@okie,
Cycloptichorn wrote:The problem is that Okie read either
Liberal Fascism by that asshat Goldberg or something a lot like it, and it told him that yes, modern Liberals are fascists. And it gave him a whole new way to attack his political opponents, right at the time of his party's greatest weakness.
In a
not unironic parallel to our actual argument, the
reality of life in Nazi Germany and of what the Nazi party did in power does not matter much, because understanding that period of time is not the actual purpose of the person in question.
Cycloptichorn
okie wrote:Your problem, as is the problem of many so-called historians, is that you ascribe any nationalism as a right wing phenomena, which is a pretty shallow opinion, not based in fact. And so you attack the messenger instead of using evidence to buttress your opinion, so you attack me, okie, and folks like Jonah Goldberg. I think if you simply apply common sense, socialism is leftist, and whether you have an international form of it or a nationalistic form of it, it is still socialism, plain and simple, especially if compared to the context of what we understand right wing or conservative, vs. left wing or liberal politics of today. I think this has been the common fallacy thrust upon us by the European attitudes of the World War II era, the nationalistic form of socialism, or Nazism, was perhaps considered to the right of the full blown communists of that time.
The liberals hated Individualism and had a secret love affair, in their heart of hearts, with socialism-communism.
Thay hated the nazis, who were in partnership with the commies until June 22nd of 1941,
when
the nazis betrayed the liberals' darling.
The liberals pretend that
the opposite of collectivist totalitarianism (communism)
IS collectivist totalitarianism (nazism).
Wanna buy a bridge ??
Clearly, the opposite of collectivist totalitarianism is
Individualist libertarianism;
that is to say, for instance: America of the 1800s.
The domestic jurisdiction of government is
INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL to the personal liberty of the Individual Citizen;
hence, on one extreme, the
left extreme, of the scale is unlimited domestic jurisdiction
as manifested in both nazism and communism
and
on the other extreme, the
right extreme, is
feeble domestic jurisdiction
as manifested in libertarian Individualism. Its very clear and easy.
okie wrote:You can call Goldberg names if you wish, which is your common practice against anyone that disagrees with you, but I think his writings on this are pretty brilliant and insightful. By the way, he is not the only one, there are many I think. I keep citing the internet article "Hitler was a Socialist," by John Ray, whom I think provides a very detailed, lengthy, and accurate description of what Hitler and the Nazis were about, their rise to power, their policies, and the whole ball of wax; the article is buttressed with much evidence and solid reasoning.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/hitler.html Of course, the libs criticism of him is not so much based upon substance of the article, but instead personally attack him by saying "who is John Ray," and he knows nothing, blah blah blah. When you get right down to it, they can't poke holes in his basic information, but they make fun of it because it does not fit their pre-determined template that somehow Hitler was some kind of right wing fanatic. It matters not that Hitler and the Nazis hated many things conservative and instituted numerous left wing policies and all the rest of it, they simply are tone deaf when it comes to the evidence.
Hitler and Stalin were philosophically united in their contempt of the Individual citizen and of his personal freedom.
Both communism and nazism were despotism incarnate, whose opposite was and is
FREEDOM. Try it this way:
The opposite of Marx, Stalin and Hitler are Barry Goldwater, Ludwig von Mises and Hugh Hefner and Barbie Benton.
David
