• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

I Think I'm Done With The Hill Rising

Jredbaron96

Gen 4:10
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
18,423
Reaction score
11,084
Location
C17
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
It increases both the size and scope of government,
Something the right wing has done numerous times throughout history.

Again, the definition of right wing has never been solely that of laissez-faire government and libertarian values. This is just you demonstrating once more you know nothing beyond your very narrow understanding of political history.

I'll let Bismarck speak for himself and let the reader decide:
Bismark, who banned socialist groups and newspapers, was actually a socialist.

I guess the world back then was wrong.

30013116-r.jpg
 
Last edited:

aociswundumho

Capitalist Pig
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 6, 2019
Messages
4,975
Reaction score
1,908
Location
Bridgeport, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Nonsense. Nationalism is directly rejected by Marxist and socialist works, literature, and doctrine, while it is embraced by right wing groups. You are speaking nonsense.
Yes, but nationalism isn't rejected by actual communists in the real world, and that's what counts. You're making yet another version of the "not real socialism" argument.

What a stupid statement. The military is not a socialist institution. You are speaking nonsense.
It's pretty much common knowledge that it is. Even left wing rags agree:



Which is why they both abolished it, right? Oh no? They didn't?

Oh wait, here's what Hitler actually said:

View attachment 67313357
I couldn't find a source for that quote, and apparently neither can anyone else:

bogus hitler quote.jpg


As evidence against your bogus quote, Time Magazine, 1939:

"Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany's bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on others what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for foodstuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism."

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539-6,00.html


Again, fascists are extremely hostile to private property rights, just like all socialists. From one of the most respected books on Nazi Germany:

"The business men, who had been so enthusiastic over the smashing of the troublesome labor unions, now found that left-wing Nazis, who really believed in the party's socialism, were trying to take over the employers' associations, destroy the big department stores, and nationalize industry. Thousands of ragged Nazi Party officials descended on the business houses of those who had not supported Hitler, threatening to seize them in some cases, and in others demanding well-paying jobs in management. Dr. Gottfried Feder, the economic crank, now insisted that the party program be carried out -- nationalization of big business, profit sharing, and abolition of unearned income and "interest slavery". As if this were not enough to frighten the businessmen, Walther Darre, who had just been named Minister of Agriculture, threw the bankers into jitters by promising a big reduction in the capital debts of the farmers and a cut in the interest rate on what remained to 2%."
-- The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany, William A. Shirer, Simon & Shuster (New York, 1960), Volume I, pp. 203-204.

All of this is just scratching the surface. I recently read the book Three New Deals, and the similarities between the three are amazing.


He abandoned socialism after becoming a fascist and made that very clear in his statements and writing.
But not by his actions, and again, actions count more than words. Once in power Mussolini did everything Bernie Sanders would luv, which I documented here:

 

Antiwar

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
4,511
Reaction score
763
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
...


What a stupid statement. The military is not a socialist institution. You are speaking nonsense.

...
US militarism can easily called socialistic. But it uses antisocial methods and mostly has an antisocial agenda.
 

Antiwar

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
4,511
Reaction score
763
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I think you've confused yourself by trying to figure history out by trying to label everything as mostly homogeneous socioeconomic political models. Every system is a mixture. The US system is a mixture. It's probably more socialist than capitalist.

As I say, these models are outdated. We're well into the 21st century. Our main problems are: Earth is going to kill us off; a large percentage of the population lives with their needs not met. The solution is a socioeconomic model I call environmentalism-humanism.
 

aociswundumho

Capitalist Pig
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 6, 2019
Messages
4,975
Reaction score
1,908
Location
Bridgeport, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I think you've confused yourself by trying to figure history out by trying to label everything as mostly homogeneous socioeconomic political models. Every system is a mixture. The US system is a mixture. It's probably more socialist than capitalist.
Of course they are all mixtures. But if I put some milk in my coffee, it's still accurate to call it a cup of coffee.
As I say, these models are outdated. We're well into the 21st century. Our main problems are: Earth is going to kill us off; a large percentage of the population lives with their needs not met. The solution is a socioeconomic model I call environmentalism-humanism.
Stuff has to be produced, and to get stuff produced there are only two choices that I am aware of: the government or the market.
 

Antiwar

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
4,511
Reaction score
763
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
...

Stuff has to be produced, and to get stuff produced there are only two choices that I am aware of: the government or the market.
There pretty much always were and always will be markets.

You really need to change something in your approach.
 

aociswundumho

Capitalist Pig
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 6, 2019
Messages
4,975
Reaction score
1,908
Location
Bridgeport, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
There pretty much always were and always will be markets.

You really need to change something in your approach.
Well, convince me. Explain how your model of "environmentalism-humanism" keeps the store shelves full.
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
32,266
Reaction score
7,465
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Hitler did not want to exterminate communism (whatever that means). He hated Marxism and the Bolsheviks, because he noticed most of the Bolsheviks were Jews, and Marx himself was a Jew, and in case you didn't know, Hitler didn't like Jews very much.

