Duh, they identified as socialists, which makes them left-wing regardless of any actual policies (lol) they advocated or implemented. Anyone who tries to miswing Adolf as a right-winger is a transideologyphobic shitlord.
Don't invalidate his experience, he has "Leftist" in his username so clearly he knows more about leftism than your bigoted ass. I bet the swastika is there to be more inclusive towards Hindus and Buddhists.
Pfft. If endlessly shitting on muzzies, leftists, le evil globalists, "degenerates" and rapefugees while dickriding Daddy Trump makes one alt righr, then everyone is altright.
Bruv. You can‘t compare the holocaust to the soviets starving people. Apart from that you also have to consider the lebensborn program by the nazis which planned to kill more than half of all Slavs and replace them with germans.
If you wish to compare the deaths caused by a regime then capitalism would be number one by a big margin as all deaths caused by capitalism are over 200 million.
I‘m not a tankie and you downvoting me won‘t change that haha.
I‘m not saying the USSR hasn‘t done bad stuff because the obviously have. It‘s just that what the nazis did is a lot worse you fucking wehraboo. If the USSR or the West has done more shit is up for debate.
Kulakisation was not just starving people. It involved the systematic murder of millions of "bourgeois" peasants who's crime was simply having accrued enough resources to be able to hire laborers.
Like I said I don't want to defend the USSR. I just think that, independently of why they chose their victims, that a concentration cap was definitely a worse place than a gulag. Apart from that the nazis had a lot more fucked up programs planning to kill millions of people. Look at the "Lebensborn" program for example.
So one regime's successful malicious and intentional genocide was worse than another, even though the one that's supposedly not as bad actually killed more. How can you even say that one method of mass murder was somehow worse than another? Diminishing the severity of a genocide is defending it.
Btw, the gulags were an entirely different way from the dekulakization where the USSR committed genocide against their own people.
all deaths caused by capitalism are over 200 million
I wanna see your breakdown since everytime I see something that attempts to do this, it's full of random horseshit and floaty fart logic. Then again based on your post above, that is probably what I should be expecting.
Basically any war fought against communism(fe. Vietnam) or in the middle east for oil, the workers in the third world who die at their workplace and the support of fascist regimes all over the world. You could also add ISIS and Al Quaida to that list as the US supplied them with weapons.
i could elaborate on these points, but then i'd be seriousposting, and would have to harm myself to regain the favor of the /r/drama gods.
Basically any war fought against communism(fe. Vietnam)
takes two to tango, bitch. simplistic views of a very complex time are not helpful.
or in the middle east for oil
There have been exactly zero wars in the Middle East for oil, that's a lazy catchphrase sort of political idea.
the workers in the third world who die at their workplace
Can be laid at the door of the political jurisdictions involved, as well as the economic entities who enabled or created such conditions. This statement is also so vague to not even be intelligible. Does hazy reasoning run in your family?
And boy, talk about a combination of White Savior and Noble Savage memes here -- assigning all responsibility to the US necessarily removes all agency from any and all people in the countries you're discussing. Invisibilize brown bodies much?
support of fascist regimes all over the world
There really weren't too many fascist regimes at all after WWII. Oh wait you're using the term in the current retarded sense of "regimes I consider scary and right-wing" Pretty much the only actual fascists who survived the WWII era were Franco and Salazar, neither of whom would be considered US clients. If you wanted to say "military dictatorships" then sure, but on the flip side, the alternatives were often worse, as in garden spots like Romania and Cambodia. Compare and contrast the post-WWII era in Greece (military dictatorship) and Albania (communist dictatorship).
You could also add ISIS and Al Quaida to that list as the US supplied them with weapons.
You could also add Hershey's to the US list as they supplied the US Army with chocolate.
If you're referring to supplying weapons to insurgents, and them ending up in wrong hands, sure. Happens all the time, warsare messy bitches.
Still waiting for the list btw -- I'm sure it will be enlightening. I hope you're counting the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918, since man, if the US had used its super science to cure that one, instead of hoarding it and only treating white cishet AmeriKKKans, there's another 20-50 million deaths you can lay at the door of Ronald Reagan, that reactionary bourgoise capitalist pig-dog.
The identified as anti-socialist and proclaimed themselves a "third way" to restore the Ancien Regimes of Europe and were far-right by every possible definition of the word, going back to the 17th century, but I guess if you want you can be a stereotypical retard american who gets his politics from satellite radio and church meetings.
White nationalist groups are far larger, more powerful, and influential but all anyone can talk about is a few exit teenagers who disappeared once Facebook and reddit stopped allowing them to organize on their platforms.
The only thing they do is feed delusional conservatives propaganda material so they can keep up the 30 year long narrative that "both sides are the same."
It is a relevant problem, because just the other day we had more people arrested in my city because they assaulted a demonstration since they have no god damned clue what white supremacists actually are. The fact they just assault people and are too weak to follow through with it doesn't matter to me, when I actually interact with it in my life.
As far as I can tell, the only time that problems happen in Berkeley is when the fascists—oh sorry, whatever name you prefer, like "white identitarians"—show up. At all other times, it's just a peaceful community of smelly hippies.
The “it’s right in the name” is the response to “Antifa are the real fascists” not when anyone says Antifa are a bunch of violent thugs. Antifa are pretty openly violent thugs, just they are supposed to only be violent thugs towards fascists. They are dumb as hell though so they are terrible at spotting fascists and mostly bash trash cans and yell at anyone who comes near Berkeley wearing a collared shirt.
The identified as anti-socialist and proclaimed themselves a "third way" to restore the Ancien Regimes of Europe and were far-right by every possible definition of the word, going back to the 17th century, but I guess if you want you can be a stereotypical retard american who gets his politics from satellite radio and church meetings you can.
Western civilization is the historical novelty of an atheistic and tolerant society based on science, individualism, and the sacrifice of tradition on the alter of progress.
Fascists were so anti-western that they loved Islam.
