s U.S. Now On Slippery Slope To Tyranny?

[Orion]

Comparing the U.S. to nazi Germany... like we haven't seen that before. Bush was Hitler and the anti-Christ. Now it's Obama. It just gets tired after a while. Can't we choose another dictator from history instead? Hey, I know, let's pick Genghis Khan. He was pretty ruthless. Or Vlad the Impaler (where the idea of Dracula came from)... he impaled enemy soldiers on pikes!

The U.S. doesn't know tyranny. Yeah, the situation could always be better, and the statism could be put to rest, but don't tout the horn of tyranny when you have no damn idea what it even looks like. Try living in China, Iran, or Burma. You still have rights and a relatively good standard of living in America. You still have your private property laws and rights in tact (for the most part), and you have three branches of government that are relatively effective in preserving the rights of the individual.

Lastly, grow up.

 

[Deuce]

Ahh, more proof you are nothing more then a troll not interested in actual discussions just pissing around threads that don't praise OBama and CO.

The peice was written by the honorable Mr. Thomas Sowell. I consider him to be one of the top 5 most intelligent political and social commentators around. A shame you lack the abilkity to appreciate wisdom.

I'm being exactly as intelligent as the premise of the thread. Comparing us to Nazi Germany is lazy, stupid, and wrong. Why should I treat such idiocy seriously?

 

[lizzie]

Comparing us to Nazi Germany is lazy, stupid, and wrong. Why should I treat such idiocy seriously?

Noam Chomsky made the same comparison recently, and I had you figured to be a Chomsky kind of guy.

 

[Orion]

Noam Chomsky made the same comparison recently, and I had you figured to be a Chomsky kind of guy.

No he didn't. He compared the right-wing media in the U.S. to nazi Germany. He did not compare the U.S. government to it.

 

[lizzie]

No he didn't. He compared the right-wing media in the U.S. to nazi Germany. He did not compare the U.S. government to it.

It sounded to me like he was comparing the tea party movement to Nazis, in effect calling many people in the citizenry Nazis who want a Nazi-type leader.

 

[Deuce]

Noam Chomsky made the same comparison recently, and I had you figured to be a Chomsky kind of guy.

Any comparison on any subject to Nazi Germany is stupid, lazy, and wrong.

Unless it actually involved genocide.

 

[j-mac]

Any comparison on any subject to Nazi Germany is stupid, lazy, and wrong.

Unless it actually involved genocide.

Really? So unless Obama starts rounding up American Jews, and sending them off to concentration camps then we can learn nothing of Hitler's rise, and what he did to "progress" to that point, and the parallels that Obama may hold today?

To ignore history because it is uncomfortable is to be doomed to repeat it.


j-mac

 

[German guy]

Really? So unless Obama starts rounding up American Jews, and sending them off to concentration camps then we can learn nothing of Hitler's rise, and what he did to "progress" to that point, and the parallels that Obama may hold today?

To ignore history because it is uncomfortable is to be doomed to repeat it.


j-mac

Some apparently don't even realize how silly they look when they compare a black man to history's most murderous racist.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

I and I suspect many others would like to see the minutes of that meeting.

I would like to see the video, since there was no reason whatsoever for it not being on the record.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

That's one of the reasons why I'm skeptical of the many right-wingers or "tea party" people who now scream bloody murder and "tyranny", allegedly defending the Constitution. I ask them, where were they in the past 8 years under Bush? Most of them didn't complain at all at the excessive expansion of government power, except for a small bunch of genuine libertarians. Doesn't add to their credibility.

we were all over the place complaining about the liberal and socialist policies of GW Bush, Leftwinger, and his anti-Republic Republicans in Congress.

Where were you when all that damage was going on?

Probably railing against the people on the right who were trying to defend the Republic and it's Constitution.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

If Mr Sowell is such a good commentator, then this piece with the obvious Godwin-Nazi-sledghammer was not his best work, apparently.

I'm sorry, but NO discussion of the trend towards fascism in ANY country, including the United States, can be considered valid unless the issue of Hitler is discussed.

Therefore, any silly Internet "law" that claims arguments made invoking Hitler are void are invalidated when REAL discussions about the REAL history of the Third Reich and Fascism are undertaken.

It's like trying to discuss soccer without using the words "ball", "goal", and "kick".