But Hitler had no problem with communism itself, as evidence by the Nazi 25 point program which was loaded with commie policies.

Furthermore, if you believe fascists hated communists, then why did Mussolini often refer to himself as the "Lenin of Italy"?

Or why did Hitler allow thousands of communists into the Nazi party?
He absolutely did want to exterminate communism; his “crusade” to wipe it out was greeted with delight by conservatives across the globe. His anti-semitism, again, was one shared by many conservatives in the 1930s, which, again, was part of why his far right dictatorship saw support.

Squealing about “commie ideas” from 1920 is amusing, but ignores the fact that Hitler enslaved or murdered vast numbers of communists are part of his plan to stamp out leftism in Germany.

Because Lenin had carved out a massive empire and revolutionized a previously backwards state, which is what Mussolini wanted to do himself. Duh.
 

Antiwar

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
4,511
Reaction score
763
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, convince me. Explain how your model of "environmentalism-humanism" keeps the store shelves full.
How about I start a new thread (probably tomorrow)?
 

aociswundumho

Capitalist Pig
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 6, 2019
Messages
4,975
Reaction score
1,908
Location
Bridgeport, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
How about I start a new thread (probably tomorrow)?
Sounds good.

Make sure you describe institutions, not just goals and intentions.

Saying what you want is easy. Explaining how it will come about is the hard part.
 

swing_voter

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
9,584
Reaction score
6,038
Location
'Murica
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
She's trying to build a YouTube audience for her channel.

She's got a million subscribers which isn't too shabby if she was the sole owner/operator of the channel, but it's highly produced with a team so I guess they still aren't making much money, if any at all.
 

Surrealistik

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
7,127
Reaction score
3,232
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sometimes it's really hard to find political commentators who provide a good balance of criticism of both Democrats and Republicans. Kyle Kulinski is... okay, but too much of an irrational purist at times. Jimmy Dore is even more of a purist, but also very cringey and obsessed with AOC's 'betrayal' because she doesn't like his strategy for M4A. And then there's Krystal Ball (and Saagar) on The Hill Rising. For a while now I've been getting increasingly annoyed with their 'both-sides-isms', the smugness, and their obsession with the media. But last month's On My Radar segment combined with the events of yesterday was the final straw.

This aged sooo well:

I mean the greatest sin in that video is that she underestimated the threat posed by Trump.

On most of the other subjects brought up in the segment I can't find much fault, particularly her at length commentary about the decline in institutional and media trust, much of it self-inflicted with lies of omission, systemic exaggeration and headline domineering political theatre, she's dead on. One of the most lamentable facts about cable news is that they have provided enough truth to Trump's claims of fake news to see them germinate into something truly toxic.

Not saying Krystal has never had a bad take, but she gets it right much more often than she gets it wrong.
 

Jredbaron96

Gen 4:10
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
18,423
Reaction score
11,084
Location
C17
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Yes, but nationalism isn't rejected by actual communists in the real world,
More nonsense. The Soviets heavily repressed ethnic nationalism within their borders, and virtually all Communist states proclaimed and supported an internationalist approach to foreign affairs.

It's pretty much common knowledge that it is.
No, it isn't. It's an uneducated sentiment expressed by people who think they can apply socioeconomic theories to organizations that were not in mind when the theory was created or promoted.

As evidence against your bogus quote, Time Magazine,
lol

" The capitalists have worked their way to the top through their capacity, and on the basis of this selection, which again only proves their higher race, they have a right to lead. Now you want an incapable government council or works council, which has no notion of anything, to have a say; no leader in economic life would tolerate it."

-Adolf Hitler, 1930

Again, fascists are extremely hostile to private property rights,
Which is why they didn't abolish it, right? You keep saying they both hated it, yet never did anything to actually curtail it. Tell me, what was Krupp charged with after WWII?

Oh, and what happened to the left-wing Nazis btw?

But not by his actions,
You don't even grasp what Mussolini's actions are, which is why you fail every time you try to make this argument and fall back on trying to repeat the same bullshit that someone else fed you, because you don't know enough about the topic to speak for yourself.

For example, you always fall back on claiming that Mussolini was socialist because he A)Spent a lot of public works and B) There was a high degree of state ownership. You keep repeating this because this is all you have.

In reality, neither prove Mussolini was a socialist; for starters spending on public works has never been the sole domain of socialists, and numerous right wing conservatives have done so. This is literally just you once again exposing how little you understand of political history.

Second, Italian State Ownership under Mussolini did not mean anywhere close to what you think it does. In reality what "state ownership" meant was the Italian government intervening in failing industries to prop them up by buying a majority ownership. This resulted in virtually no major changes to leadership, direction, or employment; businesses didn't stop producing what they did nor did they stop employing the people they waned; management was virtually unchanged.

