerSucker1981
"merger of corporations and the state" -- i.e., Fannie Fascism, which Liberals adore, foster, spread and ferociously defend,. from Fannie Mae to Freddie Mac to Community Reinvestment Act to Public-Private Partnerships to sponsoring labor price-fixing cartels.
"far right ..." ... SOCIALISM.
You L-word apologists keep reciting the adjectives but you oddly forget to mention the noun which they modify.
You're a sad joke against your grandparents.
TylerNull 1 year ago 28
@TylerNull umm...so one minute you call the liberals fascists, the next its socialists, then marxists, then communists....you are all a bunch of pathetic name callers. youre a joke. You bring up fannie mae and freddie mac..wasnt it the republicans who bailed out the banks to the tune of 700 billion dollars? Mussolini left the socialists party, then had members of them killed and arrested. He, hitler and japan ran a campaign against communism and liberalism. i mean...this is text book stuff...
SeerSucker1981 1 year ago
@Suck
umm... if socialists hadn't manifested such genocidal nightmares under whatever prior name you invented for yourselves, then you wouldn't have to whine whenever civilized man references them long after we defeated its prior plague(s).
As for your other blather, yes, the various sects of socialists vascilate between aligning with, and warring against, each other, as do Sunni v. Shia Islam. So, what ?
Unhappy with $0.7B, but happy with $3.0B ?
Here's a name: you are a textbook imbecile.
TylerNull 1 year ago 13
@TylerNull the socialists werent militaristic and were anti-war. they didnt manifest any genocidal nightmares. I guess the founding fathers and colonists were socialist as well because of the genocide they committed on the native indians, as well as the enslavement of blacks...?
And what do you mean "for ourselves"? I'm not a socialist. Just because im not a fucking idiot that thinks fascists and liberals arent exactly the same doesnt make me a socialist, sorry retard.
SeerSucker1981 1 year ago
@Suck
By "weren't militaristic", the socialist apologist is referring to the USSR socialists that warred against their neighbors & entirely obliterated the peoples of 12 nations.
By "genocide ... on native indians", the illiterate dolt is referring to the betrayals and treachery thereof by president Andrew Jackson (D). Socialists are theologically required to smear our nation's founders with Dem'rat stink.
Shame of your own political bent is your lone, residual sign of sanity. Start there.
TylerNull 1 year ago 12
@SeerSucker1981
Mussolini WAS a socialist and the major difference between the socialists and his party at the time was that his party supported WWI, that was the ONLY difference.
Meanwhile Hitler and other Nazis came out and said "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalist society."
Goebbels even said if he had to side with the Bolsheviks or the capitalists, then he'd side with the Bolsheviks for socialism. Because capitalism would destroy what the Nazis fought and stood for.
GProduct 1 year ago
@GProduct
So horribly wrong. Hitler named his party the socialist party because socialism meant more freedom, hope and revolution during that time. It was extremely popular especially during the first world war were people suffered so much and realized something had to change in society. During that time Liberalism/ Socialism and Communism grew massively and was hugely popular which Hitler used as his advantage.
rutgerh9 1 year ago
@SeerSucker1981 Socialists not militaristic? Ask Soviet Russia, Pol Pot's Cambodia and then the killing fields, Mao's China, and all the other dictatorships around the world that rule in the name of Socialism. Don't try and act like socialists are historically a bunch of harmless hippies.
thesmittydubs81 9 months ago 6
@SeerSucker1981 ...Text book and you still failed to get it right. Republicans, for what they're worth, raised objection MANY times to the Democrat's relationship with Fanny and Freddie - this includes Bush himself!
Now, Bush was an idiot, and the democrats were once again face-down in the loot. But at the same time, there were those of us who were objecting - perhaps like you - to the bailouts that Bush and Obama put in place.
Stop the looting, no matter what side it's coming from.
TheAmericanApologist 1 year ago
@SeerSucker1981 The only reason Hitler went after the communists was that he thought they were infiltrated with Jews, that they were part of a Jewish conspiracy. However, Hitler agreed with many of the communists philosophical points.
MrGreenPoop1000 1 year ago
@SeerSucker1981 Dude, they are the same thing. Did you even watch the video?
bweazel 9 months ago
@SeerSucker1981 You've got all your facts wrong.
The Democrat-controlled houses of congress bailed out the banks in 2008.
Marxism is the umbrella over socialism, communism, and fascism. They are all flavors of the same basic ideology.
dafunkmonster 8 months ago
@TylerNull Yes. It is strange that we have to debate with half-wits about where socialism fits in our political compass. I guess they want to use the Big Lie theory to wash down the Fascist Fantasy.
Double plus good, I'd say.
No really, National Socialism displays the inability of liberals to face personal responsibility. Their ideas killed how many millions and they blame everyone but themselves?
Wow.
More right-wingers may consider drawing the line at altruism vs America.
TheAmericanApologist 1 year ago
@TylerNull Very nice comment. I just gave that douche bag the same lesson; then I read your response and see you beat me too it. I love being called a ‘retard’ and a ‘joke’ by some second-rate asshole that drops quotes that inadvertently destroy the very position they were trying to take. Only a Liberal could be that confident in his unintelligence.
mdstalla 9 months ago 2
@TylerNull
Oh lovely, nothing says free speech like filtering comments to be approved, I hope your proud of your conservative censorship.
SowellFan333 6 months ago
@SowellFan333
Unable to discriminate between government force and private citizens exercising their liberties over their own stuff, Liberals always brag about getting it perfectly back-ass-wards.
