If Fascism was a literal ideology, then why are there no pro Hitler liberal politicians?

[LetsGoBrandon]

We're simply speaking of what groups called themselves, and how that must accurately depict what they are.

You say Nazis were socialists because that word is in their name, so by that logic East Germany must have been a democracy.

Again, why are you bringing up "after the war"?

 

[wist43]

Change your political leaning because you are not a libertarian.

So a libertarian is supposed to believe in democracy?? Is that what you're saying??

 

[wist43]

Are you serious

You should be made aware that the people who have set us on the path to ruin had begun changing definitions of words and falsely conflating the terms of governmental systems 100 years ago.

They literally changed America from a republic into a democracy overnight by changing the dictionary definition, and curriculum in government schools.

Obviously that was not an accident, and the change had nefarious intent.

Law and Justice: Public Law

“No law is stronger than is the public sentiment where it is to be enforced”Contents“We have a government of limited power under the constitution, and we have got to work out our problem on the basis of law.” -William Howard TaftConstitutional law defines the relationship between various...

legaldesire.com

Public law was originally defined by the Roman as Res publica – i.e. ‘the public thing,’ or in the public interest and common good, and based on the differentiation between the state and the government.[1]

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:

Under the Romans, res publica was an alternative to the traditional ruling systems, where the power was vested entirely in the hands of a single person. Rome in the 1st century B.C.E. had no written constitution, but the republic used unwritten guidelines and principles passed down mainly through precedent.

Res publica, public law, as the thing of people, was first defined by the Roman senator Cicero. Res publica usually refers to a thing that is not considered to be privately owned (res private) but which is held in common by many people.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

This guy is not a liberal, for example

Republican Lawmaker Says Homeless Should Look to Hitler for Inspiration

Tennessee State Sen. Frank Niceley gave a "history lesson" about how the homeless should look to Adolph Hitler for inspiration.

www.rollingstone.com

This girl isn;t a liberal,

‘Hitler was right on one thing,’ Republican congresswoman tells pro-Trump rally

Newly sworn-in House member from Illinois Mary Miller quotes Nazi leader's Mein Kampf at DC demonstration against certifying election results; ADL demands apology

www.timesofisrael.com

Certainly no liberals here,

GOP lawmakers will appear alongside white nationalists, Nazi apologists, at rally to support insurrectionists

A rally planned for Saturday at the Arizona Capitol that aims to support “political prisoners” of the January 6 insurrection will feature speakers who are white nationalists, have endorsed Nazi ideology and are facing charges for storming the U.S. Capitol alongside GOP legislators.

www.azmirror.com

There are leftists who love pieces of Hitler’s ideology while wanting to seperate themselves from the man. The murder of people deemed unworthy to live by doctors (called euphemistically, “death with dignity”) is one example of a Nazi idea embraced whole heartedly by the left

 

[Slartibartfast]

There are leftists who love pieces of Hitler’s ideology while wanting to seperate themselves from the man. The murder of people deemed unworthy to live by doctors (called euphemistically, “death with dignity”) is one example of a Nazi idea embraced whole heartedly by the left

Wut?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Wut?

You can read English.

So you know that when the state is creating a mechanism by which sick people can be “consent” to being poisoned by doctors that’s a policy taken from the national socialists. And it’s wholeheartedly embraced. I wouldn’t be shocked if in ten years single payer systems and American insurance carriers alike will be forcing patients into it.

 

[Slartibartfast]

You can read English.

So you know that when the state is creating a mechanism by which sick people can be “consent” to being poisoned by doctors that’s a policy taken from the national socialists. And it’s wholeheartedly embraced. I wouldn’t be shocked if in ten years single payer systems and American insurance carriers alike will be forcing patients into it.

I can read English but what crazy thing are you going on about this time?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

I can read English but what crazy thing are you going on about this time?

Look leftist gaslighting.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Look leftist gaslighting.

So all you have done try and imply some thing you consider to be a great wrong and then failed to explain whatever this wrong was. Also it seems to have something to do with doctors and not with politicians who openly embrace hitler.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

So all you have done try and imply some thing you consider to be a great wrong and then failed to explain whatever this wrong was. Also it seems to have something to do with doctors and not with politicians who openly embrace hitler.