Their economics were left, their social policies were right. By modern standards, the state seizing control of the means of production to redistribute amongst the population, in addition to emphasis on uniform public education (as opposed to individual family ideals) are left wing. Restoring "traditional values" through social purification are right wing ideals.
That's why both the left and the right call each other nazis. It's silly to call the Nazis completely left OR completely right. Literally no right-winger wants the government to take over businesses, over-print currency to solve debt issues, or attempt use public education to replace the family (Hitler youth).
Tonnes of right wingers support economically ‘collectivist’ (or redistributive) policies, American “”””fiscal conservatism”””” is also known in most of the world as economic liberalism, supported by the liberals of the 19th century who believed in open markets and free trade. Reactionaries have always opposed this.
Economic liberalism is in no way a collectivist/redistributive system, it's the exact opppsite. Reactionaries have always opposed it because it isn't collectivist.
But many rightwingers favor some bussinesses, some don't care about the debt and many would try to shape families and culture to their favourite religion or nationalist nonsense via public education.
One is regulatory capture (a market failure), and 'crony capitalism' (either a market failure or a feature of the right depending on where you're standing). One is nationalization, a leftist position. The first stays inside the law, the second disregards property rights in the name of the people.
Fascism borrowed it, like it borrows other left positions like land reform, to create a 'third way' that was neither a liberal democracy or Bolshevik communism.
My point is that the economic points of fascism are a lesser aspect to the project; instead, the national cult, the strongman cult, and the concentration between government, bussiness and (some parts of) labor are way more important.
Is there a lot of difference between the government overtaking a bussiness or the bussiness overtaking the government if it gets bad enough?
Would be a lot of difference between national capitalism and national socialism at the end? It'd be naive to say something is not fascism just because it didn't behave 100% like Italy or Germany did. The worst parts of the nationalist right are not so different at the end.
Yes, there would be a difference. You can compare the 'national capitalist' Gilded Age USA and Nazi Germany.
For example, during the Gilded Age, Esso exerted a massive amount of political influence to stifle regulation, competition, and unions in pursuit of maximum profit. IG Farben, when nationalized by the Nazis, produced breakthroughs in synthetic oil and rubber, and chemical weapons in pursuit of the Nazi government's goals (war and autarky).
The social aspects are typically more right wing. The right does enjoy its strong, forceful actors and flag waving. They are not unique to the right, however. While Obama was not a particularly 'forceful' strongman, he did have a large following due to his charisma, and told Congress he would go over their head with his Executive Orders (I've got a pen, and I've got a phone.). A more traditional one would be Lenin and his Vanguardism.
The big difference between the American right and Fascism is the end goal. A Fascist regime seeks to use a mix of left and right policies to bind the People to the State, and use them to do the State's will. Even in Trump's wildest dreams, he's not going to shackle the American people to go full 100 Million Hearts Beating As One.
For example, during the Gilded Age, Esso exerted a massive amount of political influence to stifle regulation, competition, and unions in pursuit of maximum profit. IG Farben, when nationalized by the Nazis, produced breakthroughs in synthetic oil and rubber, and chemical weapons in pursuit of the Nazi government's goals (war and autarky).
I'm not talking about the gilded age right, I'm talking about the nationalist right (see Trump for a prototype of how could that go). If there are enough bussiness interests that think beyond maximizing some profits and more about an ultranationalist ideology is not too farfetched (see the media of the US right and its promiscuous relationship with the state to have an idea of how that could work).
The social aspects are typically more right wing. The right does enjoy its strong, forceful actors and flag waving. They are not unique to the right, however. While Obama was not a particularly 'forceful' strongman, he did have a large following due to his charisma, and told Congress he would go over their head with his Executive Orders (I've got a pen, and I've got a phone.). A more traditional one would be Lenin and his Vanguardism.
Without offense, but that's a laughable comparison. There is one difference between a leader being popular and charismatic and an ideology promoting blind acceptation of whatever the leader says (see Trump and how there is a system around him so people accept his bullshit). It's easier to find criticism of Obama on the left than criticism of Trump on the right by an order of magnitude.
Let's not even talk too much about the executive orders, because it's fairly evident that they weren't "abused" so much compared to other administrations and it was a fairly extreme circumstance. And again, it's not like he wasn't criticized by the left for doing that.
The big difference between the American right and Fascism is the end goal. A Fascist regime seeks to use a mix of left and right policies to bind the People to the State, and use them to do the State's will. Even in Trump's wildest dreams, he's not going to shackle the American people to go full 100 Million Hearts Beating As One.
No, the big difference is how overt are about using violence. Trump would want to bind people to his will and have absolute powers (see his tweet about having powers of pardoning himself), but he is too blatantly stupid to achieve it.
The nationalist right deteriorates institutions until there is no independence nor fairness, the fascists would take government by force without hesitating.
The economics are just a mere detail when considering this.
Literally no right-winger wants the government to take over businesses, over-print currency to solve debt issues, or attempt use public education to replace the family (Hitler youth). These are things associated with the extreme left.
The first right-wingers were literal monarchists and most monarchist parties in Europe support all of these things. Take your dumbass Americuck political science somewhere else.
IMO a lot of the ideological weirdness comes from the facts that A. Hitler was actually a bit lazy in terms of substance rather than being a rabid ideologue like Stalin and B. European conservatives (going back to Bismarck) were monarchists/statists rather than the allegedly anti-statist American conservatism of today and thus were often willing to do "socialist" things.
I'd argue that the best description (sacrificing for the sake of simplicity) of Hitler and the Nazis would be that they were an attempt at a modernist reboot of imperial Germany. Getting weirder, I'd argue that in spite of Stalin being much more of a Marxist ideologue the Soviet Union wound up being the bigger "success" story in terms of being a modernist reboot of the old order.
History can be weird. Ask a turn-of-the century observer and they'd have told you that Russia was destined for Jew-hating fascism and that Germany would wind up communist/socialist.
But we're proud Trump nationalists and there's nothing wrong with that? No siree. No part of the National Socialist name that alludes to the glorious tradition of nationalism.
So if the Jews know that Nazis will claim they're liars, and they claim Nazis are right-wing, does that makes this all a ploy to get them to convert to leftism?
