I came on here because I am tired of conservatism being linked up with these fascist Nazis like the guy who killed the people in Buffalo.
Racist Nazis are not conservatives in the American tradition of honoring the Constitution and the values in the Declaration of Independence.
Race war Nazis, who take pride in mowing down innocent, unarmed people, have nothing to do with American conservativism which is about individual rights, responsibility, and liberty.
These horrendous acts by race war Nazis (I don't care if they call themselves Nazis or not, that's what they are) discredit conservatism. People think the choice is between murdering lunatics and Big Pharma controlled Democrats.
We are left with no choice.
And to top it off, these Nazis are destroying the greatness of America. We used to be proud of defeating Nazis. As a conservative, I was proud that we moved beyond slavery, fighting the Civil War (remember Republicans were against slavery, Democrats, for), many conservatives joined with the Civil Rights movement (against most Southern Democrats). Blacks fought with whites in World War 2, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan.
We are one nation, under God, no matter what ethnicity we are, if we hold to the Constitution. That's what matters, not the color of someone's skin.
Race war Nazis are destroying that and destroying America, weakening us internally as well as externally.
So I'm going to say something radical: they want a war? We should take that war to them. I don't mean Black Americans should take the war to them. I mean patriotic Americans, black white, brown, whatever. They're going to shoot up innocent people? I say we start taking up arms against them. They're armed. They aren't innocent. They intend to do harm to Americans. They are a violent threat to Americans and America.
Patriots can give it to these cowardly Nazis shooting up unarmed citizens ten times over. 100 times over. Just wipe them from the face of the earth.
Who's with me?
Easy to say. Harder to defend.
So.......like do you know who they all are? Or u just gonna kill any white guy that says racist shit? We talking racist jokes? Because they are funny. I am brown and laugh at the shit myself :D. Also my dude....u wanna call 2 arms....why not blast the elites. I am sure there is alot less of them, than there are racist "good ole boys".
Nope. They regularly gather all in one place with their guns.
Nazis, first. Elites second. Half the people here are just run by half the elites, just like Dem supporters are run by the other half. Look at all the people backing Trump? Trump is just one of the elites. He's a pied piper. He could give a shit about regular people.
As much as we might hate elites, Nazis are just the stormtroopers for a complete elite takeover. Nazis don't care about anyone's right to bear arms or free speech or anything else. Take out the Nazis because they're armed component of absolute tyranny.
Nazi's bleed tho. IF A Nazi invasion happens on our soil. Which is VERY fucking unlikely.....remember this. There are more retired service men with itchy trigger fingers, and real Operators. Just waiting for the say so. I am OK with Nazi's my friend. They fuckin bleed. What cannot bleed is the Spiritual warfare going on. Thgem stealing and harvesting our Energies. You are correct...people are run by the elites. Because the Elites created "current--sea" $$$$$$. They made this an "Energy transfer" harvest system. Why you think you get a certificate of birth? a Social #???? We are cattle friend. So yea.....lets get all in an uproar about a boogeyman....about separating us even fucking further as a species, as a group of people. We are 1 race. the Hue-Mans. And we are literally allowing "Them" to harvest us. We are ALLOWING this. And u are pissed about a bubba fat ass white boy. SMDH get priorities fixed. And also fuck Trump. Fuck the Governments, We do not NEED to be lead. This is what humans forget. We are so much more powerful than we are allowed to know.
Nazis care nothing about your individual liberty. They care nothing about your freedom. Nazism is the opposite of that. If what you want is to be free and defend your liberty, supporting Nazis isn't the way to go. You think you can say what you want under a Nazi regime? Think again.
This is fantasy claptrap. There is no "stealing of our Energies." Tell me how you source that fantastical claim.
What "'energy transfer' harvest system?" Please elucidate. How does it work?
We need a certificate of birth and a social security number to prove our citizenship, to pay taxes (you think there are no taxes under Naziism? Think again, brother, difference is, you can't vote out the people imposing the tax), to receive benefits (like half the people on this board are receiving SSI. Social Security Insurance.
