This guy is a Far-Right Activist, but this other guy is a Fascist (according to this blue checkmark journalist)

[Tuur]

First people addie went after were communists. I'm seriously disappointed in some history and social studies teachers out there.

Suggestion: If you're ever in Northern Ireland, don't wear an orange sash to Mass. And yet Roman Catholics and Protestants are both Christian groups.

What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Plenty. Because two groups can despise each other doesn't mean they aren't close kin. What went on in that period of time is staring you right in the face, and yet you miss it: Communism was the type of socialism some feared, so when a different type was offered, they went with it to guard against the first.

If your history teacher didn't point this out, likely as not he didn't point out something similar in the US with the New Deal. Neither communism or fascism, it offered socialism in another form.

 

[Tuur]

No. A citation for the text that I put in bold. That fascism is a form of communism.

I've made no such claim. I've stated that fascism and communism are both types of socialism. Fascism and communism are close cousins, closer than some are comfortable with, but they are different. The results, people living under authoritarian government, are the same.

If you're wanting a cite that both fascism and communism are type of socialism, there have already been cites presented in this topic. Or you can look over the National Socialist's Party's 25 Point Program and find socialist aspects there.

One that I can't cite because it was in a textbook I haven't had access to in well over forty years was a comparative list of points of fascism and communism. The very last I remember clearest: Fascism: Strongly anti-communist. Communism: Strongly anti-fascist.

 

[Desk trauma]

Look, it's the "not real communism!" of the right.

 

[rambot]

Suggestion: If you're ever in Northern Ireland, don't wear an orange sash to Mass. And yet Roman Catholics and Protestants are both Christian groups.

What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Plenty. Because two groups can despise each other doesn't mean they aren't close kin. What went on in that period of time is staring you right in the face, and yet you miss it: Communism was the type of socialism some feared, so when a different type was offered, they went with it to guard against the first.

If your history teacher didn't point this out, likely as not he didn't point out something similar in the US with the New Deal. Neither communism or fascism, it offered socialism in another form.

Psssst.....Adolf went after Socialists when he started the Nazi party too. So..... not sure what you're going on about here.

I'm up in Canada so we never really discussed the New Deal at length but all apearances are that it kind of saved America or at least was very, very helpful.

 

[Belk]

I've made no such claim. I've stated that fascism and communism are both types of socialism. Fascism and communism are close cousins, closer than some are comfortable with, but they are different. The results, people living under authoritarian government, are the same.

If you're wanting a cite that both fascism and communism are type of socialism, there have already been cites presented in this topic. Or you can look over the National Socialist's Party's 25 Point Program and find socialist aspects there.

One that I can't cite because it was in a textbook I haven't had access to in well over forty years was a comparative list of points of fascism and communism. The very last I remember clearest: Fascism: Strongly anti-communist. Communism: Strongly anti-fascist.

This is counter indicated by the citation I put in my post. Fascism is not a form of socialism.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

One that I can't cite because it was in a textbook I haven't had access to in well over forty years was a comparative list of points of fascism and communism. The very last I remember clearest: Fascism: Strongly anti-communist. Communism: Strongly anti-fascist.

Yep, the red field on the Nazi Swastika flag was intentionally lifted from the Red Hammer and Sickle flag because the Nazis wanted it to have a similar look so that it might appeal to those that were previously sympathetic with the Communists.

I think some of the best evidence on this stuff are the actual quotes of Hitler and other Fascists toward the Capitalists and Upper-Class nobility of their day. By in large, they hated and disrespected and only tolerated them as a short term means to an end of Industrializing their society and keeping it's social cohesion. Such attitudes show they are not right wing at all, the only way you could see them that way is to swallow Trotsky's interpretation of them. And with that logic you got other problems, if countries like Germany under Kaiser Wilhelm tried to save Capitalism and their own position by instituting social programs from the Socialist playbook and avoid a Marxist revolution while doing so and eventually invent Fascism to aid with that enterprise., then what can you make of Communist countries like the Soviet Union that actually fall, or adopt some form of Capitalism like China? That seems to be at least an equal if not a great indictment of the Communist system as being untenable. (China's current system now is more technically Fascist in spite of the control of the Communist party, even though it seems like they are in the process of reverting back to their former ways with the various new reforms going on.)