 

[German guy]

we were all over the place complaining about the liberal and socialist policies of GW Bush, Leftwinger, and his anti-Republic Republicans in Congress.

Well, kudos for you then! But there weren't many on the right who complained about Bush.

Where were you when all that damage was going on?

Are you talking to me?

Probably railing against the people on the right who were trying to defend the Republic and it's Constitution.

Who do you mean?

Sorry, you need to be a little more precize.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Some apparently don't even realize how silly they look when they compare a black man to history's most murderous racist.

Yeah.

Stalin was white, and Mao was asian.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Well, kudos for you then! But there weren't many on the right who complained about Bush.

Yes there were.

Since they were objecting to his left-wing policies, they didn't media attention.

Are you talking to me?

No, I don't move my lips when I type.

I was posting to you.

Who do you mean?

Ron Paul, for one.

Sorry, you need to be a little more precize.

I'm always precise.

 

[German guy]

I'm sorry, but NO discussion of the trend towards fascism in ANY country, including the United States, can be considered valid unless the issue of Hitler is discussed.

Therefore, any silly Internet "law" that claims arguments made invoking Hitler are void are invalidated when REAL discussions about the REAL history of the Third Reich and Fascism are undertaken.

It's like trying to discuss soccer without using the words "ball", "goal", and "kick".

Ok then. Why don't we have this discussion now? It's well on-topic.

Do you think the US are on the way to fascism, and if yes, which specific events do you think resemble the history of Nazism in Germany?
In which way are American politicians comparable to Hitler, and where do the similarities end?

 

[German guy]

Yeah.

Stalin was white, and Mao was asian.

Sure. But what does this have to do with Hitler-comparisons?

 

[German guy]

Yes there were.

Since they were objecting to his left-wing policies, they didn't media attention. (...)
Ron Paul, for one.

Yeah. He falls under the category of "the few genuine libertarians" I mentioned, I guess.

No, I don't move my lips when I type.

I was posting to you.

Do you think splitting hairs makes you look smart?

I'm always precise.

I'm sorry, but there are so many people on the internet who insist on their very own definitions of political labels like "socialist", "left-wing" or "fascist" that nobody else shares, so it's a little difficult to understand where people come from when they don't explain a little more.

 

[spud_meister]

I'm sorry, but NO discussion of the trend towards fascism in ANY country, including the United States, can be considered valid unless the issue of Hitler is discussed.

Therefore, any silly Internet "law" that claims arguments made invoking Hitler are void are invalidated when REAL discussions about the REAL history of the Third Reich and Fascism are undertaken.

It's like trying to discuss soccer without using the words "ball", "goal", and "kick".

i think you need to differentiate between facism and nazism, you can be a facist without being a nazi, and facism isn't the only result of a rise in government power, jumping straight to nazi comparison hyperbole is simply a lazy tactic without consideration for reality, hence Godwins law.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Ok then. Why don't we have this discussion now? It's well on-topic.

What discussion?

Socialism sucks.

It's cousin, fascism, sucks just as much, but no more, since there's little diference betwixt them.

Limited government is the best government, and the United States no longer has limits on it's government, and it's current dictator has no limits imposed by law, He can even arbitrarily seize the assets of the bond-holders of a publicly held corporation and turn that money over to union cronies in exchange for past political favors.

There are rules and regulations and outright laws controlling drilling off the American shore. Unless it can be shown that a company is in violation of those rules, regulations, or laws, the government does not have the authority to shut those operations down. Not for any reason outside of war. Yet the community organizer tries to do just that, and the sycophantic media raises no questions about this.

I would not draw the parallel between Hitler and his Volkischer Beobachter, nor would I say the situation is exactly like the USSR and it's Pravda, but the fact remains that the majority of the US media outlets are flat out NOT DOING THEIR JOB. They're not questioning the people with the power.

And that is how fascist states manage to steal the freedoms of the people.

The goonions in the United States have taken to gross intimidation of people in their private residences, literally busing mobs into suburban residential districts to mob the houses of people opposed to the current trend in American governance. I rejected that when Right-to-Lifer's attempted similar tactics on alleged doctors who specialized in murdering babies, and I still reject it when the socialistic goonions are doing it. For the same reason. Those victims have neighbors, and those victims have not violated any laws. If this is to remain a nation of law, we have to keep the Brown Shirts off the streets.

