In Hitler's Germany the people owned neither the Workplace nor the State, German Socialists who exposed Hitler's lie and pointed out that he was not offering Socialism were the first of his many victims. They were disposed of because they knew what socialism was and were a threat to the fascist corporate state power structure.
Unless the Workers own the Work Place you do not have socialism, not even if you have democracy at the state level, socialism can only exist when the workers are free.
The truth is Hitler lied about a great many things and pronounced his intent to deceive his people with "The Big Lie" in his own words, that he would give socialism to the people while instead giving them a state corporation was part of The Big Lie.
What Hitler called socialism was also part of "The Big Lie" what he gave the people was the opposite of socialism, but he gave them the promise of socialism to win their support, and when instead he gave them tyranny where the workers were basically slaves to the state, he told the workers it was socialism.
Does the thought never occur to the capitalist that tyrants might lie and claim to represent a movement popular among the working class to gain their support while betraying their cause?
@FreeTheWorker Being a slave to the state is exactly what socialism is. Socialism is defined as the government owning the means of production and distribution. If they control the goods, they control you. It doesn't matter if you vote, because politicians lie and who you vote for doesn't necessarily win. A free market system with government enforcement of property rights is the closest thing to real freedom we can ever get to.
@lordnate2000 No, it's not. Socialism has several meanings, there are forms of socialism that don't even allow a state. You should read more about it instead of getting all your information from FOX News and right wingers.
George Orwell? I thought he was a social democrat? He fought alongside Trotskyists in the spanish civil war. He would have been the last person I would have thought of arguing for a free market.
@xtremejohnny69 Orwell became anti-soviet but, as a real democrat, he never gave up being leftist. He'd never have seen as somethig good mastery and servitude.
My Keynes Hayek: The Clash That Defined Modern Economics is published in October by W.W.Norton. See website: sites.google.com/site/wapshottkeyneshayek/
"What has always made the state a hell on earth has been precisely that man has tried to make it his heaven" -Holderlin --One of my favorite quotes from F.A. Hayeks "The Road to Serfdom" When will neo-liberals wake up and realize that collectivism has and always will, produce horrors of unspeakable death and poverty? Islamism, Nazism and Stalinism ARE all constructs of liberalist socialist structure.
all the libertarians i know have never gone hungry, have never been homeless, never got mugged, etc. ive seen more in the last 3 years than in my first 20, and like i am straight as an arrow, on top of my shit kinda guy. always have been. but it doesnt matter.
you literally have to know nothing but folk myths to believe in something like libertarianism, which is like the most forceful misunderstanding of reality i can just about imagine and i was raised catholic
@CajunCommie You are an avowed communist and you believe Libertarianism is the "most forceful misunderstanding of reality"? What aspect of repeated famine and millions of bloody corpses leads you still to believe in the Utopian fantasy of peace, prosperity and justice under Communism?
@gergenheimer it actually happened. the biggest increase in standard of living in human history all happened in the 20th century in first the USSR, then China, then the DPRK, then Cuba. Why don't libertarians ever shed tears for the corpses of capitalism? 140 million slaves alone died creating the wealth necessary for the creation of the factory system, not including the tens of millions of native americans let alone the hundreds of thousands of european poor and immigrants
@CajunCommie Just because you "used to be a Libertarian" and switched to another ideology doesn't automatically validate your views - when I graduated from college, like a lot of artists, I was a socialist or borderline communist - then I learned some credible history, economics and learned how to think critically, not based on Utopian fantasy. I won't waste my time commenting on your assessment of standards of living in communist countries, because it's pure fantasy.
I think the greatest book Hayek ever wrote is The Pure Theory of Capital. It is also a very difficult book, but within it's pages one will find the keys to understanding the precise nature of the recent financial market crash and the subsequent recession. Mises.org has it for free. I you have the time and the disposition, go read it.
How is Regan a fan of Hayek? We saw huge deficits and debt under him, not to mention the creation of the presidents working group on financial markets.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
i used to be a libertarian until i had to be a poor wage worker for years. amazing what changes in a man when he no longer is living off of his folks in a safe suburb, getting all the emotional and financial support he needs.