I am both highly educated (double degree in computer science with all honors available, solo singing, composition, piano - currently learning the flute), and a fan of Prokofiev. I have been practicing his second piano concerto for over a year, almost every day. And while I'm no Yuja Wang, I can play it decently.
If you disagree with what I have said there, you are free to read the rest of this thread where I have substantiated that claim for those that doubt it.
Also, keep the abuse to yourself. It speaks very poorly of you, same as your spelling decisions and the lack of punctuation.
You joke but the number of now alt right spergs that got into politics after MUH VIDEYA gamergate is not accident. Bannon was WOW gold farmer, he knew the untapped potential of stinky basement virgins.
Gaming journalism is the most retarded shit in the world. Whether that's because of le SJWs or the fact that gaming journalists are basically untalented journalists who couldn't get a job in a normal news agency is another issue.
When im playinv games I quite often how imagine much better my gaming experience could be of it weren't for SJWs spoiling it with their weird idea that women are as equal as men. I blame SJWs for the whole battlefront 2 mess. What are they thinking?
I want to start a political party that espouses hardcore communist and SJW positions. It will be called "The American Patriot Alt-Right Conservative Christian Wall Street Party." That should give us at least 50 years of drama involving people claiming that the Alt-Right was all about promoting tranny bathroom rights and communal toothbrushes.
National Socialism is a very strange ideology--almost undeniably right-wing in its rhetoric on ideas such as the nation, the volk, power, etc. but also somewhat similar to socialism in regards to many of its economic practices. It will never cease to confuse lay people unversed in political science.
I believe strongly in the existence of nations. Practically everyone except for extreme globalists do. The point is not that the Nazis were nationalists but rather that they were extreme in some of their stances on nationalism, even compared to their counterparts in Europe and the Americas who would be very right-wing/nationalistic compared to their states today.
Good. Enforce the borders, illegals out, voter ID, rapefugees out, Build That Wall. End sanctuary cities, free Timmy Robinson and end globalist scheming. MAGA!
Oh god, I had a recent discussion with someone else who thought this.
When you can start to say that Nazis, USSR, etc. were socialist the term simply ceases to mean anything as then everything can reasonably called socialism.
The only relevant definition of socialism is that it's the school of egalitarian economics. Meaning that there is democratic control over the economy.
Social programs and socialism have nothing to do with each other per se. Not even the slightest bit.
Because social programs do not necessarily change nothing about the order of the economy.
Social programs who are meant to divert income inequality to strengthen the choice of the individual can be socialist (e.g. ubi)
Social programs, who are meant alleviate tensions are not (e.g. free grain allotments in rome).
Also, the NSDAP actually had socialist programmatic points (I.e. the 25 point program is often cited by guys like him/her) but those were only window dressing to appeal to the common worker, not actual things Hitler intended to do and were dropped long before he got in power. Those that remained served as window dressing to partly justify his attacks on actual socialist.
Hitler was enabled and funded by german capitalists like Krupp and Tyssen, which accurately shows that he did not in any way sought to combat these big cooperations.
after he got in power unions were banned, so was the social democratic party and socialist were put into jail.
But still the window dressing remained to ensure support by common people and stuff like worker's day were introduced.
In the early 20s, Hitler will commonly refer to himself as a socialist. How ever, if you read his speeches from 22 onwards you'll notice a shift in discourse (it is almost as if socialism was popular during a time of capitalist crisis and the nazi party was trying to ride the wave and get as many people as possible to join them)
Some quotes, just so you know I ain't pulling this out of my ass:
"There are only two possibilities in Germany; do not imagine that the people will forever go with the middle party, the party of compromises; one day it will turn to those who have most consistently foretold the coming ruin and have sought to dissociate themselves from it. And that party is either the Left: and then God help us! for it will lead us to complete destruction - to Bolshevism, or else it is a party of the Right which at the last, when the people is in utter despair, when it has lost all its spirit and has no longer any faith in anything, is determined for its part ruthlessly to seize the reins of power - that is the beginning of resistance of which I spoke a few minutes ago. Here, too, there can be no compromise - there are only two possibilities: either victory of the Aryan, or annihilation of the Aryan and the victory of the Jew."
Hitler, in a speech from 1922, denouncing leftist ideology.
"There are no such things as classes: they cannot be. Class means caste and caste means race."
Hitler, in the same speech, completely denying the core concept of the left, class struggle.
"What right do these people have to demand a share of property or even in administration?... The employer who accepts the responsibility for production also gives the workpeople their means of livelihood. Our greatest industrialists are not concerned with the acquisition of wealth or with good living, but, above all else, with responsibility and power. They have worked their way to the top by their own abilities, and this proof of their capacity – a capacity only displayed by a higher race – gives them the right to lead."
Hitler to Max Amann, defending the right of business owners to keep the means of production... you know... the thing socialists fight against.
And, I'd to remind you, Hitler's definition of socialis is not the common academic definition:
"Socialist' I define from the word 'social; meaning in the main ‘social equity’. A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency. Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true socialism is not. Marxism places no value on the individual, or individual effort, of efficiency; true Socialism values the individual and encourages him in individual efficiency, at the same time holding that his interests as an individual must be in consonance with those of the community. All great inventions, discoveries, achievements were first the product of an individual brain. It is charged against me that I am against property, that I am an atheist. Both charges are false."
-Hitler, in 1938, defining his brand of socialism... that is surprisingly anti socialist.
Left and right are concepts that came form the french revolution
Right = pro monarchy, aristocracy/conservatism
Left = pro poor people/change
This translates into all major early 20th century politics where the leftists usually sat left in a parliament and were usually pro working class and poor people, generally anti authoritarian or social hierarchy, while the right were pro hierarchy and old norms.
These days left and right refers to both social progressivism vs social conservatism and economically socialist vs economically capitalist
I am both highly educated (double degree in computer science with all honors available, solo singing, composition, piano - currently learning the flute), and a fan of Prokofiev. I have been practicing his second piano concerto for over a year, almost every day. And while I'm no Yuja Wang, I can play it decently.