Whether calling themselves Liberals, or calling themselves "Sowell Fan", even their names are lies.
Thanks for helping me PROVE that.
TylerNull 6 months ago 2
@SeerSucker1981
The flaw in your logic is that you are using Mussolini as a point of reference. As a person whos word and philosophy we should look to and trust. and thats FUCKING FAIL.
girzwald3 1 year ago
@SeerSucker1981 Your opinion is based on one quote? That's pretty laughable as well. Have you even read the book?
MrGreenPoop1000 1 year ago
@SeerSucker1981 The "merger" you're referring to was a TAKEOVER of corporations, genius.
MrGreenPoop1000 1 year ago
@SeerSucker1981 Only a fool assumes that conservatives are the official deal makers with corporations. Look at all the private corporations that donated money to Obama's campaign. Look at the liberal union between Goldman Sachs and Fannie and Freddie. A true free market society ( a conservative one) is one where corporations stay out of government and government stays out of corporations. Look at the auto bailout! and bank bailout proposed by a liberal congress and president.
sirjustin511 1 year ago
@SeerSucker1981
What about what happened with the Affordable Care Act? It basically says that by 2014 health insurance has to be implemented according to the dictates of a federal agency. For those who don't enroll in health insurance, the IRS will collect the penalties and pay them to the insurance companies as proxy premium payments. Sounds like a merger of corporations and the state to me.
mmille10 11 months ago
@SeerSucker1981 I believe you are incorrect. Mussolini heavily admired Wilson and the "Progressive Movement." There were corporate men(such as H.Ford)that admired the fascist movement, yet it was heavily "liberal"organizations such as the Times. WEB Dubious(a self defined Marxist) himself admired Mussolini and Hitler(he gave a speech in 1937 that praised Hitler).
usernforce 10 months ago
@SeerSucker1981 Do Conservatives push to merge Government and Corporations? I mean Conservative’s have been begging Congress for less government regulation and State-mandated Industry standards in the private sector; for years now! Democrat's have created true quazi-government/corporatate institutions including FNMA, GNMA, FHLMC and FINRA. I don’t know what Unionism is; but Government/Corporate mergers are, without question, a Liberal initiative. "Retards" and "Jokes;" Really? Really?
mdstalla 9 months ago
This guy is spot on. He accurately describes the mind set of the left wing loonies that post on YouTube, spouting the bilge and vile of the socialists.
GutpileCharlie 1 year ago 3
The Libs. who like to throw around terms like Fascism at Conservatives (or anyone who disagrees with them) & are simply "Projecting" their own proclivities.
elLocoChongo 1 year ago 4
@elLocoChongo ...or just making an accurate observation.
rivmikant 1 year ago
@rivmikant "All looks yellow to a juandiced eye"
elLocoChongo 1 year ago
Read Mr. Goldberg's book...enlightening for sure...thank you...
politicopol 1 year ago
@jdggearhead not to mention there are whites being screwed over like others even in european history you see these tight grip groups in many different forms just like other cultures
cooks1234 1 year ago
@jdggearhead type faster and accurate so i apologize if my mistakes offend you.by the way a.i.d.s started in africa because of the usa/cia polluting the water .well according to some(i didnt believe this).but with the whole guatemala syphilis event.it might be true.also i dont hate on whites i just give credit where it is really do.europeans also came up with inventions.in my view there isnt really a white man its more like tight grip groups.you see them in almost every culture known so far.
cooks1234 1 year ago
@jdggearhead well for your game there are so many but instead i will skip to what i guess one can say we see everyday in life.currency believe it or not started in middle east.paper,Compass,printing(Woodblock printing),again gunpowder etc in china.Nepohualtzitzin(calculator or computer),roads systems,etc in maya/south america.as for africa since it was were our species began there are the wheel,Yam cultivation,Glass tools used for shaving,etc.also reason for my mispellings is im practicing to
cooks1234 1 year ago
@jdggearhead just cause its not an insult to you doesnt mean its not an insult to another especially since your not even half native.no offense
cooks1234 1 year ago
@jdggearhead i never said they were a utopian society.what i am saying is things got alot worse when euros brought capitalism.though what would be the point in trying to show proof to someone who doesnt want to hear,see,think and i guess some would say is self hating person.natives probably did advance its just europeans rewrote history.euros have a nac for trying to take credit for other cultures achievements they tried to steal gunpowder/other stuff from china ,astrology from maya,etc
cooks1234 1 year ago
@jdggearhead one more thing with all due respect you due know the word indian is the improper word and sometimes is used as an insult(like the n word for african americans and s word for mayan and other south american descendents) the europeans wanted to go to india but ended up in america and only reason they refered to the natives as indians cause they thought it was india
cooks1234 1 year ago
@jdggearhead two for your information usa is not capitalist it hasnt been capitalist since well atleast the native american genocide(such as manifest destiny) and the iron fist control(like monroe doctrine) of its southern bloc(so called latin america).whether liked or hated it has had socialism for quite sometime.basically its mixed.and three the ussr was not communist it never achieved it no surprise.obama is an ass but paylin(especially)and bush are even bigger dumbasses.also no socialist
cooks1234 1 year ago
@jdggearhead for the record one capitalism yes is economic idea.but even economic ideas have effects on societys way of life and mentality.second whether accepted or not capitalism does create its own totalitarian dictatorship system only instead of one like other ideas its more than two and instead of the gov(state) its different forms of businesses.look at the way the states considered dictators and businesses especially in mexico and colombia operate and youll notice theyre very similar
cooks1234 1 year ago
A Liberal in Nazi Germany
1. No Hitler, you cannot racially profile all communist as Jews
2. No Hitler, you cannot invade Poland unprovoked
3. No Hitler, it's financially irresponsible to fight two wars at once
4. The Reichstag has no connection with Poland and was in fact an inside job
5. Get called an unpatriotic enemy sympathizer by the opposition
psynema 1 year ago
@psynema
1. Liberals are PROUD to judicially segregating a citizenry into protected and unprotected classes by commandeering federal muscle. They call it Protected Class Law.