Hmmm. That's one of the main reasons I am a libertarian. Ever since I was 14 I have been a worker, not to mention, at the age of 18 I found my own place, paid for my own tuition, and worked two jobs to support myself. Independence taught me to have confidence in my abilities. I still earn little, but I am free and have a great future ahead of me... thanks to hard work and self-reliance. No self-pity here.
@MarcNeilsen I gotta agree with you. I'm 18 now and I moved out and I've worked a few jobs to support myself. I got laid off a few months ago and have been living off my savings, the government intervention in the markets has stunted job growth so it's getting harder, but I get my degree in 8 months so that's gonna help.
@MarcNeilsen Bravo ! I come from a European country where 70% of teenagers in high school dream of becoming civil servants. This country is going bankrupt. Soon.
@stefool You're joking about that 70% right, if not that's pretty idiotic of them. I mean Idiotic in the traditional Latin sense, not the Modern American sense.
@CajunCommie You went from being being someone who lived off his folks in a safe suburb to wanting financial and emotional support from his fellow citizens. It seems to me that you should grow up and become an adult.
@CajunCommie SO let me get this straight: You couldn't stand on your own two feet before and you can't stand on your own two feet now. Once a mooch always a parasite. Why not be a man and take responsibility for your own life. Until you are financially independent an secure you should not be wasting your time on youtube.
@CajunCommie Should have got a better job. Life is hard without your parents. Get over it and stop expecting the rest of the nation give you money cos you're not satisfied with your life
@CajunCommie That sounds like someone who never really was a libertarian. Living off your folks as a man? Not much of a man, nor a libertarian. So what really happened is that your true nature was revealed. So now you want a bigger, more powerful daddy and mommy to provide the support.
Remember that the Bolsheviks played on a similar disillusionment... the preyed on the envy and the ignorance of the worker to gain power. And when they got it, they destroyed Russia. The "new elite" oppressed their subjects with a brutality that was unheard of in the days of the Czar.
Sure, i guess the whole communist thing was a success in that everyone not in government was EQUAL-- equally poor and miserable. Plus now they had ZERO chance of being the best they could be.
Hayek is one of the brightest and most articulate writers of our lifetime. Luckily, for us, the road to serfdom is back in the forefront and thanks to FOX and pundits such as Beck and Levin, younger generations who knew not the horrors of communism and de-population are now learning the truth about our American scum. ie... Obama, Clintons, FDR, LBJ, Franks, Sanders, Dodd etc... Perhaps FINALLY in our country we will see freedom return!
@DerrEinzige Hmmm, seems to me that someone likes Marx. You probably have Mein Kompf and Das Capital on your shelf. The communist manifesto on your night stand. And that "Communist Manifesto" is probably Marx's worst book (he even says so himself)
Yes I do? You know why? Because I like to educate myself on the subject before making baseless accusations! The Communist Manifesto probably was Marx's worst book Das Capital is much more thought provoking. Just because I dont listen to neocon trash doesn't make me a communist no matter how much Mark Levin says so... You dont believe me he says its his worst book? Watch the interviews of him in his later life! He regrets writing it he became a classical liberal later in life.
@DerrEinzige He is a Libertarian. His views on Keynes alone are some of the most well known criticisms documented. As far as Das Capital? Communism has been used. It has been tried every where. It ends in walls and guns every single time. So, if you are not brilliant enough to see that collectivism is a failed practice? Perhaps you shouldn't comment at all.
No fucking shit collectivism fails. Have you read the road to serfdom? Its from a highly ordoliberalism point of view. In that book he denounced laissez faire. His OTHER books are great, the Road to Serfdom did very little to promote the cause of liberty. How about reading what I fucking saw? Now go run along and suck Bill O'Reilly's dick.