Brother, come back down to Earth. There is no "THEM" here. We're all just people. Nobody's harvesting energies. Is this some cult teaching?
Look, I'm being dismissive. I shouldn't be so dismissive. Let me say this. Please demonstrate this theory of yours that some undefined "they" are harvesting our energies.
I'm mad about bubba fat ass white boy killing kids in a school or this latest dude killing people at a parade. All motivated by fantasies from 8chan or somewhere (here?).
I believe we need Government to organize society in a fair way. I'm not saying government isn't corrupt, it always is. So we need safeguards against that corruption. In the US, corruption is basically legalized. But we, as the voters, have the ability to do something about it. The problem is that the elites that control us keep us divided so we can't do that. They have conservatives and liberals fighting over abortion or gun rights while they are literally sucking us dry. Our resources, the resources we produce through our work, not our energies or whatever. I don't know. I don't understand your position about energies.
I agree with you on this.
I think what we should do about racist nazis is send them $40billion in foreign aid to fight a war that can’t be won against Russia..... aw shit...Whoops my bad, That’s actually the US congress that believes that, not me.
The Ukrainian government isn't a Nazi government. Even the once Nazi Azov battalion was essentially de-Nazified when it was absorbed into the Ukrainian security forces.
Even so, a lot of people here support Nazis, right? So is there division between Nazi supporters and Putin supporters?
Putin is the head of a kleptocracy that denies any rights to the opposition. I do not see how that fits in with anyone's world view who values freedom.
How much do you get paid and why the entire month to reply to my comment? Pay freeze? Who do you work for?
At my job I get paid about 74,000, which is probably a lot more than you get on your SSI check. But I'd support you getting more.
But, no, I have a real job and that real job keeps me busy and I don't have time for discussion boards. I was motivated to post last time because of the Buffalo shooting. Or maybe Ulvalde. I don't remember. Then this latest shooting motivated me to think about this discussion again. That's all.
And look, I'm not one to say, let's take away all the guns. I have guns of my own. I am speaking out against this radical right movement spreading nonsense like replacement theory, which is motivating people, many of them with mental illness, to go out and shoot people.
But I also do believe that the radical right is direct threat to social order and the Constitution. Adherence to the Constitution is what maintains social order in this country. I have a family, kids. I don't want the social order broken down and society run by a bunch of right wing thugs.
If we are supporters of the Constitution, if we are opposed to theocracy (or White Christian rule), if we don't want right-wing militia thugs patrolling our neighborhoods and raping our daughters, we need to take care of them now. I, for one, am armed. I'm ready to take up arms against them.
The guy was communist and more than likely pushed by an "informant"
Sources? From what I know he literally said this:
Weird thing for a Communist to say. And if he was pushed by an informant, we need to see evidence of that before we can make the claim. If you have that evidence, I'd be glad to look it over and if it checks out, adopt your view of this. Infiltrators and informants are used by the government all the time, against both the left and the right. I know this. But knowing that it happens doesn't mean it happens in all cases. The Unabomber wasn't pushed by an informant, for example. I don't think Timothy McVeigh was either.
Elements of this post are reminiscent of leftist msm propaganda talking points. Need to differentiate propaganda from evidence. What evidence exists to support certain conclusions? For example, I'll assert that a super majority of racism, acts of violence, and vandalism are caused by leftist other directly or via subterfuge.
I'm talking specifically about mass shootings of innocent people, such as the Buffalo shooter. This latest guy, too, was a racist. How many of these guys are on the 4chan boards? Quite a few.
I'm not saying that crimes haven't been committed by the left or by Black supremacist groups as well, such as the Black Israelites and the New Black Panther Party. I believe in the latter case, they target police officers. Everyone of them should also be taken out. I think one guy claimed to be Antifa, but there just aren't multiple examples of mass shooters claiming to be Antifa or leftists.
The assertion that a "super majority of racism, acts of violence, and violence are caused by leftist other [sic] directly or via subterfuge" is simply not measurable (how do you measure vandalism caused by subterfuge? Can you cite an example of that?