In fact when you look at the history of economic intervention by the Italian Fascist Government you see nothing on par with the USSR's centrally planned economy. The Italians did not seize industries and converted them to state rule, they intervened when the banks failed to stop the spread of economic collapse and avoid mass unemployment. The Battle of Grain did not involve mass conscription of the workforce, re-appropriation of land, or redistribution of wealth (something the Soviets did), but consisted of government grants and advisors. There was nothing on par with the USSR's centrally planned economy or Stalin's industrialization efforts.
 

bomberfox

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Messages
11,976
Reaction score
2,951
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Nonsense. Nationalism is directly rejected by Marxist and socialist works, literature, and doctrine, while it is embraced by right wing groups. You are speaking nonsense.



What a stupid statement. The military is not a socialist institution. You are speaking nonsense.

The Monarchs for tens of thousands of years who raised armies were not creating socialist institutions. You are literally just making shit up because you don't understand what words mean.



Which is why they both abolished it, right? Oh no? They didn't?

Oh wait, here's what Hitler actually said:

View attachment 67313357




He abandoned socialism after becoming a fascist and made that very clear in his statements and writing. Just because you don't know about them doesn't meant they didn't happen.

Fascism is therefore opposed to Socialism to which unity within the State (which amalgamates classes into a single economic and ethical reality) is unknown, and which sees in history nothing but the class struggle."

-Benito Mussolini
Private enterprise was their main method of evading the treaty of versailles.
 

Antiwar

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
4,511
Reaction score
763
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sounds good.

Make sure you describe institutions, not just goals and intentions.

Saying what you want is easy. Explaining how it will come about is the hard part.
Hey aoc.
Here's the thread. Please reply by just saying something short and simple such as: "Alright, I'm here."

The thread idea is mostly that I am presenting my ideas and hopefully there will only be serious, succinct replies. Wish me luck.

 

Jonsa

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2012
Messages
4,900
Reaction score
2,838
Location
Toronto
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Talking about needing 'temporary communism' during a pandemic does not make one a communist.
I hate to disagree since I don't think she is a commie, but supporting a "temporary" form of communism is supporting communism. Using the tenets of such a repugnant ideology can't be "temporarily" imposed. Power Politics should inform those that have it tend to want to retain it.
 

Jonsa

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2012
Messages
4,900
Reaction score
2,838
Location
Toronto
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Private enterprise was their main method of evading the treaty of versailles.
ACtually It was Hitler's economic policies to acquire the necessary capital(including stiffing on the crushing reparation payments) and quietly building a government controlled military industrial complex (although they didn't call it that back then).
 

bomberfox

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Messages
11,976
Reaction score
2,951
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
ACtually It was Hitler's economic policies to acquire the necessary capital(including stiffing on the crushing reparation payments) and quietly building a government controlled military industrial complex (although they didn't call it that back then).
It was still private property in the hands of German capitalists.
 

Taylor

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
14,713
Reaction score
5,807
Location
US
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
1. Consider public spending. Bernie, who is on the left, luvs public spending, as did Benito:



That doesn't sound very right wing.

2. Next, the welfare state. Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, and all of us on the far right want the welfare state eliminated completely, while Bernie, who is on the left, wants it drastically expanded. Here's what Mussolini did:



I think Bernie and all leftists would approve.

3. Bernie supports a federal jobs guarantee, which is an idea so stupid that only a leftist could support it. Mussolini loved the idea of increasing the number of people working for the state:



4. Next up is nationalization, i.e. socialism. Although Bernie doesn't talk about it too much today, earlier in his career he called for outright nationalization of many industries, and recently he called for nationalization of utility companies and national rent control. This of course, makes those of us on the political right vomit, but what did Mussolini think of nationalization?



Gee, that doesn't sound very right wing.

The idea that fascism is "right wing" is simply ludicrous. I'm far right, and my political views are the complete opposite of those held by Mussolini, Bernie, and Lenin.

Mussolini was a socialist for his entire life, ffs.
Yes, it's no secret that FDR had a man-crush on Mussolini.
 

Geoist

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
17,981
Reaction score
9,265
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I hate to disagree since I don't think she is a commie, but supporting a "temporary" form of communism is supporting communism. Using the tenets of such a repugnant ideology can't be "temporarily" imposed. Power Politics should inform those that have it tend to want to retain it.
Was Lincoln an authoritarian because he declared martial law for a brief period? I have never encountered a communist who only believed in temporary communism, have you?
 

Jonsa

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2012
Messages
4,900
Reaction score
2,838
Location
Toronto
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Was Lincoln an authoritarian because he declared martial law for a brief period? I have never encountered a communist who only believed in temporary communism, have you?
no, but I once ran into a temporary communist who was in fact a confused libertarian.
 

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
54,046
Reaction score
21,777
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
It must be suck not reading at all. 😂
I've only read your post, and can read my own response well enough to tell your efforts at understanding how history works are like a child who doesnt understand history and stories are different things.

It is embarrassing. The kind of stuff flying in Q circles.
 

Taylor

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
14,713
Reaction score
5,807
Location
US
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I've only read your post, and can read my own response well enough to tell your efforts at understanding how history works are like a child who doesnt understand history and stories are different things.

It is embarrassing. The kind of stuff flying in Q circles.
Clearly. You ought to try reading some actual history so you don't appear so ignorant.
 
Top Bottom