If you disagree with what I have said there, you are free to read the rest of this thread where I have substantiated that claim for those that doubt it.
Also, keep the abuse to yourself. It speaks very poorly of you, same as your spelling decisions and the lack of punctuation.
168 comments
1 SnapshillBot 2018-06-07
Don't even try to kinkshame me. My kinks are my business.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-06-07
this but of the 20th century German edition
1 kwawi 2018-06-07
Duh, they identified as socialists, which makes them left-wing regardless of any actual policies (lol) they advocated or implemented. Anyone who tries to miswing Adolf as a right-winger is a transideologyphobic shitlord.
1 allendrio 2018-06-07
NIGHT OF THE LONG KNIVES NEVER HAPPENED
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
HITLER VV GUD BOI HE DINDU NUFFIN.
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
HITLER VV GUD BOI HE DINDU NUFFIN.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Actually, class massacres happen in every communist country
1 alphetasauce 2018-06-07
You just ackshualleed. Wow. I didn't think the meme was real.
1 allendrio 2018-06-07
Actually, hes just retarded
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
It’s ok to kill the Jews so long as you call them kulaks
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
Whataboutism lol. Both the Soviets and Nazis killed many people, but their ideologies were completely different.
1 kwawi 2018-06-07
Don't invalidate his experience, he has "Leftist" in his username so clearly he knows more about leftism than your bigoted ass. I bet the swastika is there to be more inclusive towards Hindus and Buddhists.
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
He's actually an alt-right agendaposter.
1 kwawi 2018-06-07
Pfft. If endlessly shitting on muzzies, leftists, le evil globalists, "degenerates" and rapefugees while dickriding Daddy Trump makes one alt righr, then everyone is altright.
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
Bruv. You can‘t compare the holocaust to the soviets starving people. Apart from that you also have to consider the lebensborn program by the nazis which planned to kill more than half of all Slavs and replace them with germans.
If you wish to compare the deaths caused by a regime then capitalism would be number one by a big margin as all deaths caused by capitalism are over 200 million.
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
Imagine being this much of a tankie.
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
I‘m not a tankie and you downvoting me won‘t change that haha.
I‘m not saying the USSR hasn‘t done bad stuff because the obviously have. It‘s just that what the nazis did is a lot worse you fucking wehraboo. If the USSR or the West has done more shit is up for debate.
1 WiggityWatchinNews 2018-06-07
Kulakisation was not just starving people. It involved the systematic murder of millions of "bourgeois" peasants who's crime was simply having accrued enough resources to be able to hire laborers.
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
Like I said I don't want to defend the USSR. I just think that, independently of why they chose their victims, that a concentration cap was definitely a worse place than a gulag. Apart from that the nazis had a lot more fucked up programs planning to kill millions of people. Look at the "Lebensborn" program for example.
1 WiggityWatchinNews 2018-06-07
So one regime's successful malicious and intentional genocide was worse than another, even though the one that's supposedly not as bad actually killed more. How can you even say that one method of mass murder was somehow worse than another? Diminishing the severity of a genocide is defending it.
Btw, the gulags were an entirely different way from the dekulakization where the USSR committed genocide against their own people.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Wrong
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
Nice rebuttal there mate. You sure got me.
1 CarnistHappyCamp 2018-06-07
I wanna see your breakdown since everytime I see something that attempts to do this, it's full of random horseshit and floaty fart logic. Then again based on your post above, that is probably what I should be expecting.
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
Basically any war fought against communism(fe. Vietnam) or in the middle east for oil, the workers in the third world who die at their workplace and the support of fascist regimes all over the world. You could also add ISIS and Al Quaida to that list as the US supplied them with weapons.
1 CarnistHappyCamp 2018-06-07
i could elaborate on these points, but then i'd be seriousposting, and would have to harm myself to regain the favor of the /r/drama gods.
takes two to tango, bitch. simplistic views of a very complex time are not helpful.
There have been exactly zero wars in the Middle East for oil, that's a lazy catchphrase sort of political idea.
Can be laid at the door of the political jurisdictions involved, as well as the economic entities who enabled or created such conditions. This statement is also so vague to not even be intelligible. Does hazy reasoning run in your family?
And boy, talk about a combination of White Savior and Noble Savage memes here -- assigning all responsibility to the US necessarily removes all agency from any and all people in the countries you're discussing. Invisibilize brown bodies much?
There really weren't too many fascist regimes at all after WWII. Oh wait you're using the term in the current retarded sense of "regimes I consider scary and right-wing" Pretty much the only actual fascists who survived the WWII era were Franco and Salazar, neither of whom would be considered US clients. If you wanted to say "military dictatorships" then sure, but on the flip side, the alternatives were often worse, as in garden spots like Romania and Cambodia. Compare and contrast the post-WWII era in Greece (military dictatorship) and Albania (communist dictatorship).
You could also add Hershey's to the US list as they supplied the US Army with chocolate.
If you're referring to supplying weapons to insurgents, and them ending up in wrong hands, sure. Happens all the time, warsare messy bitches.
Still waiting for the list btw -- I'm sure it will be enlightening. I hope you're counting the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918, since man, if the US had used its super science to cure that one, instead of hoarding it and only treating white cishet AmeriKKKans, there's another 20-50 million deaths you can lay at the door of Ronald Reagan, that reactionary bourgoise capitalist pig-dog.
1 alphetasauce 2018-06-07
You forgot to mention USSR supporting maoist China and North Korea. And supplying weapons to Vietcong which also made their way into the Khmer rouge.
1 CarnistHappyCamp 2018-06-07
the crimes of Communism are legion, and no mere mortal can meme them all
1 DoubleCheekedUp 2018-06-07
i aint a tankie but if i see a fine ass apparatchica my bloodline bout to be a breadline 😤😤😤😤😤😤😤
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
My comrade
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
Actually, the nazis didn't kill by class but by political leanings during the knight of the long knives/
1 PizzaHoe696969 2018-06-07
The identified as anti-socialist and proclaimed themselves a "third way" to restore the Ancien Regimes of Europe and were far-right by every possible definition of the word, going back to the 17th century, but I guess if you want you can be a stereotypical retard american who gets his politics from satellite radio and church meetings.