@DerrEinzige Bill O'reilly? Are you kidding me? Wow how misinformed. Try watching for once instead of following the herd of liberal morons. And you didn't read Hayek. Your last statement let me know you haven't a clue of what you are talking about. Hayek is against Keynes. NOT against free market capitalism
THATS WHY HE RENOUNCED THE ROAD TO SERFDOM. The Road to Serfdom was from a ordoliberalist standpoint. Maybe if your read the fucking book you would know.
Go to the wikipedia page of the road to serfdom go to the part "Role of government"
Everything there he later renounced. Why? Because he came to his senses and adopted laissez faire.
@SuperGuitarman69 I would put a damper on FOX. I am here mostly because Ron Paul brought me down this path of knowledge. Without him I would have never even known where to look because I am not being taught these things nor is it shown in the media so many others looks to. If I do not know to look somewhere it is expediently harder to determine the need. This is largely due to the fact that without knowing what is available to study it is harder to study these hidden subjects.
Good stuff overall, though I find it hard to swallow that Churchill was a fan of Hayek; he was a statist through and through. He may have given a nod or some lip service to Hayekian principles, but in the end he was a big government dickwad.
Ironic point about Orwell and his self proclaimed "marxist" beliefs. He wrote to a great extent about the debasing of language as the key propaganda instrument of communism (stalinism suffices here) especially as a means of deflecting criticism. Communists and socialists of all forms love to change the meaning of those isms whenever they are criticized. Orwell seems guilty of the same in claiming Marxism accepts democracy. Maybe in his definition yes but it certainly is not of Marx.
@ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER Orwell may have called himself a marxist and fought for a marxist cause but he advocated a democratic form of socialism and democracy is total incongruous with Marxism. Marx utterly rejected democracy as the very word implies state and the pure marxist collective is stateless.
Stalinism was totalitarian as was Lenin. Both were of the communist party so I am correct.
@mongoose704 Of course we could, like most libertarians and socialists, spend all of our time trying to define what TRUE socialism or libertarianism is...arguing semantics
but I think its better that we just try to understand each other and I don't think we are too far off, depending upon what YOU believe Marxism to be.
Woah there tiger. I wasn't trying to make any of your claims sound absurd at all. I think you read too much into my post. I know you stand firmly against Lenin and One Party dictatorships. I did make a point about confusion over semantics though and that we are likely much closer to agreement than we realize.
@mongoose704 I can sort of see what your semantics issue is. The fact is Orwell was a socialist, communist, Marxist. He was sick of the sectarianism in Spain. He was definitely not against communism. Orwell knew about real communism.
@ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER Unfortunately everytime I have a discussion with a libertarian and ESPECIALLY a socialist, they try to deflect every criticism by changing the meaning of words, something Orwell noted very specifically in Animal Farm. Now it may be considered Marxist to have a democratic socialism depending on...semantics but such a system is far removed from the vision of Karl Marx who very clearly and unambiguously rejected democracy and believed that its failure is inevitable.
@mongoose704 BTW I am a libertarian and UGH is it frustrating having to wade through 2 hours of arguing what a libertarian is before we can have any meaningful discussion, lol...
and why Ayn Rand or insert libertarian philosopher is "wrong."
@ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER Do you hate yourself? Because every time you take care of yourself, before taking care of someone else, your acting in your self interest, which is selfish. : (
I'm sure you don't selfishness, its probably just the degree to which people are selfish.
"Selfishness denotes the precedence given in thought or deed to the self, i.e., self interest or self concern. It is the act of placing one's own needs or desires above the needs or desires of others. "
In order to survive every creature must at some point perform a "selfish" action.
Edit: I meant to write "I'm sure you don't hate selfishness, just the degree to which people are "overly selfish".
@mongoose704 Yes Lenin and Stalin where indeed totalitarian. However Marxism emphasizes the democratic control of the state by the working class. Thus, dictatorship of the proletariat.
A good book to read about the socialism of fascism should read Liberal Fascists. Its a good and well researched book about the ties between liberals and fascists.