Do you think the US are on the way to fascism, and if yes, which specific events do you think resemble the history of Nazism in Germany?

Nazi Germany isn't the only fascist state.

The path the Weimar Republic followed to produce the Third Reich isn't the only path to follow to destroy a republican government.

Because the United States is NOT the Weimar Republic, because it is not Itally, because it is not China, Cuba, Russia, or Uganda, it's going to follow it's own unique path to hell, if it continues to follow the present path to serfdom it's leaders insist on following, against the wishes of the people.

But, like the Weimar Republic, United States has been simply IGNORING true threats to the security of the realm and the stability of the government. Hitler was supported by many in Germany's government and the Army. There are major factions in the US that support the PATRIOT Act, that insist on amnesty for the invading hordes of Mexicans destroying the nation's economy, and who support such illegal actions at the takeover of GM and the drilling moratorium in the Gulf, all of which weaken the republic and the rule of law the republic is based on.

Overt racism is not a major issue in the United States, since only fringe organizations like the NAACP continue to profit from the perpetuation of such policies, that and certain government bureaucracies like the Equal Empolyment Opportunity Commission. There won't be a repeat of Germany's industrial scale extermination in the foreseeable future for the US of A.

In which way are American politicians comparable to Hitler, and where do the similarities end?

ALL would be dictators follow the paths set by those who succeed in their goals.

Hitler followed the lessons of Julius Caasar and Napoleon, not to mention that he clearly paid VERY close attention to the Reign of Terror in France and the Soviet Purges. There's also the tendency of all would be dictators to bend the law to their will and to use the powers of government they have gained to grasp further powers. Hitler and his Reichstag Fire, Obama and the Deepwater Horizon, and yes, I'm perfectly aware that Hitler caused the Reichstag Fire, and Obama doesn' t have the brains to have planned the Gulf oil rig accident.

But Obama certainly has the ability and the henchmen to make sure he doesn't waste this crisis to expand the power the government has over the people to the enrichment of his friends and allies, namely the goonions and the banks that will profit from the Cap and Tax scam Obama is pushing on the basis of this unrelated crisis in the Gulf.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

i think you need to differentiate between facism and nazism, you can be a facist without being a nazi, and facism isn't the only result of a rise in government power, jumping straight to nazi comparison hyperbole is simply a lazy tactic without consideration for reality, hence Godwins law.

Hello?

National Socialism is a form of fascism.

You might want to note carefully that I say the US is on the road to fascism, not National Socialism, and I say that Obama is engaging in fascist policies, not Nazi policies.

Since I'm clearly using the words correctly, I don't need any grammar lessons.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Yeah. He falls under the category of "the few genuine libertarians" I mentioned, I guess.

No.

Genuine libertarians don't see earmarks for their districts.

I've never asked for an earmark for my district.

Do you think splitting hairs makes you look smart?

No, that's what the spats are for.

I'm sorry, but there are so many people on the internet who insist on their very own definitions of political labels like "socialist", "left-wing" or "fascist" that nobody else shares, so it's a little difficult to understand where people come from when they don't explain a little more.

Socialism, the belief that the means of production should be owned by the worker; the belief that government exists to steal to provide services for the undeserving, and that there should be no meaningful limits on government.

In other words, the biggest evil in the world.

National Socialism, Fascism, Communism, Maoism, and other similar left-wing -isms are all based on these diseased notions that deny the ownership of property by individuals who have the right to make free decisions regarding the use and productivity of that property.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

It's after 0200 here. So good night, I'm off to bed.

 

[German guy]

Thank you very much, Scarecrow, for explaining your view and starting an interesting debate. I'll reply in more detail later. For the time being, just a few remarks:

Hello?

National Socialism is a form of fascism.

You are aware that this interpretation is the prevalent opinion Marxist historians only, while non-Marxist historians usually classify Nazism as distinct and unique enough compared to fascism to be considered a category on its own?

 

[German guy]

Socialism, the belief that the means of production should be owned by the worker; the belief that government exists to steal to provide services for the undeserving, and that there should be no meaningful limits on government.

Ok, that is socialism. But I think it's obviously ridiculous to call Bush or Obama "socialists". Neither of them wants to nationalize the economy, neither of them wants the government to "steal", and neither of them wants to disable all checks on the government (although it's arguable that they expand government power beyond a reasonable limit), or even cancel free elections.