1 TheGreatWolfRuss 2018-06-07
North Korea is entirely democratic (hint: it's in the name.)
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Trans women are women (it’s in the name)
1 drvgyn2 2018-06-07
the terms right and left wing are retarded
1 CordialCalamity 2018-06-07
FTFY
1 aiyooooo 2018-06-07
look at this and tell me there aren't left and right wings, dumb ass.
1 maddestofcats 2018-06-07
Damn it really do be like that.
1 ItsSugar 2018-06-07
Got 'em.
1 Plexipus 2018-06-07
Yah but the left wing flaps and the other one just punches the eagle in the face
1 tktkkablewie 2018-06-07
I see port and starboard wings.
1 TheVeryNicestPerson 2018-06-07
DICK AND BALLS
1 BIknkbtKitNwniS 2018-06-07
The left: Just because National Socialism has socialism in the name doesn't mean they are socialists, you utter buffoon
Also the left: How can you call antifa violent thugs? All they do is oppose fascism. Its right in the name, you shitbag.
1 Starship_Litterbox_C 2018-06-07
https://i.imgur.com/I9ZdtUA.gifv
1 BIknkbtKitNwniS 2018-06-07
That's homophobic.
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-06-07
no u
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
shut up
1 watermark02 2018-06-07
White nationalist groups are far larger, more powerful, and influential but all anyone can talk about is a few exit teenagers who disappeared once Facebook and reddit stopped allowing them to organize on their platforms.
1 allendrio 2018-06-07
remem all those mayo left wing antifas who went on shooting sprees? breed of peace
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
Literally 0 antifa members have gone on shooting sprees.
1 allendrio 2018-06-07
thats 1 one to many, ban antifa
1 uniqueguy263 2018-06-07
Baseball guy. He almost killed Steve scalise. Can't think of a single other one, but it's happened
1 Plexipus 2018-06-07
Thought baseball guy was a Bernout?
1 uniqueguy263 2018-06-07
I think both
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
Baseball guy wasn't antifa lol.
1 Mexagon 2018-06-07
Baseball guy tried shooting up a bunch of senators. Antifa just can't aim for shit.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Lefties usually leave their murder sprees to their Uslamic servants
1 error404brain 2018-06-07
Chad leftist use their slave muslims to commit terror plot vs virgin right winger that need to do it themselves.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Yes.
1 error404brain 2018-06-07
Another way in which leftist are truly superior.
Do the right wing have a slave race ? Checkmat, libtard.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
The left wing are a slave race
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
Imagine being this autistic lmao
1 Feanorfanclub 2018-06-07
lol fuck off. How many times have we had riots at Berkeley, and how many tiki torch marches have we had?
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
Tiki torch marches got someone killed and berkely riots didn't, so white nationalists are definititely in the lead here.
1 pizzashill 2018-06-07
Dude that was one of many. They legit kill more people yearly than any one group in the US.
1 pizzashill 2018-06-07
Like you realize nobody other than retarded American conservatives thinks antifa is a relevant problem, right?
Go look at any FBI report on domestic terrorist threat.
Hint: White nationalists are at the top. Look at any police report in general.
They all fear white nationalists/right wing domestic terrorists.
Right-wing domestic terrorists kill more people in the US yearly than anyone else.
https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_ECDB_IslamistFarRightHomicidesUS_Infographic_Feb2017.pdf
1 gilmore606 2018-06-07
it's kind of embarassing for antifa that literally no one who matters is afraid of them tbh
1 pizzashill 2018-06-07
The only thing they do is feed delusional conservatives propaganda material so they can keep up the 30 year long narrative that "both sides are the same."
1 gilmore606 2018-06-07
ok but why downvote me i mean you're big powerful famous pizzashill and i'm just that guy who replies wow this
it's pretty hurtful, like more hurtful than antifa even
1 pizzashill 2018-06-07
What makes you think I downvoted you or care enough to downvote you?
1 uniqueguy263 2018-06-07
The Reddit algorithm. 1 gets fudged to 0 or 2 all the time
1 ItsSugar 2018-06-07
Get off the cross you fucking fag.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Antifa aren’t a problem only because they are weak ineffective faggots.
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
Can you please go back to MDE, the_Daddy or where ever you come from?
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Can you please go back to TransPassing
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
What the fuck is transpassing? I'm not an SJW you retard.
1 Feanorfanclub 2018-06-07
It is a relevant problem, because just the other day we had more people arrested in my city because they assaulted a demonstration since they have no god damned clue what white supremacists actually are. The fact they just assault people and are too weak to follow through with it doesn't matter to me, when I actually interact with it in my life.
1 heavenlytoaster 2018-06-07
And nobody but retarded Dem party shills think there's a massive cabal of white supremacists
1 pizzashill 2018-06-07
By retarded dem party, do you mean law enforcement and FBI?
1 preserved_fish 2018-06-07
As far as I can tell, the only time that problems happen in Berkeley is when the fascists—oh sorry, whatever name you prefer, like "white identitarians"—show up. At all other times, it's just a peaceful community of smelly hippies.
1 Feanorfanclub 2018-06-07
Look dude if we're going to pretend Milo or Shapiro are fascists we're not going to go very far.
1 preserved_fish 2018-06-07
Both of those Jews certainly promote boot-licking.
1 Feanorfanclub 2018-06-07
wew lad
1 preserved_fish 2018-06-07
You don't think Jews can be authoritarians?
1 Crusader_1096 2018-06-07
What numbers are you basing that on? Seems like antifa organizations are more numerous with more members globally than WN groups.
1 JamesRobotoMD 2018-06-07
The “it’s right in the name” is the response to “Antifa are the real fascists” not when anyone says Antifa are a bunch of violent thugs. Antifa are pretty openly violent thugs, just they are supposed to only be violent thugs towards fascists. They are dumb as hell though so they are terrible at spotting fascists and mostly bash trash cans and yell at anyone who comes near Berkeley wearing a collared shirt.