 

[KCfromNC]

Yep, the red field on the Nazi Swastika flag was intentionally lifted from the Red Hammer and Sickle flag because the Nazis wanted it to have a similar look so that it might appeal to those that were previously sympathetic with the Communists.

Hmm, what does that say about the political alignment of "red" states here in the US?

Spoiler alert : absolutely nothing, the same amount it says about Nazis being communists.

I think some of the best evidence on this stuff are the actual quotes of Hitler and other Fascists toward the Capitalists and Upper-Class nobility of their day.

Which quotes are those?

 

[Ana the Ist]

First people addie went after were communists. I'm seriously disappointed in some history and social studies teachers out there.

After all the counter revolutionaries are gone....you know who communists go after first?

Communists.

To point out anyone seizing power rids themselves of communists is such a trite observation, it even applies to communists.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yep, the red field on the Nazi Swastika flag was intentionally lifted from the Red Hammer and Sickle flag because the Nazis wanted it to have a similar look so that it might appeal to those that were previously sympathetic with the Communists.

I think some of the best evidence on this stuff are the actual quotes of Hitler and other Fascists toward the Capitalists and Upper-Class nobility of their day. By in large, they hated and disrespected and only tolerated them as a short term means to an end of Industrializing their society and keeping it's social cohesion. Such attitudes show they are not right wing at all, the only way you could see them that way is to swallow Trotsky's interpretation of them. And with that logic you got other problems, if countries like Germany under Kaiser Wilhelm tried to save Capitalism and their own position by instituting social programs from the Socialist playbook and avoid a Marxist revolution while doing so and eventually invent Fascism to aid with that enterprise., then what can you make of Communist countries like the Soviet Union that actually fall, or adopt some form of Capitalism like China? That seems to be at least an equal if not a great indictment of the Communist system as being untenable. (China's current system now is more technically Fascist in spite of the control of the Communist party, even though it seems like they are in the process of reverting back to their former ways with the various new reforms going on.)

China's version of capitalisim looks remarkably like fascism.

 

[Ana the Ist]

How about we just close the book on the whole fascism vs socialism thing by admitting that it kinda looks like socialism because it involves the government assuming ultimate authority over private business but ultimately falls short of socialism's defining feature of planned markets and assumption of control over supply and demand.

Also, no one here, myself included, is that smart.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

How about we just close the book on the whole fascism vs socialism thing by admitting that it kinda looks like socialism because it involves the government assuming ultimate authority over private business but ultimately falls short of socialism's defining feature of planned markets and assumption of control over supply and demand.

Also, no one here, myself included, is that smart.

I would say that is right. Fascism has private companies "privately owned" and they can make a profit etc. but they follow the directives of the state, and that includes making the products that the state wants you to make and if you don't do that you as the CEO will be replaced and someone else who will do the state's bidding in the formal Fascism. But most of the major powers that fought in the second World War actually check the basic Fascist criteria of having privately owned companies following the national directive, led by a strong man, and lots of national pride going with the militarism and the social programs. There are only fine differences between the good side and the bad: Britian and the US had more respect for human rights, were less coercive than Germany, Italy and Japan.


It is also interesting how politicians, especially sell programs today that are literally Fascistic. The Clintons, Obama, and Biden sometimes love to use the word Partnership when describing some new venture where they will basically collude and work directly with business but what they are suggesting is basically a feel good, happy American marketing of a Fascist arrangement where they can set an agenda like Green Energy, A national overhaul of Health Insurance etc. There are some big venturers where that sort of coordination is necessary and historically needed like putting establishing highways roads, the transcontinental railway but I have no confidence on this when it comes to energy. The people pushing for Green Energy now, over oil, nuclear etc. do not know what they are doing especially Governor Gavin Newsome. Green energy, in spite of the name is not really green nor is it practical, nor is it on horizon of being workable with some kind of economy of scale.


