Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, communism and socialism are different, despite the fact that they seem to be used interchangeably.
In communism there is no state. In socialism the state owns everything. In fascism there is private enterprise controlled entirely by the state. So I would argue that the net effect in the case of socialism and fascism is essentially the same.
The net effect would the result of the philosophy, wouldn't it? In socialism the state control would be to benefit the workers, in fascism the state control is to benefit the owners. So the net effect would probably be different since the beneficiaries are different.
The only real distinguishing factor between the two is the rabid nationalism of fascism.
Otherwise they're both statist governments that describe the same thing with different words.
Remember the parts of a definition that includes "a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition in fascism.
A dog and wolf are ALMOST the same... I wouldn't want to play fetch with a wolf.
It is historically accurate from the surface to its core.
So the right are Statist and Nationalist and the left are Statist and Nationalist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
First your vote count is widely off the mark. The SDP only held 121 seats, and following the Reichstag Fire the German Communist Part the KDP was dissolved along with its 100 votes in the Parliament. That means that your 132 votes drops down to a meager 27 votes cast in favor by SDP delgates.
So now we're to believe you over a State University? And a progressive one at that...
Quote:
Welcome to Dickinson State University, a progressive university striving to be a premier university in the Upper Great Plains. With its emphasis on educating a diverse and international population through innovative teaching, learning and scholarship, DSU fosters responsible citizens who make a positive impact on the world.
Dickinson State University :: North Dakota (http://www.dsu.nodak.edu/AboutDSU.aspx - broken link)
I can only assume you used some other source other than a school or some other disciplined studier? Wikipedia maybe?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
Few, what is a few? Kodak, Hugo Boss, Volkswagen, IG Farben, Siemens, Coca-Cola GmbH, Ford, Standard Oil, Chase Bank, IBM, Random House's parent company Bertelsmann A.G, Krupp, Thyssen that few??
Few compared to the masses. It's well known Hitler choose his words wisely when and had to maneuver around both sides of the economic spectrum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
Assuming that private corporations exist, I don't think that anyone could dispute that argument, nor would I argue that a fascist dictator would see the necessity of forming a symbiotic relationship with the corporations and industries that provide the goods and services required. But that wasn't the case under a communist dictatorship which deemed private corporations as an anathema to state interest. The distinction between left-wing and right wing totalitarianism.
Formed a relationship? He controlled them and with that the means of production. Free jobs, houses and land for all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
Here is where far too many conservatives fail in their analysis, whether you like it or not, there are two groups that stand between left and right wing totalitarianism, liberal democrats and conservative democrats both of whom have historically been adamantly anti-communist and anti-fascist. It is true today as it has been for the last 70 years, despite reactionary claims to the contrary.
Obama is a Fascist then is basically what you're getting at by making that statement. But he's a liberal democrat so there goes that argument. There has only been one group that has embraced Communist, Maoist, Trotskyites and Socialist ideals and that's been democrats. The most liberal ones. You sure like moving your goal post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
I don't disagree, but where the right gets confused is in the erroneous assertion that liberals are opposed to free markets, and free enterprise, and conservative seem to be just as blind to the fact that they are just as eager to constrict the whole do-as-you-please thing as liberals. Now if you are taking the libertarian approach, I can't help you because I can't think of a more childish political ideology for anything more complex than a society of hunters and gathers. It simply has no place in a modern and global world.
Then in your mind, which seems to be all over the place, everyone on the planet, left and right, are collectivist so it is duly noted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
Fascism and Communism do not delegate powers to the people anymore that the people delegate powers to the government, that is the nature of totalitarian governance, Socialism (shrugs shoulders) is a nebulous term which can mean many different things to many different people because it comes in as many flavors as Heintz has varieties. Collectivism... this is a concept that I don't understand as you use it because what is a nation but a collective? If not what on earth were the Framers talking about when they used the personal plural pronoun we, as in;
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
You're all over the place. Now the FF'ers were collectivist.