Hitler being a "rightie" never made sense to me considering he was the head of the socialist party, and that the hard right was supposedly idential to the hard left. It wasn't until I realized what I taught was BS and that Hitler's leftist policies made him a leftist. The hard right = the hard left thing never made sense because how can the right, which promotes limited government, suddenly advocate the opposite? The far right should be anarchy and The 5000 Yr Leap confirmed my hunch.
@ScubaSteve1974 The words right and left have no politcal meaning anymore.
In terms of conservative and liberal as they apply to government there is no doubt Hitler was liberal. He believed in freedom of unlimited government power to control every aspect of life and he conserved none of it. He exercised every bit of his authority to impose its will on all.
@mongoose704 Right and Left certainly do have meaning. The problem is you have parties assigned to one or the other that repeatedly fail to defend that side: ie the Republicans that act like socialists. Liberal is another concept that fails to promote what it's supposed to believe. Hitler wasn't a liberal because liberals, by definition, should support liberty. He didn't, hell, none of them do. "Liberal" is the most abused word in our language.
The video doesn't claim "greatest champion of economic liberty" If it did, that would outrageous. Rothbard and Block deserve that title. LeFevre and Chodorov would be next. Then Mises, Hayek and Hazlitt.
Yea it does: go to 2:08 (near the end). The screen says
"Friedrich Hayek:
This Century's Greatest Champion of Economic Liberalism
1899 - 1992"
Oops,ok it says "Liberalism" not "liberty" but I think the video's is using the classical definition of the word liberal and not the modern illiberal definition.
Today the Germans have more socialism and more democracy than they ever had under Hitler's tyrannical regime.
FreeTheWorker 4 months ago
In Hitler's Germany the people owned neither the Workplace nor the State, German Socialists who exposed Hitler's lie and pointed out that he was not offering Socialism were the first of his many victims. They were disposed of because they knew what socialism was and were a threat to the fascist corporate state power structure.
Unless the Workers own the Work Place you do not have socialism, not even if you have democracy at the state level, socialism can only exist when the workers are free.
FreeTheWorker 4 months ago 2
The truth is Hitler lied about a great many things and pronounced his intent to deceive his people with "The Big Lie" in his own words, that he would give socialism to the people while instead giving them a state corporation was part of The Big Lie.
FreeTheWorker 4 months ago
What Hitler called socialism was also part of "The Big Lie" what he gave the people was the opposite of socialism, but he gave them the promise of socialism to win their support, and when instead he gave them tyranny where the workers were basically slaves to the state, he told the workers it was socialism.
Does the thought never occur to the capitalist that tyrants might lie and claim to represent a movement popular among the working class to gain their support while betraying their cause?
FreeTheWorker 4 months ago
@FreeTheWorker Being a slave to the state is exactly what socialism is. Socialism is defined as the government owning the means of production and distribution. If they control the goods, they control you. It doesn't matter if you vote, because politicians lie and who you vote for doesn't necessarily win. A free market system with government enforcement of property rights is the closest thing to real freedom we can ever get to.
lordnate2000 4 weeks ago
@lordnate2000 No, it's not. Socialism has several meanings, there are forms of socialism that don't even allow a state. You should read more about it instead of getting all your information from FOX News and right wingers.
FreeTheWorker 3 weeks ago
Mastery and servitude, even with the pretext of liberty, are anti-democratic. Hayek and his "fans" are (or were) bunches of criminals and imbecils.
Progresista71 7 months ago
George Orwell? I thought he was a social democrat? He fought alongside Trotskyists in the spanish civil war. He would have been the last person I would have thought of arguing for a free market.
xtremejohnny69 7 months ago
@xtremejohnny69 Orwell became anti-soviet but, as a real democrat, he never gave up being leftist. He'd never have seen as somethig good mastery and servitude.