1 FcpEcvRtq 2018-06-07
It still applies to this istance.
1: Nazis weren't socialists.
2: It's literally in their name, faggot.
2: Antifa are fascists
1: It's literally in their name, sauerkraut.
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-06-07
I know you think renting a van will help you get thr 144 stacies you desire but I implore you pls don't.
1 JamesRobotoMD 2018-06-07
Topical!
1 PizzaHoe696969 2018-06-07
The identified as anti-socialist and proclaimed themselves a "third way" to restore the Ancien Regimes of Europe and were far-right by every possible definition of the word, going back to the 17th century, but I guess if you want you can be a stereotypical retard american who gets his politics from satellite radio and church meetings you can.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
If restoring Western Civilization is right, I don’t wanna be wrong.
1 PizzaHoe696969 2018-06-07
Western civilization is the historical novelty of an atheistic and tolerant society based on science, individualism, and the sacrifice of tradition on the alter of progress.
Fascists were so anti-western that they loved Islam.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
That is the dumbest thing I have heard today. Congratulations.
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
The Nazis loving Islam is historical fact you retard.
1 ChaddingTater 2018-06-07
liberals = nazis confirmed
1 Neronoah 2018-06-07
And tankies = nazis by the horseshoe theorem, so liberals = tankies. QED
1 PizzaHoe696969 2018-06-07
tfw when liberalism died in the 00s and what we are left with is two shades of far-right.
1 ChaddingTater 2018-06-07
Liberalism is gayer than aids sweetie, fascism is the one true path
1 kippot 2018-06-07
You should start talking to yourself, you would be hearing completely retarded shit all the time!
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
That would be a duplication of effort
1 scrombobulon 2018-06-07
Their economics were left, their social policies were right. By modern standards, the state seizing control of the means of production to redistribute amongst the population, in addition to emphasis on uniform public education (as opposed to individual family ideals) are left wing. Restoring "traditional values" through social purification are right wing ideals.
That's why both the left and the right call each other nazis. It's silly to call the Nazis completely left OR completely right. Literally no right-winger wants the government to take over businesses, over-print currency to solve debt issues, or attempt use public education to replace the family (Hitler youth).
1 cimarafa 2018-06-07
Tonnes of right wingers support economically ‘collectivist’ (or redistributive) policies, American “”””fiscal conservatism”””” is also known in most of the world as economic liberalism, supported by the liberals of the 19th century who believed in open markets and free trade. Reactionaries have always opposed this.
1 scrombobulon 2018-06-07
Economic liberalism is in no way a collectivist/redistributive system, it's the exact opppsite. Reactionaries have always opposed it because it isn't collectivist.
1 cimarafa 2018-06-07
Yes, that’s exactly what I just said.
1 scrombobulon 2018-06-07
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I thought you were disagreeing with me
1 db1923 2018-06-07
You should continue arguing anyways for the drama
1 scrombobulon 2018-06-07
Quit trying to spray me with your mayo
1 db1923 2018-06-07
Lmao aasuming im a mayo, nice try soyboy
1 CarnistHappyCamp 2018-06-07
now make up and kiss, you two deserve it.
1 Neronoah 2018-06-07
But many rightwingers favor some bussinesses, some don't care about the debt and many would try to shape families and culture to their favourite religion or nationalist nonsense via public education.
1 redmako101 2018-06-07
One is regulatory capture (a market failure), and 'crony capitalism' (either a market failure or a feature of the right depending on where you're standing). One is nationalization, a leftist position. The first stays inside the law, the second disregards property rights in the name of the people.
Fascism borrowed it, like it borrows other left positions like land reform, to create a 'third way' that was neither a liberal democracy or Bolshevik communism.
1 Neronoah 2018-06-07
My point is that the economic points of fascism are a lesser aspect to the project; instead, the national cult, the strongman cult, and the concentration between government, bussiness and (some parts of) labor are way more important.
Is there a lot of difference between the government overtaking a bussiness or the bussiness overtaking the government if it gets bad enough?
Would be a lot of difference between national capitalism and national socialism at the end? It'd be naive to say something is not fascism just because it didn't behave 100% like Italy or Germany did. The worst parts of the nationalist right are not so different at the end.
1 redmako101 2018-06-07
Yes, there would be a difference. You can compare the 'national capitalist' Gilded Age USA and Nazi Germany.
For example, during the Gilded Age, Esso exerted a massive amount of political influence to stifle regulation, competition, and unions in pursuit of maximum profit. IG Farben, when nationalized by the Nazis, produced breakthroughs in synthetic oil and rubber, and chemical weapons in pursuit of the Nazi government's goals (war and autarky).
The social aspects are typically more right wing. The right does enjoy its strong, forceful actors and flag waving. They are not unique to the right, however. While Obama was not a particularly 'forceful' strongman, he did have a large following due to his charisma, and told Congress he would go over their head with his Executive Orders (I've got a pen, and I've got a phone.). A more traditional one would be Lenin and his Vanguardism.
The big difference between the American right and Fascism is the end goal. A Fascist regime seeks to use a mix of left and right policies to bind the People to the State, and use them to do the State's will. Even in Trump's wildest dreams, he's not going to shackle the American people to go full 100 Million Hearts Beating As One.
1 Neronoah 2018-06-07
I'm not talking about the gilded age right, I'm talking about the nationalist right (see Trump for a prototype of how could that go). If there are enough bussiness interests that think beyond maximizing some profits and more about an ultranationalist ideology is not too farfetched (see the media of the US right and its promiscuous relationship with the state to have an idea of how that could work).
Without offense, but that's a laughable comparison. There is one difference between a leader being popular and charismatic and an ideology promoting blind acceptation of whatever the leader says (see Trump and how there is a system around him so people accept his bullshit). It's easier to find criticism of Obama on the left than criticism of Trump on the right by an order of magnitude.