2-3. Liberals LOVE warfare. They're only upset when America fights back to defend herself.
4. Alex Jones called. He wants his hoax back.
5. Aiding the wartime enemy, as your ilk do, is high treason. You're giggling because you get away with it, not because it isn't high treason.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull Tyler, you're just flat out stupid.
1-3 make no sense.
5. GOP funded the terrorist, do business with them to this day. It's called a racket. Look up the word.
And Naomi Wolf is a libertarian, tea bag partier, who is a guest on Alex Jones, not a liberal, so Jonah ONCE AGAIN, is lying and confused
psynema 1 year ago
@psynema
1-3. Your baseless decree isn't a rebuttal, jackass. As I pointed out, the only lesson your kind learned from the horrors of Nazi socialism is to use better marketing for the toxic stuff.
5. You fail to address Dem'rat high treason. Distracting with a fresh lie, as you did, doesn't revitalize your stale lie.
And spreading your idiocies out from your original batch, like to your Wolf gal, clearly demonstrates that you wouldn't know lies if you proselytized wad after wad of them.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull and what high treason was that? Arming terrorists was Reagan.
Would you care to apologize to the american people for supporting a terrorist cell called the GOP?
psynema 1 year ago
@psynema
"and what high treason is that"
1. Betraying classified war programs.
2. Suing those who helped the FBI track down enemy operatives in the USA after 9/11.
3. Advocating for al Haramain from US congressional office.
4. Advocating for Saddam Hussein.
5. Threatening US war fighters with criminal prosecution for successfully interrogating the enemy.
6. Slandering US combat soldiers who survived an enemy ambush in Haditha.
Oh, & arming Muslims during the Cold War wasn't treason, you dolt.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull Regarding 2-3 I'd only add "and Israel".
stockinettestitch 1 year ago
What the liberal Democrats impose on America, the colonists kicked out the British over much less! They would have tarred and feathered Pelosi, Reed, and Boxer and ran them out of town!
newalm 1 year ago
uh this guy does know that theres never been a comunist country.they are socialist./fascist. also there were jews in nazi(Erik Jan Hanussen,the ss did have Mischling).also there are those that say jew bankers had a hand in hitler rule/rise.but im skeptic on this part.
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234
"there has never been a communist country"
Communist countries disagree.
What socialist apologists would say in that regard, if their politics allowed reality to seep in, is their Utopian fantasy fails to manifest, even partially, here in the real world; that their politics are so toxic to humanity that the host civilization collapses within about one generation of its attempted implementation.
(I'm here to help.)
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull well if you look at what communism really is youll notice there never was a com country.it was only a promise land from the state like what heaven is to control christians/others by the church.but unlike heaven communism can be achieved maybe not as a country but by oneself.also while on the issue of toxic to humanity maybe you should look at capitalisms own dictatorships no im not just talking about corporations im talking about the mafia/gangs/(especially)cartels
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks
Muddling gov't authority with religious belief is a mainstay of socialist apologetics. There too, even within their framework, we witness that socialists establish their politics as THE gov't enforced religion, and then work to criminalize the competition. The exquisite bestseller, "Godless; the Church of Liberalism" details that of the USA case.
The liberty of a free people to engage in free enterprise is a prerequisite of capitalism, so your capitalist-dictatorship notion is absurd.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull um look socialist have theyre own counter views on why it works and why they dont or werent dictatorships but facts is facts whether it wasnt suppose to happen it happened and like socialism.out of capitalism dictatorships have risen out of it.like i said both ideas suck especially capitalism people die/live worser.i know you might say oh but the usa is capitalist.interesting fact the usa hasnt been capitalist since well even before cold war.which yes i believe was a false war.
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234
"facts is facts" -- and baseless decrees are baseless decrees.
"risen out of"
Do you believe that dictatorships have "risen out of" the bread that bakers theretofore sold prior to their business being nationalized? Do explain your "risen out of" claim.
Totalitarian regimes are not the spawn of liberty. Find a less lunatic claim with which to proselytize your stale socialist agitprop.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull maybe not the bread but definitely the cocaine,counterfited money,prostitutes,firearms,recently carbombs etc.they may not be the spawn of liberty but they are from freedom and the actions they take are totalitarian dictatorial threatening the media(control),killing some to use as examples,supression of the masses.its the same thing you read about in socialist/fascist societys only worse and there is plenty of evidence on the web.even here on youtube.
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234
"cocaine,..." -- that's just a list of bad things. You offer zero reasoning for your indictments of capitalism.