Quote:
Definition of COLLECTIVISM
1 : a political or economic theory advocating collective control especially over production and distribution; also: a system marked by such control
2 : emphasis on collective rather than individual action or identity
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...
Quote:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Today I learned from ovcatto that the FF'ers were collectivist. Obama is a Fascist. Liberal and conservative democrats were all anti-communist. Liberals and conservatives believe in the state and Fascism in the form of Nazism is a right-wing organization. I'm a left-winger and Everyone on the planet is for the state and power.
Quote:
The classic liberal used to be the man who believed the individual was, and should be forever, the master of his destiny. That is now the conservative position. The liberal used to believe in freedom under law. He now takes the ancient feudal position that power is everything. He believes in a stronger and stronger central government, in the philosophy that control is better than freedom. The conservative now quotes Thomas Paine, a long-time refuge of the liberals: 'Government is a necessary evil; let us have as little of it as possible.'
~Thomas Paine~
There's a reason why Reagan left the liberal democrats, and rhetoric, of FDR and that's because the left was embracing communism.
Quote:
Sterling Hayden, an admitted member of the Communist Party, later said that Communism was stopped in Hollywood by "a one-man battalion of opposition named Ronald Reagan."
Reagan would famously say during his political career that "I was a Democrat most of my adult life. I didn't leave my party and we're not suggesting you leave yours. I am telling you that what I felt was that the leadership of the Democratic Party had left me and millions of patriotic Democrats in this country who believed in freedom."
Reading some of the posts on here is extremely revealing and indeed frightening.
Looks like the Reublican party will be changing their name soon to the "National Fascist Party"
Damn..... are they that Stupid........... guess they are.
So the right are Statist and Nationalist and the left are Statist and Nationalist.
Sorry but that is a strawman argument since my response did not address statism or nationalism simply that the fascism arises as a reaction to the threat of socialism and communism.
Quote:
So now we're to believe you over a State University? And a progressive one at that...
Ah, your source isn't the problem but rather your specious mathematics. No where in your link does Dr. Meier give the total number of seats won by the SDP or even how many members where present for the vote. It only states that the only no votes, given as being 94, came from the SDP. By your tabulation the SDP would have had to have won 226 seats, but they didn't. I first verified the results of the 1933 election online
Although its core support among blue-collar workers remained relatively stable, the SPD lost support among white-collar workers and small businessmen, many of whom switched their allegiance to the conservatives and later to the Nazi Party. By 1933 the SPD held only 120 of 647 seats in the Reichstag to the Nazis’ 288 and the Communists’ 81.
and then checked all the above against the results reported in "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" William Shirer, page 199
So the question becomes not whether to believe me or the professor but rather whether or not to believe me, my sources, your sources or your fuzzy math?
Quote:
Obama is a Fascist then is basically what you're getting at by making that statement. But he's a liberal democrat so there goes that argument. There has only been one group that has embraced Communist, Maoist, Trotskyites and Socialist ideals and that's been democrats. The most liberal ones. You sure like moving your goal post.
The post is so patently ridiculous as to not being deserving of a response.
Then in your mind, which seems to be all over the place, everyone on the planet, left and right, are collectivist so it is duly noted.
You're all over the place. Now the FF'ers were collectivist.
Regarding the word collective, not being a big fan of selective quotes, Merriam-Webster in toto;
Definition of COLLECTIVE
1: denoting a number of persons or things considered as one group or whole <flock is a collective word>
2
a : formed by collecting : aggregated
b of a fruit : multiple
3 a : of, relating to, or being a group of individuals b : involving all members of a group as distinct from its individuals <a collective action>
4
: marked by similarity among or with the members of a group
5
: collectivized or characterized by collectivism 6
: shared or assumed by all members of the group <collective responsibility>
— col·lec·tive·ly adverb
See collective defined for English-language learners »
See collective defined for kids »
Examples of COLLECTIVE
We made a collective decision to go on strike.