Let's not even talk too much about the executive orders, because it's fairly evident that they weren't "abused" so much compared to other administrations and it was a fairly extreme circumstance. And again, it's not like he wasn't criticized by the left for doing that.
No, the big difference is how overt are about using violence. Trump would want to bind people to his will and have absolute powers (see his tweet about having powers of pardoning himself), but he is too blatantly stupid to achieve it.
The nationalist right deteriorates institutions until there is no independence nor fairness, the fascists would take government by force without hesitating.
The economics are just a mere detail when considering this.
1 MisterLipton 2018-06-07
The first right-wingers were literal monarchists and most monarchist parties in Europe support all of these things. Take your dumbass Americuck political science somewhere else.
1 solowng 2018-06-07
IMO a lot of the ideological weirdness comes from the facts that A. Hitler was actually a bit lazy in terms of substance rather than being a rabid ideologue like Stalin and B. European conservatives (going back to Bismarck) were monarchists/statists rather than the allegedly anti-statist American conservatism of today and thus were often willing to do "socialist" things.
I'd argue that the best description (sacrificing for the sake of simplicity) of Hitler and the Nazis would be that they were an attempt at a modernist reboot of imperial Germany. Getting weirder, I'd argue that in spite of Stalin being much more of a Marxist ideologue the Soviet Union wound up being the bigger "success" story in terms of being a modernist reboot of the old order.
History can be weird. Ask a turn-of-the century observer and they'd have told you that Russia was destined for Jew-hating fascism and that Germany would wind up communist/socialist.
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
We should also call North Korea a democratic country, it says so right in the name!
1 westofthetracks 2018-06-07
pretty sure rightoids reserve that one for black people. the correct term is "terrorists" or possibly "the real fascists," get your strawman right
1 spookyguy109 2018-06-07
lolberts are the dumbest people on the political spectrum.
1 TheVeryNicestPerson 2018-06-07
Wait what's a lolbert? I think it has something to do with Dilbert but need some help here.
1 spookyguy109 2018-06-07
lolbert=lolbertarian aka libertarians.
1 GuillotinesNOW 2018-06-07
We just call them pedophiles here.
1 AIDS_IN_THE_ASS 2018-06-07
It's a free market!
1 Mexagon 2018-06-07
Gaming journalists?
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
Nah, the classic liberalism fags tend to be KiA. Male feminists are rapists but nto pedophiles.
1 KateUptonsCumback 2018-06-07
Wew lad that is just some proud smug retardation on display.
1 LightUmbra 2018-06-07
What about Nazbol
1 XRotNRollX 2018-06-07
Nazis who own an ushanka
1 Wraith_GraveSpell 2018-06-07
No one gives a shit about nazbols.
1 watermark02 2018-06-07
But we're proud Trump nationalists and there's nothing wrong with that? No siree. No part of the National Socialist name that alludes to the glorious tradition of nationalism.
1 Red_of_Head 2018-06-07
“The majority of scholars identify Nazism in both theory and practice as a form of far-right politics.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism#Position_within_the_political_spectrum
1 aiyooooo 2018-06-07
democratic (((scholars)))
1 Red_of_Head 2018-06-07
It's all a (((plot))) to get red-pilled white kids to convert to leftism.
1 GuillotinesNOW 2018-06-07
Scholars are educated. Therefore, they're tankie SJW liberals and do nothing but lie.
1 heavenlytoaster 2018-06-07
But scholars also believe Jesus existed.
So they're definitely all at least retarded
1 CanadianCartman 2018-06-07
(((scholars)))
1 Red_of_Head 2018-06-07
So if the Jews know that Nazis will claim they're liars, and they claim Nazis are right-wing, does that makes this all a ploy to get them to convert to leftism?
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Majority of commie faggots
1 Red_of_Head 2018-06-07
The Jews were just trying to defend Capitalism and right-wing ideals, but comrade Hitler couldn't let that stand.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
That is one way of putting it
1 kippot 2018-06-07
r u mad?
1 Red_of_Head 2018-06-07
I am both highly educated (double degree in computer science with all honors available, solo singing, composition, piano - currently learning the flute), and a fan of Prokofiev. I have been practicing his second piano concerto for over a year, almost every day. And while I'm no Yuja Wang, I can play it decently. If you disagree with what I have said there, you are free to read the rest of this thread where I have substantiated that claim for those that doubt it. Also, keep the abuse to yourself. It speaks very poorly of you, same as your spelling decisions and the lack of punctuation.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
You sound like a dork
1 Red_of_Head 2018-06-07
Perhaps you did not read the last paragraph. I repeat:
Also, keep the abuse to yourself. It speaks very poorly of you, same as your spelling decisions and the lack of punctuation.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
You are right. I did not read it. Tant pis pour vous.
1 ay_what_up2 2018-06-07
Lmfao every time
1 loperetti 2018-06-07
Imagine gaming being your go to issue.
1 tktkkablewie 2018-06-07
You joke but the number of now alt right spergs that got into politics after MUH VIDEYA gamergate is not accident. Bannon was WOW gold farmer, he knew the untapped potential of stinky basement virgins.
1 bernredditdown 2018-06-07
While playing Paladins.
1 Whaddaulookinat 2018-06-07
(((Paladins)))
1 FcpEcvRtq 2018-06-07
Gaming journalism is the most retarded shit in the world. Whether that's because of le SJWs or the fact that gaming journalists are basically untalented journalists who couldn't get a job in a normal news agency is another issue.
1 ay_what_up2 2018-06-07
Yeah gaming journalism is trash cause it’s populated by so many trash writers and morons, it’s been like that for as long as I can remember
1 Baconlightning 2018-06-07
E T H I C S
I N
V I D E O G A M E
J O U R N A L I S M
1 Joeybada33 2018-06-07
When im playinv games I quite often how imagine much better my gaming experience could be of it weren't for SJWs spoiling it with their weird idea that women are as equal as men. I blame SJWs for the whole battlefront 2 mess. What are they thinking?