In fact, the narco-states have "risen out of" centrally-planned socialist cesspools, e.g. Columbia and Mexico. As for counterfeiting, Iran was dominant there for decades, and that had "risen out of" Islamic style socialism. Global criminal organizations had "risen out of" the USSR, from its inception. So, don't blame capitalism for criminal enterprises.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull well on the centrally planned thing if you think about it all economies are centrally planned only difference is who is doing the planning and how many.also socialism is for the state or group and clearly in mexico/other latin countrys weve seen it is mainly the state(until recently that citizen militias/mobs or vigilante groups like in guatemala)have been the only ones that have stood up to these tyrrants.yes i realize there is corruption but believe it or not there is still loyalty
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234
No, all are not centrally planned. In market-based economies, producers and sellers determine what they make and at what price to sell it, competing for buyers. Central planning is when government bureaucrats usurp the plans of both buyers and sellers.
Stop muddling.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull in the state to its people.these cartels are not socialist since they dont want egalitarian/equality.they dont want redistribution of anything except bullets to anybody.the state isnt really getting a profit(also most corrupt politicians are forced to cooperate at gun point).they believe and practice private ownership not just of land(even public),things like weapons,but also of people.they definitely believe in freedom not liberty,they keep profit to themeselves,there is competition,
cooks1234 1 year ago
@TylerNull they are against the state even though they controled some of it.socialism has the state and all(people) as whole as an important piece in the system.capitalism has individuals and groups(businesses).cartels/mafia/gangs etc dont really have anything socialist about them.if it was the mexican federal gov that was commiting those atrocitys then it would probably be socialist.but it is individuals/groups doing this.with intention to keep profit for self not redistribute
cooks1234 1 year ago
@TylerNull also in the ussr you had the censorship of the press/media were the group(state) didnt allow the journalist to report on what is really going on and even told them what to do/control the media like music,movie etc,right.well guess what the same thing is happening in mexico only instead of the state(group) its well lets just call them businesses(groups).by the way instead of putting journalists in asylums/prison like ussr did.they torture/kill/use them as examples to control the masses
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234
... and therefore ... WHAT, exactly?
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull capitalist dictatorships suck more than socialist ones only atleast some socialist are open about it.
cooks1234 1 year ago
@TylerNull when it goes wrong socialism sucks but capitalism is a b**ch. both ideologys suck mainly cause a few jaxs end up as dictators of the many.also on the collapse thing yes ussr collapsed but atleast its not in a hellhole situation like real capitalist countrys like colombia and mexico the state plays very little role in economy/society and private interest groups run the country/other countrys even at others expense.also no socialist
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234
You're confusing capitalism with narco-nanny-state cesspools.
All the problems of "capitalism" can be traced to government functionaries usurping the will of the private citizen on matters of commerce.
E.g., the Medi-scare (nationalizing medicine), Fannie Mayhem (nationalizing mortgages), Social Insecurity (nationalizing pension funds) in which we're all now ensnared.
Socialism "never goes" right, because socialists eventually run out of other people's money. It's INVIABLE.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull well true.but capitalist always try to take other peoples money and unlike some socialist(not all)they dont give anything back or if they do its usually something just as bad as socialist give.
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234
"don't give anything back"
That's a nonsensical mantra of socialist proselytism., and evidences an immaculate economic illiteracy.
EVERY transaction between free people entails something "given back" by both parties, e.g., money for goods.
Corporate profits are the sum give-back of those who work there. If they were as greedy as socialists, they would suck every last nickel out and go bankrupt, as socialists invariably do.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull well socialist say the same thing people get something back(usually free education,healthcare,some forms of security,etc).also on the subject of the so called free peoples.it turns out not all are always free sometimes one forces the other to buy/sell/do.like i said capitalism is just like socialism well they both have totalitarian dictatorships.socialism is suppose to be egalitarian/equal its proven it cant.capitalism is suppose to be freedom/choice its proven it cant.they both suck
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234
"well socialists say..."
Anyone can say anything (as long as we don't let socialists criminalize speech with Hate Crime laws & such); however, only some statements have any veracity. Theirs have none:
Neither school nor medicine nor any other industry is "free", especially when commandeered by gov't. And the more the gov't intrudes into an industry, the quicker such costs SKYROCKET (hyper-inflate). And gov't alone forces all to pay. Your 3 are examples of such catastrophes.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull true but samething goes for capitalist.i believe theres things called cornering the market,buying out,and outsourcing.also if i forgot to mention when speaking of socialism and capitalism sucking im mainly talking about the mentality/way of life that spawns out of them .i honestly think the idea of economy or currency is stupid.another thing if you really believe capitalist economy is better than socialist maybe you should debate a person who knows alot about it like MaoistRebelNews2
cooks1234 1 year ago
@TylerNull cause im pretty sure ive mentioned before im against both.just cause one defends something doesnt neccessarily mean there for it.both have good and bad things.but from what ive seen and researched from both capitalism seems like worst when it goes wrong and in some cases live in.
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234
You appear to be oblivious that you are reciting stale socialist agitprop with your muddled equivocations, even as you post your belief that you are offering some kind of objective analysis.
The superiority of capitalism to socialism is so spectacular, and so well evidenced by both the historical record AND current events, that socialism requires 12+ years of proselytism to everyone's kids just to keep its vile hoax on life support.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull well tell that to the cartels/mafia/gangs/corporations victimes across the planet.and the native americans(well at least whats left of them) and others that were murdered.capitalist are so in denial.this is one of the reason why i keep saying capitalism is crapier than socialism.at least socialist admit the terrors that system caused and some try to modify it while capitalist deny deny deny.look for escape goats.and worst do the same thing/promote the system that caused the problems.
cooks1234 1 year ago
@TylerNull please stop with your capitalist propaganda cause ive seen what it can do and how it lies.especially the ones its used to gain for itself.manifest destiny kill so called indians for private gain,slavery of so called animals,whats next use illegals as escape goats only instead spread it to all those who have origins in those country to cover up its faults and gain a profit/land
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234
That's the no-I'm-not-but-you-are rebuttal. Your claim is also ironic due to the quantity & composition of your posts in response to any one of mine.