At best (or worst, if you like), Obama is a social democrat. I know the difference between social democracy and socialism is virtually unknown in America, but it's fundamental in Europe. Social democrats in Europe often were/are the strongest opponents of communists and socialists, and it often were social democrats who established free, democratic systems and defended them against both communists and fascists (think of the Social Democrats in Weimar Germany -- they were the only party to really support the republic!). Many European nations, some of which are among the most free and democratic countries that exist on this planet, have a much higher degree of wealth redistribution than anything Obama proposes. Yet they aren't tyrannies, but there is a very high degree of both individual and economic freedom in these countries, and they are among the leading economies on this planet.

Even if Obama expanded redistribution much more than he does, he'd still not reach European levels -- and it wouldn't make America "fascist" or "socialist" in the slightest. At best (or worst), America would become a little more like Sweden, and I think the claim that Sweden is "fascist" or a "tyranny" is obviously ridiculous.

National Socialism, Fascism, Communism, Maoism, and other similar left-wing -isms are all based on these diseased notions that deny the ownership of property by individuals who have the right to make free decisions regarding the use and productivity of that property.

Fascism and Nazism are not considered left-wing, but right-wing, for very good reasons. The Nazis, for example, didn't nationalize the economy and didn't change the economic system significantly, but on the other side emphasized traditional values, racism and militarism, which are right-wing topics.

It's true that all these left-wing and right-wing -isms have in common that compared to libertarianism or anarchism, they give the government/state a bigger role. But political ideas are not extremes on a one-dimensional line. These ideologies and systems are distinct enough not to be conflated and for very good reasons, they deserve their respective labels.

 

[PeteEU]

Link
Is U.S. Now On Slippery Slope To Tyranny? - IBD - Investors.com

Quote(When Adolf Hitler was building up the Nazi movement in the 1920s, leading up to his taking power in the 1930s, he deliberately sought to activate people who did not normally pay much attention to politics.

Such people were a valuable addition to his political base, since they were particularly susceptible to Hitler's rhetoric and had far less basis for questioning his assumptions or his conclusions.

"Useful idiots" was the term supposedly coined by V.I. Lenin to describe similarly unthinking supporters of his dictatorship in the Soviet Union.

Put differently, a democracy needs informed citizens if it is to thrive, or ultimately even survive.

In our times, American democracy is being dismantled, piece by piece, before our very eyes by the current administration in Washington, and few people seem to be concerned about it.)

The more control Government grant themselves over our lives, the less choice we have.

Quote(Just where in the Constitution of the United States does it say that a president has the authority to extract vast sums of money from a private enterprise and distribute it as he sees fit to whomever he deems worthy of compensation? Nowhere.

And yet that is precisely what is happening with a $20 billion fund to be provided by BP to compensate people harmed by their oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Many among the public and in the media may think that the issue is simply whether BP's oil spill has damaged many people, who ought to be compensated.

But our government is supposed to be "a government of laws and not of men."

If our laws and our institutions determine that BP ought to pay $20 billion — or $50 billion or $100 billion — then so be it.)

I believe that this is the Point that Joe Barton was trying to put across, albeit in some other garbled manner.
Is Government allowed to extort money from Corporations without having gone through the process of law?
Quote(But the Constitution says that private property is not to be confiscated by the government without "due process of law."
Was due process carried out in this instance? I somehow doubt it was.
Quote(Technically, it has not been confiscated by Barack Obama, but that is a distinction without a difference

With vastly expanded powers of government available at the discretion of politicians and bureaucrats, private individuals and organizations can be forced into accepting the imposition of powers that were never granted to the government by the Constitution.

If you believe that the end justifies the means, then you don't believe in constitutional government.)

Please for the purpose of this discussion leave out the fact that BP fully deserves to pay this amount and more in cleaning and compensation and recovery costs, this is readily accepted by everyone including BP.
Can we stick with the argument that the President and Government have in this instance not kept to the Constitution?

This is the same website that said that Steven Hawlkings would have died in the UK under the NHS and that he is only alive because of the "superior" US system.... Yes Steven Hawlking is British and is only alive because of the NHS.

In other words, their credibility is....