You know exactly what the wrong is. And you are refusing to address it.

 

[Slartibartfast]

You know exactly what the wrong is. And you are refusing to address it.

Something about doctors poisoning people was all I got. Is this one of those COVID vaccine rants?

Also what does this have to do with politicians that openly embrace hitler?

 

[Jredbaron96]

You should be made aware that the people who have set us on the path to ruin had begun changing definitions of words and falsely conflating the terms of governmental systems 100 years ago.

They literally changed America from a republic into a democracy overnight by changing the dictionary definition, and curriculum in government schools.

No, you're just deliberately misinterpreting definitions to try to make a point.

When the Roman's labeled their system of government a republic, they were stating that matters of government were a "public affair" as opposed to the private affairs of monarchs and autocratic. The Roman's Republic had democratic elections, both direct and indirect, because the idea that democracy is somehow incompatible with a republic is the product of people inventing definitions to words to try to make a point, much like you're doing.

 

[wist43]

No, you're just deliberately misinterpreting definitions to try to make a point.

When the Roman's labeled their system of government a republic, they were stating that matters of government were a "public affair" as opposed to the private affairs of monarchs and autocratic. The Roman's Republic had democratic elections, both direct and indirect, because the idea that democracy is somehow incompatible with a republic is the product of people inventing definitions to words to try to make a point, much like you're doing.

Well, you keep stepping in it, lol...

Here is the United States War Department's (as today's Department of Defense was known then) definition of democracy and republic.

This was given to all U.S. military recruits in 1928.

REPUBLIC VS. DEMOCRACY, U.S.ARMY ANALYSIS

www.1215.org

It is copied from Training Manual No. 2000-25 that was published by the then War Department, Washington, D.C., November 30, 1928.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Official Definition of DEMOCRACY

NOTE​

Here are four (4) facsimile section reproductions taken from a 156 page book officially compiled and issued by the U.S. War Department, November 30,1928, setting forth exact and truthful definitions of a Democracy and of a Republic, explaining the difference between both. These definitions were published by the authority of the United States Government and must be accepted as authentic in any court of proper jurisdiction. These precise and scholarly definitions of a Democracy and a Republic were carefully considered as a proper guide for U.S. soldiers and U.S. citizens by the Chief of Staff of the United States Army. Such definition stake precedence over any "definition" that may be found in the present commercial dictionaries which have suffered periodical "modification" to please "the powers in office. Shortly after the "bank holiday" in the thirties, hush-hush orders from the White House suddenly demanded that all copies of this book be withdrawn from the Government Printing Office and the Army posts, to be suppressed and destroyed without explanation. This was the beginning of the complete red control of the Government from within, not from without.

-------------------

Prepared under the direction of the Chief of Staff.

CITIZENSHIP

This manual supersedes Manual of Citizenship Training The use of the publication "The Constitution of the United States," by Harry Atwood, is by permission and courtesy of the author.

CITIZENSHIP Democracy

A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic--negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether is be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demogogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.

CITIZENSHIP Republic

Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress. Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world. A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of

(1) an executive and (2) a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation, all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create (3) a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their government acts and to recognize (4) certain inherent individual rights.

Take away any one or more of those four elements and you are drifting into autocracy. Add one or more to those four elements and you are drifting into democracy.

 

[wist43]

No, you're just deliberately misinterpreting definitions to try to make a point.

When the Roman's labeled their system of government a republic, they were stating that matters of government were a "public affair" as opposed to the private affairs of monarchs and autocratic. The Roman's Republic had democratic elections, both direct and indirect, because the idea that democracy is somehow incompatible with a republic is the product of people inventing definitions to words to try to make a point, much like you're doing.

James Madison, the man known as The Father of our Constitution disagrees.

"... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."

James Madison, Federalist Papers, #10

 

[Jredbaron96]

James Madison, the man known as The Father of our Constitution disagrees.

"... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."

James Madison, Federalist Papers, #10

Unfortunately for you neither James Madison nor the Department of Defense are an authority on what the word republic and democracy mean.

That belongs to the Latins and Hellenes, and suffice to say there is no conflict between the two terms.