And you keep pointing to unhappy events to claim it is "capitalism". Here, you lean on American Indians to do so. As silly as that is all by itself, any comparison of that clash of civilizations to any other, e.g., Islam v. Africans, Russians v. Ukrainians, etc., will highlight just how silly your notions are.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull well thats the sort of response ide expect for capitalism using escape goats.yet ironically always making big deal on socialisms/others crimes even though there is much controversy on it.capitalist seriosly need to stop talking of why other systems are bad considering they suck just as bad.government /businesses both suck.also native americans arent just the only ones you must of forgotten cartels/businesses across planet like latin america.to put it simply both suck,both dont work,
cooks1234 1 year ago
@cooks1234 Actually cooks, you're right. Capitalism is failing as badly as socialism now and that's something that even the right wing elites in this country can't argue against competently. The right wing elitists with all the money will point to flaws in socialism as our debt soars to record highs from poor management of resources and endless wars. We are hypocrites at best and doomed at worst. Like you said,"both suck, both don't work." I do think socialism can be modified to work properly.
taosimplicity 1 year ago
@cooks1234 However, capitalism is a lost cause because it has broken too many dreams and promises and the people are weary and numb from it's empty words. Think about it, info-mercials that play day and night suckering people in, false advertising for disease cures, and the biggest offender of reason and decency? RELIGION. This form of capitalism makes you want to throw up all over these idiots.
taosimplicity 1 year ago
@cooks1234 Just a side note, the conservatives have outsmarted themselves by adopting this perversion of the truth when it comes to liberal fascism because #1 most people don't understand what they are talking about and don't have the patience to bother. #2 they don't have ONE credible university that will endorse this nonsence. With the exception of Goldberg, not one credible historian will acknowledge his insane theories as legitimate.
taosimplicity 1 year ago
@cooks1234 So you see, adopting Saul Alinskys tactics only works if you have an educated public and if, and only IF you are willing to invest in the resources to forward this propaganda. In other words, they don't have the staying power and the left made progress calling them the nazis much earlier and the people are already sold on it. They might as well give up, because they've already lost this game. Tea baggers come off as insane when they show up at their reich wing rallies with nazi signs.
taosimplicity 1 year ago
@cooks1234 No, they'll use homosexuals as scapegoats, the republicans will take congress and pass some watered down version of immigration reform that will leave the right wing with no choice, but to accept it and move on from that subject. It will be a major miscalculation on their part and half the steam will be gone from the movement. After that it's the gays. . . AGAIN! Unfortunately, for them, the American people are not on their side on that one, but they'll persecute them anyway.
taosimplicity 1 year ago
It makes Jews feel good to openly hate others, it's what they do best, look how happy he looks.
derberg19486 1 year ago
Hey jonah, Stalin spoke very calmly and had a glass of water always handy when he spoke to contrast him from Hitler.
psynema 1 year ago
'I'm not calling liberals fascists, but i'm gonna go all over fox news and connect liberals to fascists and not expect anyone to think liberals are fascists because of that.'
lol, this guy is a joke and half of the garbage in his book is simply wrong.
macwild1234 1 year ago
check out The Truth Party, the party of the future.
slade420 1 year ago
@nonpartpundit --The more I read the book, the more I really appreciate it. Notice, he talks about national movements at critical times (WWI Wilson, WW II FDR, the Communist postwar scare, etc.) But he also speaks of fascistic themes in our history,not that the Left are fascists. There I think he is right. Where you had il Duce and the Fuhrer, you know have a larger than life figure whom you don't dare criticize. If you're smart, you get with the program.
TheMenghi1 1 year ago
@nonpartpundit --Hello, but I have to take issue with the Left allowing free speech. From the University to the common liberal, free speech is permitted as long as it is the politically correct thing to say. If I have some objection to things printed by Gore, Lester Brown, Rachel Carson, or Profs. Erlich or Singer, I must be ignorant. Instead of dialoging, invariably people try to silence me. Where is this coveted freech speech the Left touts?
TheMenghi1 1 year ago
@nonpartpundit
Fine I won't ignore them. The press freedom index is based on the subjective opinions of people from Reporters without borders. I'm a little skeptical of that one because the US ranks below Canada which is a little silly since they have a national speech code. As far as the democracy index goes were not a democracy were a constitutional republic. I don't want to be on the top of that list. The top spot goes to Sweden where government consumes over 50% of GDP. Sounds lovely.
limited1defined 1 year ago
Liberals are basically fascists. They want to control every aspects of our lives. Just look at all the laws the impose, especially in California, they dictate what we should eat, drive, shove eco green bullshit down our throats, ban light bulbs, guns, etc. They hate freedom of speech if it does not agree with their views. Look at the censorship doctrine! They would love that so silence conservative views!
newalm 1 year ago
@nonpartpundit That worked out real well for Russia, Mao and Cuba.
Instead of Work will make you free (Hitler slogan at camp), Mao had work wil give you a new life.
40 or 75 million worked to death, starved or killed for opposing the state really gave workers control of their production.