1 lincoln1222 2018-06-07
I stand by my statement about Wagner in the original thread
1 GuillotinesNOW 2018-06-07
I want to start a political party that espouses hardcore communist and SJW positions. It will be called "The American Patriot Alt-Right Conservative Christian Wall Street Party." That should give us at least 50 years of drama involving people claiming that the Alt-Right was all about promoting tranny bathroom rights and communal toothbrushes.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
You do that, cupcake
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Socialists using class politics to put wealthy kulaks in gulags. Sounds like Nazis.
1 kippot 2018-06-07
Takes one to know one
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
I’m not a german nor a socialist
1 kippot 2018-06-07
I would never accuse you of being of European heritage. It is quite clear that you are a degenerate sister-raping centipedo
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
I would never accuse you of being of European heritage.
Wow racist
1 kippot 2018-06-07
Can't be racist to mouthbreathing mongoloids, try again
1 Crusader_1096 2018-06-07
National Socialism is a very strange ideology--almost undeniably right-wing in its rhetoric on ideas such as the nation, the volk, power, etc. but also somewhat similar to socialism in regards to many of its economic practices. It will never cease to confuse lay people unversed in political science.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
The existence of nations is good. If that is right wing, then normal citizens are right wing.
1 Crusader_1096 2018-06-07
I believe strongly in the existence of nations. Practically everyone except for extreme globalists do. The point is not that the Nazis were nationalists but rather that they were extreme in some of their stances on nationalism, even compared to their counterparts in Europe and the Americas who would be very right-wing/nationalistic compared to their states today.
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Good. Enforce the borders, illegals out, voter ID, rapefugees out, Build That Wall. End sanctuary cities, free Timmy Robinson and end globalist scheming. MAGA!
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-06-07
That's right swallow all of Daddy's cummies 🍆💦💦
1 Leftist_Degenerate 2018-06-07
Daddy is a miracle.
1 SgtBaum 2018-06-07
You can‘t make this shit up haha
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-06-07
Later: Wtf Trump supporters aren't Nazis.
1 Piscesdan 2018-06-07
A german politician once said that in a tweet. Yep.
1 shady_Salesman 2018-06-07
Oh god, I had a recent discussion with someone else who thought this.
When you can start to say that Nazis, USSR, etc. were socialist the term simply ceases to mean anything as then everything can reasonably called socialism.
The only relevant definition of socialism is that it's the school of egalitarian economics. Meaning that there is democratic control over the economy.
Social programs and socialism have nothing to do with each other per se. Not even the slightest bit. Because social programs do not necessarily change nothing about the order of the economy.
Social programs who are meant to divert income inequality to strengthen the choice of the individual can be socialist (e.g. ubi)
Social programs, who are meant alleviate tensions are not (e.g. free grain allotments in rome).
Also, the NSDAP actually had socialist programmatic points (I.e. the 25 point program is often cited by guys like him/her) but those were only window dressing to appeal to the common worker, not actual things Hitler intended to do and were dropped long before he got in power. Those that remained served as window dressing to partly justify his attacks on actual socialist.
Hitler was enabled and funded by german capitalists like Krupp and Tyssen, which accurately shows that he did not in any way sought to combat these big cooperations.
after he got in power unions were banned, so was the social democratic party and socialist were put into jail.
But still the window dressing remained to ensure support by common people and stuff like worker's day were introduced.
1 wisty 2018-06-07
Sounds a bit like the Moscow Trials.
Like what Stalin did to the Trots?
1 MostlyTiredUser 2018-06-07
In the early 20s, Hitler will commonly refer to himself as a socialist. How ever, if you read his speeches from 22 onwards you'll notice a shift in discourse (it is almost as if socialism was popular during a time of capitalist crisis and the nazi party was trying to ride the wave and get as many people as possible to join them)
Some quotes, just so you know I ain't pulling this out of my ass:
"There are only two possibilities in Germany; do not imagine that the people will forever go with the middle party, the party of compromises; one day it will turn to those who have most consistently foretold the coming ruin and have sought to dissociate themselves from it. And that party is either the Left: and then God help us! for it will lead us to complete destruction - to Bolshevism, or else it is a party of the Right which at the last, when the people is in utter despair, when it has lost all its spirit and has no longer any faith in anything, is determined for its part ruthlessly to seize the reins of power - that is the beginning of resistance of which I spoke a few minutes ago. Here, too, there can be no compromise - there are only two possibilities: either victory of the Aryan, or annihilation of the Aryan and the victory of the Jew."
"There are no such things as classes: they cannot be. Class means caste and caste means race."
"What right do these people have to demand a share of property or even in administration?... The employer who accepts the responsibility for production also gives the workpeople their means of livelihood. Our greatest industrialists are not concerned with the acquisition of wealth or with good living, but, above all else, with responsibility and power. They have worked their way to the top by their own abilities, and this proof of their capacity – a capacity only displayed by a higher race – gives them the right to lead."
And, I'd to remind you, Hitler's definition of socialis is not the common academic definition:
"Socialist' I define from the word 'social; meaning in the main ‘social equity’. A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency. Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true socialism is not. Marxism places no value on the individual, or individual effort, of efficiency; true Socialism values the individual and encourages him in individual efficiency, at the same time holding that his interests as an individual must be in consonance with those of the community. All great inventions, discoveries, achievements were first the product of an individual brain. It is charged against me that I am against property, that I am an atheist. Both charges are false."
-Hitler, in 1938, defining his brand of socialism... that is surprisingly anti socialist.
1 double-happiness 2018-06-07
1 Orsonius 2018-06-07
god imagine being this uneducated.
Left and right are concepts that came form the french revolution
Right = pro monarchy, aristocracy/conservatism
Left = pro poor people/change
This translates into all major early 20th century politics where the leftists usually sat left in a parliament and were usually pro working class and poor people, generally anti authoritarian or social hierarchy, while the right were pro hierarchy and old norms.
These days left and right refers to both social progressivism vs social conservatism and economically socialist vs economically capitalist
1 OnlyRacistOnReddit 2018-06-07
Is this fresh pasta???
1 aqouta 2018-06-07
To be fair, historically leftists were most likely to be killed by other leftists.