Progresista71 7 months ago
Someone Cajun was educated in Government School System no doubt!
fullblastman 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
My Keynes Hayek: The Clash That Defined Modern Economics is published in October by W.W.Norton. See website: sites.google.com/site/wapshottkeyneshayek/
Nicholas Wapshott
nhwapshott 8 months ago
"What has always made the state a hell on earth has been precisely that man has tried to make it his heaven" -Holderlin --One of my favorite quotes from F.A. Hayeks "The Road to Serfdom" When will neo-liberals wake up and realize that collectivism has and always will, produce horrors of unspeakable death and poverty? Islamism, Nazism and Stalinism ARE all constructs of liberalist socialist structure.
SuperFifthwheel 8 months ago
The comments here contain so much emotion and so few facts: folks think what you want, but think for yourselves. Read up!
OlliHazard 9 months ago
it's true though.
all the libertarians i know have never gone hungry, have never been homeless, never got mugged, etc. ive seen more in the last 3 years than in my first 20, and like i am straight as an arrow, on top of my shit kinda guy. always have been. but it doesnt matter.
you literally have to know nothing but folk myths to believe in something like libertarianism, which is like the most forceful misunderstanding of reality i can just about imagine and i was raised catholic
CajunCommie 10 months ago
@CajunCommie You are an avowed communist and you believe Libertarianism is the "most forceful misunderstanding of reality"? What aspect of repeated famine and millions of bloody corpses leads you still to believe in the Utopian fantasy of peace, prosperity and justice under Communism?
gergenheimer 10 months ago
@gergenheimer it actually happened. the biggest increase in standard of living in human history all happened in the 20th century in first the USSR, then China, then the DPRK, then Cuba. Why don't libertarians ever shed tears for the corpses of capitalism? 140 million slaves alone died creating the wealth necessary for the creation of the factory system, not including the tens of millions of native americans let alone the hundreds of thousands of european poor and immigrants
CajunCommie 8 months ago
I used to actually be a libertarian brah remember that
CajunCommie 8 months ago
@CajunCommie Just because you "used to be a Libertarian" and switched to another ideology doesn't automatically validate your views - when I graduated from college, like a lot of artists, I was a socialist or borderline communist - then I learned some credible history, economics and learned how to think critically, not based on Utopian fantasy. I won't waste my time commenting on your assessment of standards of living in communist countries, because it's pure fantasy.
gergenheimer 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CajunCommie Oh, if you were raised catholic then you must be correct ;-)
jamo387 9 months ago
I think the greatest book Hayek ever wrote is The Pure Theory of Capital. It is also a very difficult book, but within it's pages one will find the keys to understanding the precise nature of the recent financial market crash and the subsequent recession. Mises.org has it for free. I you have the time and the disposition, go read it.
AbelianGroup 1 year ago
@AbelianGroup good thing im too smart/handsome in disposition to read dumb garbage!
CajunCommie 10 months ago
How is Regan a fan of Hayek? We saw huge deficits and debt under him, not to mention the creation of the presidents working group on financial markets.
cooljj82 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i used to be a libertarian until i had to be a poor wage worker for years. amazing what changes in a man when he no longer is living off of his folks in a safe suburb, getting all the emotional and financial support he needs.
CajunCommie 1 year ago
@CajunCommie
Hmmm. That's one of the main reasons I am a libertarian. Ever since I was 14 I have been a worker, not to mention, at the age of 18 I found my own place, paid for my own tuition, and worked two jobs to support myself. Independence taught me to have confidence in my abilities. I still earn little, but I am free and have a great future ahead of me... thanks to hard work and self-reliance. No self-pity here.
MarcNeilsen 1 year ago 53
@MarcNeilsen lol... precisely! (nice music choice btw :)
phenomenomenon3 1 year ago
@MarcNeilsen I gotta agree with you. I'm 18 now and I moved out and I've worked a few jobs to support myself. I got laid off a few months ago and have been living off my savings, the government intervention in the markets has stunted job growth so it's getting harder, but I get my degree in 8 months so that's gonna help.
xtremejohnny69 9 months ago
@MarcNeilsen Bravo ! I come from a European country where 70% of teenagers in high school dream of becoming civil servants. This country is going bankrupt. Soon.
stefool 1 month ago
@stefool You're joking about that 70% right, if not that's pretty idiotic of them. I mean Idiotic in the traditional Latin sense, not the Modern American sense.