Hannahand4everMiley 1 year ago
Hitler was a socialist. Nothing right-wing about it. Hitler hated communists because he thought that marxism was a jewish conspiracy. But he agreed with the principles of marxism. Conservatism is about as far from nazism as it's possible to get.
Lightf00t1 1 year ago
@nonpartpundit
By "Real left", you mean the unreal kind that exists only in your fantasies.
Instead, I'm pointing to the REAL Left. You know, the kind that has a historical record. The kind that manifests here in the real world.
Beyond that, what was once left-wing socialism and right-wing socialism have long since morphed into a toxic rainbow of disparate socialist sects who all march in lock-step together in what's broadly known today as the political Left.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@TylerNull The 'left' in modern day America is much further to the right than it was even a century ago. Unions are beaten down because the organizing of working people is a threat to the powerful private sector who rely on their exploitation to keep things running smoothly. If you think the left he is referring to doesn't have a historical record, it's apparent you aren't looking.
flyingmonkeyskin 1 year ago
@nonpartpundit
Your fantasy of some kind of immaculate socialist ideal is the "fact" here. No problem, I got that upon reading your 1st post.
Let's examine your last labyrinth of apologetics. You point to some claimed imperfection of capitalism, including a baseless indictment of Reagan (nice touch), only to use THAT to absolve socialism of its own history of horrors, under the fantasitical claim that if socialism's realities differ from your fantasy world version, then it wasn't socialism.
TylerNull 1 year ago
Jonah is just a political hack trying to make some dishonest money, but I'm surprised that there are enough gullible/ignorant people that make hs venture profitable. LIberals have more interest in protecting individual right (speech, searches...), while conservatives express more interest in property rights. Would Hitler have supported Miranda rights? :) Who is more likely to support Miranda: a liberal or a conservative? Obviously, a liberal.
GenRipper 1 year ago
@GenRipper
Who is more likely to criminalize dissent by indicting authors under Hate Speech laws? Oh, dhimmi Canada, thanks for sending us your best-selling "hate speech" author, Mark Steyn, and his Canadian-censored best-selling tome, America Alone.
HILARIOUS.
And yet you shameless scum come here to proselytize your socialist agitprop.
PRICELESS.
Leftists & Muslims -- Life Partners -- Hot for Jihad
TylerNull 1 year ago
@nonpartpundit
We exposed your word sophistry a few posts back. Try to keep up.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@nonpartpundit
By "quite supportive of capitalism", the socialist apologist is referring to Hitler's nationalizing of industries, confiscating the assets of businessmen, and exterminating them and their families.
By "denounce socialist class doctrines". the socialist apologist is referring to the fact that one tribe of socialists will alternately collude with and war against other socialist tribes, e.g., La Raza v. Black Panthers.
However, socialism is indeed warfare against language too.
TylerNull 1 year ago
@GenRipper
Speaking of a "cursory reading of history", you pointed to one title yet missed the other:
NAZI = National SOCIALIST German Workers' Party
Hitler's party was the socialist party. Hitler was a labor union boss; a labor party leader. Sure, disparate tribes of socialists are always competing with each other. So, what?
Left, right and any other wing or sect of SOCIALISM share the signature trait -- the liberal use of government force into each & every dynamic of human existence.
TylerNull 1 year ago 4
@TylerNull
Absolutely right! There are signs all over the place, if you look. The Auschwitz sign recently stolen reads 'Arbeit Macht Frei' meaning 'Work Makes You Free'. Straight outta the Communist Manifesto!
Clearly with the brainwashing and indoctrination, it's the 'liberals' who need to learn about their 'sacrosanct' ideology...
cafeturkie 1 year ago 7
conservatives are more like nazis than liberals are
ThatGuyWhoSucksBoobz 1 year ago
@ThatGuyWhoSucksBoobz That is simply not true. None of the major classical rightwing icons were sited by the nazis, nor do modern conservatives employ nazi arguments. Yet so many modern leftwing positions are identical to nazi thinking or the nazi platform: nationalization of select industries, the permanence of race, the obsession with public health, organic foods, animal rights, the abolition of sexual norms, the removal of public expressions of faith, the list goes on and on.
pittland44 1 year ago
weren't the bad guys in a sum of all fears neo nazis ando not conservatives as Golgberg says
goPistons06 1 year ago
Even if the Nazis were socialists, it does not follow that socialists are Nazis. I hope Jonah Goldberg realizes this.
KittenButter 1 year ago
@KittenButter That's not the point he is trying to make.
UberDeathTurtle 1 year ago
@KittenButter
He said many times in his book that modern day liberalism, while totalitarian in many ways, is by no means "evil", or that what happened in Nazi Germany could ever happen in America. This is why he uses the smiley face to brand liberal-fascism. They might tell you what you can drive, what you can eat, where you can work, what light bulbs you may use, and the kind of health care you will receive- but it's not going to end up with death camps. It would be political totalitarianism.
Ipetratz 1 year ago
It's no coincidence that Mussolini was originally a socialist. if you look at the origins of socialism and fascism, you'll see that they share many roots.
goPistons06 1 year ago
liberal fascism?? thats a oxymoron.
TrueGreatness73 1 year ago
The Seeds of Totalitarianism
TheLiberalAvenger 1 year ago
I agree that calling conservative Americans fascists is silly, but Goldbert seems to be saying liberals are fascists - equally silly.
glenlucefarmer 1 year ago
Adolf Hitlers party - National socialist party. That's like Oama's people- socialist, fascist, communist, atheist, controlling state. Now what do you do if your guilty, you call your accuser (conservative Americans) guilty of what your yourself are. then you let the confusion and lies do there damage and corrosion. That's how you destroy America. That's what they are doing.
weseyedwalk 1 year ago
Liberals are the most annoying people in the world, that's for sure.
