US politics general thread

[scudsucker]

I imagine any oddball group with no appreciation of how ironic their very existence and name is would beg to differ, they'd still be wrong and in Antifa's case: entertainingly misguided as well

I love the way you hand wave away facts if they do not agree with your thesis.

 

[The_Assimilator]

Snopes did what you could not. It sourced information from historians on the subject.

*would not, because ignorance and making up facts is preferable to historical record for NBFTW.

He literally also had an alliance with Stalin and Russia ... so opposed he was

Again with the making up your own facts.

 

[Cray]

They have more similarities than differences, you just refuse to see it because your programming forbids it.
He literally also had an alliance with Stalin and Russia ... so opposed he was

And how did that turn out...?

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Again with the making up your own facts.

and today's prize for dumbest post that is easily verifiable (and indeed known to anyone with any knowledge of WW2 history) goes to .....

omg, you're one of those types that use both hands for the facepalm right?

 

[buka001]

https://mybroadband.co.za/forum/threads/us-politics-general-thread.937346/post-21962799

Quite a bit more current than the BS sources Snopes quoted which just repeat the same tired old song.

This book chronicles Hitlers ascension amongst right wing groups during the period from 198 to 1924.

The book demonstrates that in September 1919, Hitler joined the tiny German Workers’ Party, because its nationalist values appealed to him.

A central theme in the book demonstrates that Hitler's over riding principle was Anti-Semitism and the advancement of Germany. It illustrates his largely divergent and bizarre views mon many topics. This book in no way demonstrates that Hitler was a socialist. It shows that he was sympathetic to some socialist values in the early days after the war, but much of this evaporated during the tumultuous time of the Weimar Republic, as he drew nearer to Right wing nationalists, in a reaction to the growing popularity of Marxism.

Hitler's own views about the German Workers Party at the time he joined it were as follows:

"
aside from a few directives, there was nothing, no program, no leaflet, no printed matter at all, no membership cards, not even a miserable rubber stamp ... this absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here, the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined..."

So to spring upon his membership of this party at the time as the defining "AHA" moment for the ever eluding connection to socialism holds little water. Not even the author central thesis or even minor thesis demonstrates this.

The defining value which separated Hitler from Socialism is his belief of racially superiority and nationalism. It is as clear as that.

 

[rietrot]

The defining value which separated Hitler from Socialism is his belief of racially superiority and nationalism. It is as clear as that.

Identity politics = identity politics. It is exactly the same thing as what current Libtards and Neo-nazis are doing.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

This book chronicles Hitlers ascension amongst right wing groups during the period from 198 to 1924.

The book demonstrates that in September 1919, Hitler joined the tiny German Workers’ Party, because its nationalist values appealed to him.

and the book also include other bits of information, like Hitler trying, and failing, to join the German Socialist party beforehand, do you really think he didn't find any of it appealing if it was his first choice?

The defining value which separated Hitler from Socialism is his belief of racially superiority and nationalism. It is as clear as that.

Those things are in no way mutually exclusive, unless you mistakenly believe a socialist can't be racist or nationalist, that's an apples vs oranges argument. Socialists can be every bit as racist and nationalist as any other ideology.

 

[buka001]

and today's prize for dumbest post that is easily verifiable (and indeed known to anyone with any knowledge of WW2 history) goes to .....

omg, you're one of those types that use both hands for the facepalm right?

The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a ruse. It allowed Hitler to pressurise the UK to give up their support for Danzig. It gave Hitler some strategic options in the sense that he could focus on Europe, with the prospect of invasion from the Soviets being quite low. Hitler had the only thing that the Russians wanted, that neither France or the Uk could offer Russia

Hitler always valued the oilfields in the Caucuses. The pact gave him the time he needed to be confident that his army was strong enough to attack Russia.

You seem to purport that there was another reason for this pact.

 

[cerebus]

You seem to purport that there was another reason for this pact.

You really think he got this far in his grand socialist/Nazi unifying theory?

 

[Unhappy438]

You seem to purport that there was another reason for this pact.

Communism buddy, Hitler was all about that communism.