Again: I'm talking about mass killings that target schools, churches, supermarkets, 4th of July parades, etc that are motivated the spread of right-wing ideologies. The most cowardly of actions. Killing unarmed defenseless people. There's definitely a disproportionate number that are demonstrably motivated by the radical, fascist, white supremacist right.
Fascism is far left. Nazis are far left. Attempting to associate them with right wing is a purposeful misrepresentation of history intended to smear their political opponents. The far right is anarchism. The American republic defeated these ideologies a number of times in the past and yet they continue to attempt to promulgate their evil through subversion.
Seeking to measure it is potentially useful though agree challenging. You can measure it by examining the flow of factually inaccurate misrepresentation of history across sources. You can also track the funding sources of these compromised institutions.
You do not understand fascism if you think it's far left. What do you think "left" and "right" mean? Anarchism is far left. Anarchism means without hierarchy. An-archy. Without hierarchy. It's socialist, but without coercive government to enforce it. It also has no government to enforce "property rights" because in anarchy you don't have property rights as there is no private property.
Read the anarchists. Kropotkin, Bakunin.
Fascism is authoritarian corporatism whereby property remains in private hands (show me a fascist who argued otherwise) but both capitalists and labor were controlled by the Authoritarian, because under fascism there is one ruler.
If you can show me a fascist who believed in the primary principle of socialism, that the means of production should be in the hands of workers, not the capitalist, then I will grant you the point. You won't be able to. Fascists themselves believed they were creating a middle ground between capitalism and socialism, maintaining private property but with state direction of production.
You've fallen for false right-wing revisionism. You don't get to just rewrite definitions because it suits your sensibilities. What anarchism is was defined by anarchists. What fascism is was defined by fascists. Read them.
I've studied plenty of history and encourage you to take a look at the relationship between socialism, communism, and fascism. This is basically a continuum of increasing government control and involvement in people's personal lives. NAZIs we're socialists who on practice enacted fascist policies. The enlarged roll of the state is characteristic of leftist ideologies. The state is idyllic and the people are flawed. Anarchism being further to the right of corporatism suggests that self assembled corporate entities emerge as governing authorities. This is congruent with what we see both philosophically and in practice.
Please don't assume my support for something based upon my ability to describe it.
None of this response addresses my argument. (Just for the record, and it doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, but you brought up the fact that you've studied a lot of history. I have a history degree + 45 hours of grad school--all but thesis--in political science).
Your dichotomy of Left and Right being about the degree of government control over people is overly simplistic. You need to think about this as a Euclidean plane, with one axis being social control over lives vs the other being economic control. In fact, there's an interesting test you can take. Here. I took it just now. I'll share mine if you share yours. Nazis fall on the right both economically (right authoritarian) and socially. Stalinists are left authoritarian. True, Nazis are less right economically than Stalinists are left.
If there are two unifying characteristics of socialism and communism of all stripes they are:
If there is a third plank of socialism it is internationalism, also explicitly rejected by the Nazis.
The Nazis adopted none of these main tenets of socialism. How can they be socialists if they rejected the main tenets of socialism?. Let's ask Hitler what he meant by "socialism":
So Hitler basically redefined the word "socialist" to mean the "common weal" and "patriotic." This is not what any socialist considers socialism. So, sure, by Hitler's made up definition of socialism, they were socialist. But they were not socialist by the terms that all other socialists accept: repudiation of private property, elimination of social classes and economic hierarchy, and internationalism.
Find me a Nazi embracing those main tenets of socialism. So far you have failed to do that.
It's not about the size of the state. If it were about the size of the state, Bill Clinton would be the most right-wing president in modern times. Reagan would be a leftist. Bush (W) would be leftist. But that's absurd. It's an absurd measure of left vs right.
You are talking about Anarcho-capitalism, not classical anarchism which argues that worker collectives would naturally emerge centered on democratic decision-making, not private "corporate entities."
In classical Anarchism (again, see Bakunin, in particular), "ownership" of land will essentially be abolished. You cannot have a non-hierarchical society with owners and workers. In any system of private ownership, some people must be compelled to work, rather than voluntarily joining an association or collective. That's the main point of actual Anarchism as opposed so called Anarch-capitalism (which is actually just radical Libertarianism).