Joe11Blue 1 month ago
@CajunCommie raveling Down the Road to Serfdom: History of Socialism from Marx to Obama | Yuri N. Maltsev.
watch?v=8mb5555PCfU
KenMacMillan 1 year ago
@CajunCommie You went from being being someone who lived off his folks in a safe suburb to wanting financial and emotional support from his fellow citizens. It seems to me that you should grow up and become an adult.
bluezoso 1 year ago
@CajunCommie SO let me get this straight: You couldn't stand on your own two feet before and you can't stand on your own two feet now. Once a mooch always a parasite. Why not be a man and take responsibility for your own life. Until you are financially independent an secure you should not be wasting your time on youtube.
carcabe 1 year ago
@CajunCommie
so you sold out your principals kuzz you want a hand out. oh i understand
JordanViewer 1 year ago
@CajunCommie Should have got a better job. Life is hard without your parents. Get over it and stop expecting the rest of the nation give you money cos you're not satisfied with your life
BillyOX4 1 year ago
@CajunCommie
Aparently thats how the MoaistRebelNews guy started out.
TheMchap123 1 year ago
@CajunCommie - you believe that all libertarians are wealthy??? Wow.
bltn77 11 months ago
@CajunCommie That sounds like someone who never really was a libertarian. Living off your folks as a man? Not much of a man, nor a libertarian. So what really happened is that your true nature was revealed. So now you want a bigger, more powerful daddy and mommy to provide the support.
jimmyjoe1975 10 months ago
@CajunCommie
Remember that the Bolsheviks played on a similar disillusionment... the preyed on the envy and the ignorance of the worker to gain power. And when they got it, they destroyed Russia. The "new elite" oppressed their subjects with a brutality that was unheard of in the days of the Czar.
Sure, i guess the whole communist thing was a success in that everyone not in government was EQUAL-- equally poor and miserable. Plus now they had ZERO chance of being the best they could be.
bobshenix 8 months ago
@CajunCommie You were NEVER a libertarian you brainwashed LIAR.
The federal reserve takes your wages and you support them you fucking moron.
BrettDunbar 7 months ago
@CajunCommie Apparently you are a young man getting all the emotional and financial support he deserves.
savestheday0 1 week ago
Hayek is one of the brightest and most articulate writers of our lifetime. Luckily, for us, the road to serfdom is back in the forefront and thanks to FOX and pundits such as Beck and Levin, younger generations who knew not the horrors of communism and de-population are now learning the truth about our American scum. ie... Obama, Clintons, FDR, LBJ, Franks, Sanders, Dodd etc... Perhaps FINALLY in our country we will see freedom return!
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago 13
@SuperGuitarman69 It's a long shot... but it's a fight worth fighting. =)
mmamolina 1 year ago
@SuperGuitarman69
To bad Bech and Levin are twats. And that "The Road to Serfdom" is probably Hayek's worst book (he even says so himself)
DerrEinzige 7 months ago
@DerrEinzige Hmmm, seems to me that someone likes Marx. You probably have Mein Kompf and Das Capital on your shelf. The communist manifesto on your night stand. And that "Communist Manifesto" is probably Marx's worst book (he even says so himself)
SuperGuitarman69 7 months ago
@SuperGuitarman69
Yes I do? You know why? Because I like to educate myself on the subject before making baseless accusations! The Communist Manifesto probably was Marx's worst book Das Capital is much more thought provoking. Just because I dont listen to neocon trash doesn't make me a communist no matter how much Mark Levin says so... You dont believe me he says its his worst book? Watch the interviews of him in his later life! He regrets writing it he became a classical liberal later in life.
DerrEinzige 7 months ago
@DerrEinzige He is a Libertarian. His views on Keynes alone are some of the most well known criticisms documented. As far as Das Capital? Communism has been used. It has been tried every where. It ends in walls and guns every single time. So, if you are not brilliant enough to see that collectivism is a failed practice? Perhaps you shouldn't comment at all.