/Ignores the fact that he privatized everything under the sun.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

You seem to purport that there was another reason for this pact.

That argument cuts both ways:
- he had an alliance with socialists because it was convenient
- he tried to join a socialist party before forming another quasi-socialist party only to trick the people away from communism
- socialism has failed in every country it has ever been tried in only because they did it wrong

vs

- he aligned with socialists because he was a socialist
- he wanted to join a socialist party because he was a socialist
- socialism always fails because the ideology is inherently wrong

The truth is somewhere in between I reckon, in this case: fascism is so similar to socialism, which in turn is very similar to communism that there isn't much value in distinguishing the one from the other. The only value whatsoever would be for leftists who wish to disassociate themselves with those horrible lefty ideologies.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

/Ignores the fact that he privatized everything under the sun.

/ignores the fact that communism also had exceptions to the "privatization" rule
/ignores the fact that socialism also had exceptions to the "privatization" rule

 

[cerebus]

The truth is somewhere in between I reckon, in this case: NarrowBandFtw is so similar to rietrot, who in turn is very similar to konfab that there isn't much value in distinguishing the one from the other. The only value whatsoever would be for righty trolls who wish to disassociate themselves from their fascist counterparts.

 

[The_Assimilator]

The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a ruse. It allowed Hitler to pressurise the UK to give up their support for Danzig. It gave Hitler some strategic options in the sense that he could focus on Europe, with the prospect of invasion from the Soviets being quite low. Hitler had the only thing that the Russians wanted, that neither France or the Uk could offer Russia

Hitler always valued the oilfields in the Caucuses. The pact gave him the time he needed to be confident that his army was strong enough to attack Russia.

You seem to purport that there was another reason for this pact.

Dontcha know, Hitler was part of the global millennia-long ongoing socialist Jewish conspiracy that has resulted in countries like Sweden and Denmark being disgusting havens of socialism?

IT WAS ALL PLANNED. OPEN YOUR EYES SHEEPLE.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Dontcha know, Hitler was part of the global millennia-long ongoing socialist Jewish conspiracy that has resulted in countries like Sweden and Denmark being disgusting havens of socialism?

IT WAS ALL PLANNED. OPEN YOUR EYES SHEEPLE.

That's right, when you get caught putting your ignorance on full display with an asinine claim like the Hitler-Stalin alliance being a "made up fact" ( still funny) you channel your inner Alex Jones and pretend everyone who doesn't share your world view is simply insane.

/S-L-O-W C-L-A-P

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

The truth is somewhere in between I reckon, in this case: NarrowBandFtw is so similar to rietrot, who in turn is very similar to konfab that there isn't much value in distinguishing the one from the other. The only value whatsoever would be for righty trolls who wish to disassociate themselves from their fascist counterparts.

Stuck in identity politics land again I see, you really should be more careful to hand over your thinking duties to some collective that easily.

I couldn't care less about whether people generally associate fascism with "the right", I do care that people generally are that gullible, and wrong, though. "The left's" staple ideologies, socialism and communism, still far outnumber the atrocities of fascism, it would be deluded to deride one and not the others.

 

[Unhappy438]

/ignores the fact that communism also had exceptions to the "privatization" rule
/ignores the fact that socialism also had exceptions to the "privatization" rule

"Exceptions"

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

"Exceptions"

Weird, I don't find that random, and factually correct, word funny at all.

You realize the dreaded fascism also had plenty of state owned and run organization right (i.e. yet more exceptions)? The bulk of the "private organizations" were in the hands of / or under direct control of Nazi's anyway ... "privatization" indeed ...

 

[Unhappy438]

Weird, I don't find that random, and factually correct, word funny at all.

You realize the dreaded fascism also had plenty of state owned and run organization right (i.e. yet more exceptions)? The bulk of the "private organizations" were in the hands of / or under direct control of Nazi's anyway ... "privatization" indeed ...

More utter trash, unless of course it was related to the military effort. I suggest you educate yourself:

Start reading from page 4: http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf

 

[konfab]

Can we just all agree that rampant statism is bad for everyone?