Besides all that, I am suspicious of this based on news of Twitter and other social media censorship and shadow banning that has gone on due to the chummy relationship between the white house and those tech companies. Supposedly, that was all unfounded conspiracy theories, but now we know that was a lie, those companies were used to censor political free speech.

 

[rambot]

After all the counter revolutionaries are gone....you know who communists go after first?

Communists.

To point out anyone seizing power rids themselves of communists is such a trite observation, it even applies to communists.

ok but the 2nd group he went after were the socialists....

 

[Ana the Ist]

ok but the 2nd group he went after were the socialists....

You mean the people in his own party who didn't agree with his concept of socialism after long declaring himself a socialist?

Or other socialists?

 

[Ana the Ist]

ok but the 2nd group he went after were the socialists....

Adolf Hitler Quote

Because it seems inseparable from the social idea and we do not believe that there could ever exist a state with lasting inner health if it is not built on internal social justice, and so we have joined forces with this knowledge.

libquotes.com

"Because it seems inseparable from the social idea and we do not believe that there could ever exist a state with lasting inner health if it is not built on internal social justice, and so we have joined forces with this knowledge."


Hey...you're big on social justice too @rambot, aren't you? I mean, thank goodness the modern version doesn't include any racial scapegoating, claims of disproportionate wealth or influence or anything else that leads to genocide.

 

[rambot]

Adolf Hitler Quote

Because it seems inseparable from the social idea and we do not believe that there could ever exist a state with lasting inner health if it is not built on internal social justice, and so we have joined forces with this knowledge.

libquotes.com

"Because it seems inseparable from the social idea and we do not believe that there could ever exist a state with lasting inner health if it is not built on internal social justice, and so we have joined forces with this knowledge."


Hey...you're big on social justice too @rambot, aren't you? I mean, thank goodness the modern version doesn't include any racial scapegoating, claims of disproportionate wealth or influence or anything else that leads to genocide.

Nice try. That stretch would make a Mr. Armstrong proud.

Hitler's Version of "social justice" involved jailing homosexuals, killing transexuals and Jews. Now you are welcome to call that social justice IF you feel killing and jailing gays and jews contributes to social justice directly. This is one of those "North Korea calls itself Democratic" name games.

That's A LOT closer to the social justice that the far right side of the spectrum participates in.

The vagueness of your examples is actually kinda funny since there isn't racial scapegoating going on, and there are no claims of disproportionate wealth or influence. There IS disproportionate wealth and influence. Much like most societies that have ever existed.

I would agree that the lasting inner health of a state DOES rely on a measure of "social justice" though. The question is what that social justice looks like. I'd argue that hypersensitive white folks who don't like their kids learning about the black experience in the US are creating injustices through perpetuating ignorance and victimhood.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Nice try. That stretch would make a Mr. Armstrong proud.

Hitler's Version of "social justice" involved jailing homosexuals, killing transexuals and Jews.

Right...you should have seen the education he pushed on children.

It effectively blamed all social ills on those groups of people.

You know....much like some blame all social ills on a group of people today.

Now you are welcome to call that social justice IF you feel killing and jailing gays and jews contributes to social justice directly. This is one of those "North Korea calls itself Democratic" name games.

I can show you a convo on another thread where basically a bunch of posters collectively blame a group for...."racial inequity".

How about you @rambot? You blame anyone for racial inequity? Is anyone responsible for correcting racial inequity in your mind?

That's A LOT closer to the social justice that the far right side of the spectrum participates in.

It doesn't matter who you blame @rambot....whether it's a racial minority or straight white men....it's all the same thing.


Hatred and collective blame.

The vagueness of your examples is actually kinda funny since there isn't racial scapegoating going on, and there are no claims of disproportionate wealth or influence. There IS disproportionate wealth and influence. Much like most societies that have ever existed.