SuperGuitarman69 7 months ago
@SuperGuitarman69
No fucking shit collectivism fails. Have you read the road to serfdom? Its from a highly ordoliberalism point of view. In that book he denounced laissez faire. His OTHER books are great, the Road to Serfdom did very little to promote the cause of liberty. How about reading what I fucking saw? Now go run along and suck Bill O'Reilly's dick.
DerrEinzige 7 months ago
@DerrEinzige Bill O'reilly? Are you kidding me? Wow how misinformed. Try watching for once instead of following the herd of liberal morons. And you didn't read Hayek. Your last statement let me know you haven't a clue of what you are talking about. Hayek is against Keynes. NOT against free market capitalism
SuperGuitarman69 7 months ago
@SuperGuitarman69
THATS WHY HE RENOUNCED THE ROAD TO SERFDOM. The Road to Serfdom was from a ordoliberalist standpoint. Maybe if your read the fucking book you would know.
Go to the wikipedia page of the road to serfdom go to the part "Role of government"
Everything there he later renounced. Why? Because he came to his senses and adopted laissez faire.
DerrEinzige 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DerrEinzige look at your last post. You said LOL NEVERMIND
SuperGuitarman69 7 months ago
@SuperGuitarman69 I would put a damper on FOX. I am here mostly because Ron Paul brought me down this path of knowledge. Without him I would have never even known where to look because I am not being taught these things nor is it shown in the media so many others looks to. If I do not know to look somewhere it is expediently harder to determine the need. This is largely due to the fact that without knowing what is available to study it is harder to study these hidden subjects.
danewheeler 1 week ago
Good stuff overall, though I find it hard to swallow that Churchill was a fan of Hayek; he was a statist through and through. He may have given a nod or some lip service to Hayekian principles, but in the end he was a big government dickwad.
032125 1 year ago 2
Ironic point about Orwell and his self proclaimed "marxist" beliefs. He wrote to a great extent about the debasing of language as the key propaganda instrument of communism (stalinism suffices here) especially as a means of deflecting criticism. Communists and socialists of all forms love to change the meaning of those isms whenever they are criticized. Orwell seems guilty of the same in claiming Marxism accepts democracy. Maybe in his definition yes but it certainly is not of Marx.
mongoose704 1 year ago
LOLWUT? Orwell was a Marxist.
ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER 1 year ago
@ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER
Uh, no. He did not like marxism, especially the totalitarian derivatives like communism.
Orwell was a democratic socialist.
mongoose704 1 year ago
@mongoose704 He hayed STALINISM he fought with the POUM, a Marxist militia.
ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER 1 year ago
@ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER Orwell may have called himself a marxist and fought for a marxist cause but he advocated a democratic form of socialism and democracy is total incongruous with Marxism. Marx utterly rejected democracy as the very word implies state and the pure marxist collective is stateless.
Stalinism was totalitarian as was Lenin. Both were of the communist party so I am correct.
mongoose704 1 year ago
@mongoose704 Of course we could, like most libertarians and socialists, spend all of our time trying to define what TRUE socialism or libertarianism is...arguing semantics
but I think its better that we just try to understand each other and I don't think we are too far off, depending upon what YOU believe Marxism to be.
mongoose704 1 year ago
@mongoose704 Please don't strawman me. I'm an Anarchist that stands firmly against Lenin and One-Party dictatorships
ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER 1 year ago
@ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER
Woah there tiger. I wasn't trying to make any of your claims sound absurd at all. I think you read too much into my post. I know you stand firmly against Lenin and One Party dictatorships. I did make a point about confusion over semantics though and that we are likely much closer to agreement than we realize.
mongoose704 1 year ago
@mongoose704 I can sort of see what your semantics issue is. The fact is Orwell was a socialist, communist, Marxist. He was sick of the sectarianism in Spain. He was definitely not against communism. Orwell knew about real communism.
ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER 1 year ago
@ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER Unfortunately everytime I have a discussion with a libertarian and ESPECIALLY a socialist, they try to deflect every criticism by changing the meaning of words, something Orwell noted very specifically in Animal Farm. Now it may be considered Marxist to have a democratic socialism depending on...semantics but such a system is far removed from the vision of Karl Marx who very clearly and unambiguously rejected democracy and believed that its failure is inevitable.
mongoose704 1 year ago
@mongoose704 BTW I am a libertarian and UGH is it frustrating having to wade through 2 hours of arguing what a libertarian is before we can have any meaningful discussion, lol...
and why Ayn Rand or insert libertarian philosopher is "wrong."
mongoose704 1 year ago
@mongoose704 I personally don't like Ayn Rand, I hate selfishness, that's all
ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER 1 year ago
@ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER Do you hate yourself? Because every time you take care of yourself, before taking care of someone else, your acting in your self interest, which is selfish. : (
I'm sure you don't selfishness, its probably just the degree to which people are selfish.
MrAlpruitt 1 year ago
@MrAlpruitt Thats the most idiotic response I've ever heard.
ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER 1 year ago
@ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER That is not an argument.
"Selfishness denotes the precedence given in thought or deed to the self, i.e., self interest or self concern. It is the act of placing one's own needs or desires above the needs or desires of others. "
In order to survive every creature must at some point perform a "selfish" action.
Edit: I meant to write "I'm sure you don't hate selfishness, just the degree to which people are "overly selfish".
Its semantics, but L2 use the right words. :*:*
MrAlpruitt 1 year ago
@MrAlpruitt thats fine...
ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER 1 year ago
@mongoose704 A democratic seizure of the state was the transitioning phase in a Marxist revolution
ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER 1 year ago
@mongoose704 Yes Lenin and Stalin where indeed totalitarian. However Marxism emphasizes the democratic control of the state by the working class. Thus, dictatorship of the proletariat.
ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER 1 year ago
A good book to read about the socialism of fascism should read Liberal Fascists. Its a good and well researched book about the ties between liberals and fascists.
davidmesaaz 2 years ago
Hitler being a "rightie" never made sense to me considering he was the head of the socialist party, and that the hard right was supposedly idential to the hard left. It wasn't until I realized what I taught was BS and that Hitler's leftist policies made him a leftist. The hard right = the hard left thing never made sense because how can the right, which promotes limited government, suddenly advocate the opposite? The far right should be anarchy and The 5000 Yr Leap confirmed my hunch.
ScubaSteve1974 2 years ago
@ScubaSteve1974 The words right and left have no politcal meaning anymore.
In terms of conservative and liberal as they apply to government there is no doubt Hitler was liberal. He believed in freedom of unlimited government power to control every aspect of life and he conserved none of it. He exercised every bit of his authority to impose its will on all.
mongoose704 1 year ago
@mongoose704 Right and Left certainly do have meaning. The problem is you have parties assigned to one or the other that repeatedly fail to defend that side: ie the Republicans that act like socialists. Liberal is another concept that fails to promote what it's supposed to believe. Hitler wasn't a liberal because liberals, by definition, should support liberty. He didn't, hell, none of them do. "Liberal" is the most abused word in our language.
ScubaSteve1974 1 year ago
Psst: How can he be this century's greatest champion of economic liberty when he died in the prior one? Is this a post-mortum award?
ScubaSteve1974 2 years ago
The video doesn't claim "greatest champion of economic liberty" If it did, that would outrageous. Rothbard and Block deserve that title. LeFevre and Chodorov would be next. Then Mises, Hayek and Hazlitt.
DoctorMurky 1 year ago
@DoctorMurky
Yea it does: go to 2:08 (near the end). The screen says
"Friedrich Hayek:
This Century's Greatest Champion of Economic Liberalism
1899 - 1992"
Oops,ok it says "Liberalism" not "liberty" but I think the video's is using the classical definition of the word liberal and not the modern illiberal definition.
ScubaSteve1974 1 year ago