 

[wist43]

Unfortunately for you neither James Madison nor the Department of Defense are an authority on what the word republic and democracy mean.

That belongs to the Latins and Hellenes, and suffice to say there is no conflict between the two terms.

Lol

 

[Jredbaron96]

Lol

Yeah that's about the depth of retort I expected.

 

[wist43]

Yeah that's about the depth of retort I expected.

Well, I prove you wrong, and you act the fool... nowhere to go from there.

Typical liberal.

ciao

 

[Jredbaron96]

Well, I prove you wrong,

No you didn't. You couldn't even cite the actual origin of the words.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Again, why are you bringing up "after the war"?

Was not your whole point that Nazis were socialists because "it says socialist in their name?" You posted this:

Nazis were national socialists in their own words. That's makes them leftwingers.

 

[wist43]

Unfortunately for you neither James Madison nor the Department of Defense are an authority on what the word republic and democracy mean.

That belongs to the Latins and Hellenes, and suffice to say there is no conflict between the two terms.

So Cicero and James Madison had it all wrong, huh??

The Founding Fathers were racist slave owners who crafted a hate-filled, authoritarian Constitution to enrich themselves and exploit the masses - right??

Isn't that what they taught you in the government school you attended??

I do feel sorry for you hapless souls. Truly sad what has become of the American people.

 

[Jredbaron96]

So Cicero

Isn't claiming what you think he is claiming, which is why your claim doesn't actually appear anywhere in the article you listed.

and James Madison had it all wrong, huh??

James Madison was free to make up whatever he wanted to believe between democracy and Republic. It doesn't make it true in the slightest.

The Founding Fathers were racist slave owners who crafted a hate-filled, authoritarian Constitution to enrich themselves and exploit the masses - right??

Isn't that what they taught you in the government school you attended??

No, surprisingly the Texas public education system I attended did not teach me that.

I do feel sorry for you hapless souls. Truly sad what has become of the American people.

And I re-iterate: the people who think there is some profound difference between democracy and a republic are people who don't actually know what those words mean.

Res publica was said by the Latins to describe a system of government where the affairs of governing were a public matter; it distinguished Rome from it's origins as a Kingdom.

Demoskratos, people power, was said by the Greeks to describe the same basic thing; to distinguish between the rule of kings and oligarchs and the rule of the people. Neither of these terms have any historical collision.

Your argument goes back to try to claim that democracy means "rule of the mob" whereas a Republic means "rule of the law", but this isn't backed up by history either. Athens, the origin of democracy, had a constitution, but Rome, which you claim was different as a republic, didn't.

 

[wist43]

Isn't claiming what you think he is claiming, which is why your claim doesn't actually appear anywhere in the article you listed.



James Madison was free to make up whatever he wanted to believe between democracy and Republic. It doesn't make it true in the slightest.



No, surprisingly the Texas public education system I attended did not teach me that.



And I re-iterate: the people who think there is some profound difference between democracy and a republic are people who don't actually know what those words mean.

Res publica was said by the Latins to describe a system of government where the affairs of governing were a public matter; it distinguished Rome from it's origins as a Kingdom.

Demoskratos, people power, was said by the Greeks to describe the same basic thing; to distinguish between the rule of kings and oligarchs and the rule of the people. Neither of these terms have any historical collision.

Your argument goes back to try to claim that democracy means "rule of the mob" whereas a Republic means "rule of the law", but this isn't backed up by history either. Athens, the origin of democracy, had a constitution, but Rome, which you claim was different as a republic, didn't.

And to the democracy for which it stands...

And fascism is "right wing" I suppose??

 

[Jredbaron96]

And to the democracy for which it stands...

It's telling that this is the very best counter you can come up with.

And fascism is "right wing" I suppose??

Yeah, but what does that have to do with the definitions of democracy or republic?

 

[wist43]

It's telling that this is the very best counter you can come up with.



Yeah, but what does that have to do with the definitions of democracy or republic?

It has to do with how muddled your understanding of governmental systems is.

James Madison and our Founding Fathers had it right - only a fool would want to live in a democracy.

Again, Madison and the Founding Fathers correctly identified that democracies are short lived and always descend into chaos, mobocracy - as is happening in the US today.

I'm sure you don't see that though.