So when Hitler claimed that the Jewish people had disproportionate influence in both academia and banking....he was wrong?

They didn't hold jobs disproportionate to their numbers.?

I would agree that the lasting inner health of a state DOES rely on a measure of "social justice" though.

See? I told you that you have something in common with Hitler.

The question is what that social justice looks like. I'd argue that hypersensitive white folks who don't like their kids learning about the black experience in the US are creating injustices through perpetuating ignorance and victimhood.

I'd say that you scapegoat against a racial group just like Hitler did and imagine yourself righteous because they're a majority, not a minority, but the hatred and racism is essentially the same.

 

[rambot]

Right...you should have seen the education he pushed on children.

It effectively blamed all social ills on those groups of people.

You know....much like some blame all social ills on a group of people today.

I don't know if it's technically a Poe but if you are suggesting that what Hitler did is like CRT, then yeah, I guess it is.

I can show you a convo on another thread where basically a bunch of posters collectively blame a group for...."racial inequity".

How about you @rambot? You blame anyone for racial inequity? Is anyone responsible for correcting racial inequity in your mind?

It doesn't matter who you blame @rambot....whether it's a racial minority or straight white men....it's all the same thing.


Hatred and collective blame.

You're set on the word "blame" instead of "explain".

So when Hitler claimed that the Jewish people had disproportionate influence in both academia and banking....he was wrong?

They didn't hold jobs disproportionate to their numbers.?

"So"

See? I told you that you have something in common with Hitler.

I'd say that you scapegoat against a racial group just like Hitler did and imagine yourself righteous because they're a majority, not a minority, but the hatred and racism is essentially the same.

I also paint and love my dog. Those are other things I have in common with Hitler. I'd say you ignore injustices perpetrated by a racial group and imagine yourself as fighting for an underdog who, strangely, wields far more power in society.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I don't know if it's technically a Poe but if you are suggesting that what Hitler did is like CRT, then yeah, I guess it is.

Well let's take a look...

Hitler blamed the conditions of the German public on the jews....CRT blames the conditions of the black public on the white man.

Sure, there's plenty of data against both....but fundamentally....that's the message. What's the difference in your mind @rambot? You believe in CRT?

You're set on the word "blame" instead of "explain".

If your "explanation" requires anything of me that I would disagree with....let's just call it what it is...

Blame.

"So"

I can rephrase the exact same point if you want....and leave out the word "so".

Would you like that? Or would you prefer to just admit I haven't mischaracterized your point at all?

I also paint and love my dog. Those are other things I have in common with Hitler. I'd say you ignore injustices perpetrated by a racial group and imagine yourself as fighting for an underdog who, strangely, wields far more power in society.

Oh injustices perpetrated by racial group now.....I guess as long as we ignore the fact that the same racial group has always been central to correcting those injustices and I simply remove my brain this makes a lot of sense.

Didn't the white man fight the civil war? Didn't he stamp out slavery worldwide with only a few exceptions?

Deep inside the labyrinth of Chinese society are jobs so horrific they may as well be slaves. In India slavery is kept relatively quiet but still rampant, and in Africa, today, you could buy a slave right off the auction block if you so pleased.

You aren't fighting injustices....you're spreading racial hatred.

 

[rambot]

Well let's take a look...

Hitler blamed the conditions of the German public on the jews....CRT blames the conditions of the black public on the white man.

Sure, there's plenty of data against both....but fundamentally....that's the message. What's the difference in your mind @rambot? You believe in CRT?

Again. "blames"

If your "explanation" requires anything of me that I would disagree with....let's just call it what it is...

Blame.

Wait. So you disagree with it so it's "blame"? Seems immature.

I can rephrase the exact same point if you want....and leave out the word "so".

Would you like that? Or would you prefer to just admit I haven't mischaracterized your point at all?

I don't really care. Do what you like with that. I'm honestly, at least in this portion of the discussion not even sure what MY point is because you are arguing Hitler's treatment of the Jews is EXACTLY the same as CRT proponents and their treatment of white people, that I can't wrap my head around how that comparison is reasonable.