Treyb3yond 1 year ago
@Treyb3yond
Yeah, they think they're so smart. They know all like, numbers and words and facts and stuff. That's like, so totally annoying!
OolTube02 1 year ago
@AgeOfReclamation
Conservative totalitarianism?
It's so totalitarian to expect that each individual is absolutely worthless unless they work hard and make a name for themselves is totalitarianism?
It's totalitarianism to award non-producers with welfare. Taking from producers and giving to non producing welfare expectant mothers.
BallsInYourJawsBitch 1 year ago
@BallsInYourJawsBitch
Well, it's certainly very collectivist to claim a person has to prove their material worth to society first in order to have the right to live. That has definite fascist overtones. It's a "survival of the fittest" kind of social Darwinist world view and fitness is determined by social recognition.
They say a society's freedom is determined by how safe it is to be unpopular. Based on that measure the need to prove your worth doesn't sound very free at all...
OolTube02 1 year ago
We hereby declare that you may attack our nation with chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction to slaughter millions of U.S. civilians, without fear of nuclear retaliation, as long as we can find some lawyers in the aftermath to rubber-stamp our betrayal.
Yours truly,
Barack Hussein Obama
FrankCastlez 1 year ago
obama rhetoric included anti capitalism, especially anti finance capitalism. In attacking the ills of democracy, obama spoke of a pluto-democracy a conspiracy that favoured liberal democratic parties in order to maintain the integrity of capitalism
shutupstupid9 1 year ago
@AgeOfReclamation Early Nazi rhetoric included anti-capitalism, especially anti-finance capitalism.[16] In attacking the ills of Weimar democracy, Adolf Hitler spoke of a pluto-democracy Jewish conspiracy that favoured liberal democratic parties in order to maintain the integrity of capitalism
shutupstupid9 1 year ago
Early Nazi rhetoric included anti-capitalism, especially anti-finance capitalism. In attacking the ills of Weimar democracy, Adolf Hitler spoke of a pluto-democracy Jewish conspiracy that favoured liberal democratic parties in order to maintain the integrity of capitalism
shutupstupid9 1 year ago
@TylerNull
Goldberg's book should be required reading for all college aged and highschool students.
laffin2much 1 year ago
Awesome. Golderg's book should be required reading for all college and highschool students.
laffin2much 1 year ago
worst part about all this, no liberals are going to research what this guy has to say about them! They just don't question themselves or their beliefs
noobview 1 year ago
scence when do liberals research...LOL thats funny !!!
frank0067 1 year ago
Although he didn't predict such events would occur in the USA, it is scary how similar what he notes what they were afraid of then and is happening now! Government take over of banks, industry and service!
noobview 1 year ago
Comment removed
AgeOfReclamation 1 year ago
"a simple oxymoron"
Your claim requires two fallacies. 1) That the politics of those who title themselves Liberal is in any way related to classical liberalism. 2) That the famous Liberal who coined the term "Liberal Fascism" knew less about his own politics than you do.
As notable, even if we overlook your fallacies, and mindlessly adopt your false measure and metrics, then it nullifies your last claim regarding "conservative totalitarianism".
That's a whole lot of wrong for one post.
TylerNull 1 year ago 2
@AgeOfReclamation left wing fascism does exist.
marxism, communism, antifa, pol pot ect.
MrAntiFarLeft 1 year ago
@AgeOfReclamation Your wasting time on semantics the matter at hand is, these so called liberals, or progressives, or left nuts, or as I call them neo nazis, want to destroy America and destroy the constitution. This country has no self defense against people coming into this country to defeat it from within. That is the vulnerable nature of being the open armed loving country that we are. Liberal communists like Stalin were fascists I don't know what is hard to understand about that
weseyedwalk 1 year ago
@AgeOfReclamation
It would have been an oxymoron in the classical use of the word "liberal".
Ipetratz 1 year ago
@AgeOfReclamation The famous liberal that coined "liberal fascism" - H.g. Wells - was actually a Fabian socialist. His claim was that Bolsheviks had implemented socialism in Russia, Nazis had implemented socialism in German, and so the Fabians needed to be less passive and more aggressive in their press of socialism. Thus "liberal fascism".
Goldberg makes a very strong case for liberal fascism being a real, even dominant political philosophy, and not an "oxymoron". You should read his book.
DrCruel 1 year ago
@DrCruel I have been reading the book, dictionary in tow of course, and I am glad to have a real perspective of liberalism in America and how it was incrementally but at the same time suddenly implemented into American politics. Liberals don't have a leg to stand on.
tmua23 1 year ago
The problem with this debate seems to be a definition of terms.
Socialism is a state in which the workforce owns the means of production, ie the state owns the MoP, and the government is a strong democracy (otherwise its just the USSR).
In practise what we (and Jonah) associate with Socialism is China, Russia, Cuba and N Korea, which resemble Nazi Germany rather closely. This is not proof that socialism is nazism. Nazism only declared itself socialist to appear more populist than it was.
RobertJBDuigan 1 year ago
Gee, so this is where the whole notion of Nazis being left-wingers comes from. Funny that he didn't mention that Strasser was purged from the Nazi party. Everything about Nazism was anti-left. Here's a quote from Hitler that puts it into perspective:
Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true Socialism is not.