The incident became part of our collective memory.
the collective wisdom of generations
First Known Use of COLLECTIVE
And for some of us, the entire breath of humanity form one big giant collective society which requires cooperation and a sense of commonality as human beings working together to survive as a species.
Definition of SOCIETY
1
: companionship or association with one's fellows : friendly or intimate intercourse : company
2
: a voluntary association of individuals for common ends; especially : an organized group working together or periodically meeting because of common interests, beliefs, or profession
3
a : an enduring and cooperating social group whose members have developed organized patterns of relationships through interaction with one another b : a community, nation, or broad grouping of people having common traditions, institutions, and collective activities and interests
4
a : a part of a community that is a unit distinguishable by particular aims or standards of living or conduct : a social circle or a group of social circles having a clearly marked identity <literary society>
b : a part of the community that sets itself apart as a leisure class and that regards itself as the arbiter of fashion and manners
5
a : a natural group of plants usually of a single species or habit within an association
b : the progeny of a pair of insects when constituting a social unit (as a hive of bees); broadly : an interdependent system of organisms or biological units
See society defined for English-language learners »
See society defined for kids »
The net effect would the result of the philosophy, wouldn't it? In socialism the state control would be to benefit the workers, in fascism the state control is to benefit the owners. So the net effect would probably be different since the beneficiaries are different.
In theory, of course. In practice, that hasn't quite been the case. Of course, these days, one would say the same of capitalism as well; so I suppose the moral of the story is that despite how it looks on paper, human nature will always prevail.
Tough to say, I mean, we've had a few fascist countries here and there, but have we ever had a truly socialist country? We've had communist countries (well, in name only)...
I suppose this is all entirely theoretical.
Quote:
Remember the parts of a definition that includes "a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition in fascism.
A dog and wolf are ALMOST the same... I wouldn't want to play fetch with a wolf.
I think we'll find that in any system where the state has complete control over the economy, that power results in the forcible oppression of those who are not at the top. The moral of the story might just be that despite what you call your system, human nature will always be the dominant factor in it, and any system that grants too much power to a group will invariably wind up being oppressive.
In theory, of course. In practice, that hasn't quite been the case. Of course, these days, one would say the same of capitalism as well; so I suppose the moral of the story is that despite how it looks on paper, human nature will always prevail.
Tough to say, I mean, we've had a few fascist countries here and there, but have we ever had a truly socialist country? We've had communist countries (well, in name only)...
I suppose this is all entirely theoretical.
I think we'll find that in any system where the state has complete control over the economy, that power results in the forcible oppression of those who are not at the top. The moral of the story might just be that despite what you call your system, human nature will always be the dominant factor in it, and any system that grants too much power to a group will invariably wind up being oppressive.
Contrary to popular belief, most Americans do not know what capitalism, socialism or fascism is.
In sound bite format:
Capitalism = private ownership (absolute ownership by individuals)
Socialism = no private ownership, only collective ownership (qualified ownership) and compulsory labor for the benefit of another.
Fascism = originally meant cooperation in the defense of property rights (Fasces was the ancient Roman symbol for the power of the many) - and "right wing". Redefined by the left wing socialist Mussolini, to mean indirect control over private enterprise via taxation and strict regulation and using pseudo religious fervor and brutality. Hitler's National Socialists did the same thing in Germany.
Finance, i.e. banking and corporations, is NOT capitalism, but instrumentalities for usurers to operate with impunity. Usury (interest) has been denounced for over 3500 years, and proscribed by all religions (that I checked).
Since 1935, America has not been a capitalist nation, so the protestors of either "wing" are actually aggrieved over socialism and usury, which rule most of the "Fee World". Obviously "more socialism" is no solution to the problems caused by 76 years of socialism. And the only remedy to usury is to stop engaging in it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