Oh injustices perpetrated by racial group now.....I guess as long as we ignore the fact that the same racial group has always been central to correcting those injustices and I simply remove my brain this makes a lot of sense.

Old racial problems that existed were solved but there is no residual affect and there is certainly now no racism in America?
The fact that white people in the US participated in getting rid of Jim Crow laws is about the most ridiculously stupid argument against CRT I've ever heard. As though were were another mechanism to resolve this.

100 years ago your ilk would be arguing that black folk should know there place and CRT people would be suggesting that maybe Jim Crow laws need to go. 100 years from now I wonder....

Didn't the white man fight the civil war? Didn't he stamp out slavery worldwide with only a few exceptions?

Reminds me of Homer Simpsons "Ahhhh Beer. The cause of, and solution to, so many of life's problems.". To be fair though, the "white man" that stamped out slavery in the US did so as they were working against a "system" FILLED with other white men working against them.

Deep inside the labyrinth of Chinese society are jobs so horrific they may as well be slaves. In India slavery is kept relatively quiet but still rampant, and in Africa, today, you could buy a slave right off the auction block if you so pleased.

Weren't you the guy who posted a link of an American company having child slave labour and then still finding a way to blame that on minorities and the government instead of the company who hired them?

Does Slavery Exist in America Today? - The Exodus Road

You aren't fighting injustices....you're spreading racial hatred.

You are mischaracterizing people wanting to be understood with hatred.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Again. "blames"

Wait. So you disagree with it so it's "blame"? Seems immature.

Blame-verb

assign responsibility for a fault or wrong.
"the inquiry blamed the engineer for the accident"

Are you assigning responsibility for an "injustice" or not?

It seems pretty clear that you aren't merely explaining it....as if there's no one to blame. If there were no one to blame...then I guess we better get CRT out of the schools.

You're balking over me using the correct word. You don't blame all of society for the conditions of black people....you don't blame Asians, you don't blame Latinos, and you certainly don't blame black people.

You blame white people. Let's not mince words. Own it.

I don't really care. Do what you like with that. I'm honestly, at least in this portion of the discussion not even sure what MY point is because you are arguing SO Hitler's treatment of the Jews is EXACTLY the same as CRT proponents and their treatment of white people, that I can't wrap my head around how that comparison is reasonable.

I didn't bring up CRT....you did. You're tattling on yourself. You made the comparison.

Old racial problems that existed were solved but there is no residual affect and there is certainly now no racism in America?

There's clearly racism. What did you imagine I was pointing out? It's not implicit....it's explicit.

The fact that white people in the US participated in getting rid of Jim Crow laws is about the most ridiculously stupid argument against CRT I've ever heard. As though were were another mechanism to resolve this.

You think there isn't? No group ever improved their conditions without the explicit consent and approval of the majority?

100 years ago your ilk would be arguing that black folk should know there place and CRT people would be suggesting that maybe Jim Crow laws need to go. 100 years from now I wonder....

Please, I know where I came from. My ilk faced conditions 1 generation ago these black children at Berkeley complaining about racism couldn't imagine.

Edit-also, what an embarrassing degree of ignorance about CRT. You understand that it's anti-liberal and pro-segregation, right? These aren't people who opposed Jim Crow so much as they opposed segregation. They didn't want those black children mixing with the whites and losing their "blackness" because of the evils of "whiteness".

That element hasn't really changed.

Reminds me of Homer Simpsons "Ahhhh Beer. The cause of, and solution to, so many of life's problems."

Weren't you the guy who posted a link of an American company having child slave labour and then still finding a way to blame that on minorities and the government instead of the company who hired them?

Does Slavery Exist in America Today? - The Exodus Road

The company that hired them did so because they believed they would get away with it....never said they were blameless.

You are mischaracterizing people wanting to be understood with hatred.

That you believe anyone could construct a curriculum explaining "black people" requires a degree of racism I don't share with you.