When in power, the Nazis launched a mass privatization scheme (like the Italian fascists).
IPlayWithFire135 1 year ago
Yes, the left-wing socialists were "anti" right-wing socialists, and visa verse. Much like the Shia Muslims are "anti" Sunni Muslims. And the one sect is often claiming the others aren't "true".
So, what?
The fact that left wing and right wing socialists are socialists is a bit more than a "notion". All are fascistic.
Beyond that, your claim that one sect of socialism "has nothing to do with" another is nonsensical. All socialists share the common signature traits, as Goldberg discusses.
TylerNull 1 year ago
These terms get so confused, and are used to confuse us. The division we need to understand is the fact of the increasing concentration of power and money at the top of the pyramid and the withering away of the middle class. This is not happening because of some fundamental economic law of the universe but by the design of the powerful. The government should not try to force everyone to be equal but it must redistribute power to make all citizens less unequal or our democracy is doomed.
calamagrostis88 1 year ago
What the US Government "should" and should not be doing is expressly and explicitly spelled out in the founding document of our republic.
No where is it even hinted in the US Constitution that they should "redistribute power".
Nowhere is it hinted that we, the supposedly self governing people, have granted to them, the hired help, ANY authority to redistribute ... ANYTHING.
TylerNull 1 year ago
Actually it does. The Constitution gives the federal government the power to tax and spend, for example.
Of course the constitution is a living document, so your point is moot.
Esoteric0714 1 year ago
Wrong.
There are but 17 enumerated powers under which they may either tax or spend. ANY taxing OR spending outside those enumerated powers is racketeering.
Demonstrating their contempt for the US Constitution, socialist mystics proselytize the dogma of "living document", as you mindlessly recited.
People are alive. Documents aren't. Find a less toxic mysticism to proselytize.
TylerNull 1 year ago
Power is distributed among the 3 branches, but there are no provisions of the redistribution of the power among the 3 branches. I believe that is what you are attempting to explain.
Aegius 1 year ago
You're referring to the "co-equal" property of the three branches, which is another, somewhat related issue.
The fellow to which I replied is proselytizing the Democrat party's long-running national fraud that the US Constitution grants them an open-ended totalitarian mandate to tax and spend on anything and everything their big-pimping hustlers can get away with, such as wealth REDISTRIBUTION programs -- taking money from earners to pay non-earners, in exchange for nothing whatsoever.
TylerNull 1 year ago
Lol. As I mentioned, Strasser and friends were purged, as Goldberg conveniently left out. There is no such thing as right-wing socialism. Nazism and Marxism never have had anything in common. By saying that, you've turned the word socialism into a meaningless term. Does socialism mean capitalism? Because Nazi Germany was capitalist. Only the truly misinformed would equate Nazism with Soviet or Cuban socialism, flawed as they were/are.
IPlayWithFire135 1 year ago
You keep leaning on the exposed idiocy that tribe A can't be a tribe if it's opposed to tribe B.
Worse yet, you do so even after the idiocy was explained to you, chuckles.
As for common signature traits between Marxists, Nazis, Green, Labor, La Raza, and all other disparate tribes of socialists, they all favor socialism, with its fascistic injection of government force into each and every facet and dynamic of human endeavors.
They all march in lock-step agreement against the G7, literally.
TylerNull 1 year ago
No. You missed my point. I said they have NOTHING to do with each other. By your logic I could say Nazism and libertarianism are fundamentally the same, since they both display an extremely arrogant social-darwinist mentality. Government involvement in human affairs is not "fascistic" or "socialistic." Your shallow terminology is entertaining, but not surprising considering the right-wing's fetish for name calling. La Raza socialist? HAHAHAHA
IPlayWithFire135 1 year ago
Debunking your point, as I did, is the opposite of "missing" your point, as you just now claimed. Do attempt lucidity.
"I said" -- and I debunked.
"both display ... arrogant..." -- your subjective metric is just that. Contrarily, I pointed to an objective measure. Socialists -- ALL SECTS, wings, and branches -- enforce their mandates with as much corrupted federal muscle as they can commandeer.
Oh, and La Raza (The Race) isn't a label of my invention, genius.
TylerNull 1 year ago
Not true. Marxism and Nazism favored government control of industries and Nazi Germany wasn't capitalist. Hitler also was strongly antipathetic toward business people just as Marx was.
Nazism just didn't go into complete control of all industries as Marxism did, but only certain industries, while in other industries prices and other aspects were dictated.
Aegius 1 year ago
Don't bother. Marxists are inoculated from reason. Directly answer a question, and they merely ask it again.They have no ability to discuss politics. They merely proselytize.
And I allow them to proselytize only long enough to document that fact..
TylerNull 1 year ago
@Aegius Hitler went directly after Unionists.Just like today's CONservatives.
Dubya took a new Cadillac that he got from Slick Willie - poured gas/lit it - drove it into a brick wall at 97mph - had a bulldozer shove it into a ditch - then tossed the keys to Obama and told him to "Drive safe".
IWLocal8 1 year ago
@IWLocal8
The king of England attacked the kind of France, so they can't both favor kingdoms?
The logic and reasoning of you labor price-fixing thugs never quite rises above that of your carbon residue. No wonder you socialists are so enchanted with the stuff.
Hitler was a labor union leader. The Nazi party was THE labor union party.
As did their communist brethren, Nazis and all other labor union leaders attack other labor unions once they get control of all the machine guns.
So what?
TylerNull 1 year ago 8