Anyway, I'm happy to discuss this with you further. But please, present evidence of any Nazi anywhere at anytime repudiating private property, social hierarchy, or nationalism. It's impossible. Naziism fails to meet the three most important tenets of socialism.
More of Hitler's "socialist" views:
How to debate with you when any source material, as you reference, is not accurate due to circumstantial context. Then later, using source documents to support your points of view against circumstantial context? You have to chose an epistemology or else the argument is not internally coherent.
Fascism is state control of estates beyond the economic (since that is a special case of fascism called socialism). Communism is a special case of socialism that believes in collective ownership. Using this definition and historic evidence of past control of the means of production we then can clearly categorize Nazi as socialist. They are also nationalists (not debating that).
Modern parties likely do not believe the same ideologies. This is true of GOP and Dem. Modern GOP is ~ classic liberalism. Modern Dem ~ classic socialism / borderline fascism.
Agree that corporatism is a special case of anarchism, was using it as an example implementation of how hierarchies do emerge within that form of "governance". Agree that social communities could also emerge independent of corporations but question the practical distinction.
No, no, no. You don't get to declare source material "not accurate due to circumstantial context." That's an evasion. You have to demonstrate how it is out of context. My epistemology is fine and coherent. Your declaring it not so does not make it not so. The problem is that I do have source material and you do not. That's a disingenuous attempt to evade your problem.
I have defined fascism. I have let Hitler himself define what national socialism is. I have defined socialism. Find a Nazi who repudiates "private property." Find a socialist who doesn't. Communism is state ownership of production. You are attempting to side step the idea of ownership by using the word "control." As Hitler said, the state only "controls" the means of production in exceptional cases. As an authoritarian dictatorship, the state has ultimate power to do whatever, even compel corporations to produce what the Dictator demands. But the state does not own the means of production. The means of production still engage in capitalism, the acquiring of capital for the capitalist class. That is fundamentally not capitalism.
This is absolutely not true. First, the GOP is no long a neoliberal party. They have become a party of interventionism under Trump, via his protectionist policies, overwhelmingly supported by the GOP.
The Democratic Party has been a neoliberal party since Clinton, notoriously so. The only difference between the Democrats and Republicans in the level of mitigation they are willing to adopt to soften the blow for American workers. Democrats are willing to support more intervention than GOP, but they both support some and under Trump, GOP supports more than Dems now. The last Democrat to champion protectionism was Dick Gephardt and he lost hard.
Neither party per se is "fascist." Neither party believes in an absolute leader. And, besides, socialism and fascism are utterly different (as I have demonstrated with no rebuttal from you), so the Democrats can't be both. There are elements in the Democratic Party that are democratic socialist which is very much socialism lite, mostly advocating more regulation of capitalism and maybe some support for very limited publicly owned industry, but probably in the US that would be zero.
You have been living in some alternative reality where you have swallowed all these right-wing revisionisms whole. It's like Orwell's Newspeak. War is Peace. Fascism is Socialism. You're very confused.
Here's another example of that right-wing revisionism that I see a lot: The US is not a democracy because the word "democracy" doesn't appear in the Constitution. It is a Republic. The problem is that the term democracy is inclusive of the term Republic. Republics are representative democracies. They're just a type of democracy in which the people delegate their vote to an elected representative.
The problem with US representative democracy is that our system allows for legalized bribery, so the representatives don't really represent "we, the people" but mostly corporate or special interests that can inundate them with money and reward with lucrative lobbying jobs after they leave office. That's what makes democracy in the US a farce. But, if you read the anarchists like I said, you'd find that Bakunin predicted this:
That isn't anarchy. Anarchy is literally without hierarchy.
You are confusing several different ideas and labelling them all with nazis. Learn to think.
They are all fundamentally racist fascists, whether they call themselves that or not. They are not, for example, simply free market conservatives. They are the radical right.
That is like having a huge pile of rotten vegetation, you hate the smell and the insects it produces, so you attack the insects as they come off the pile.
Good plan.
Nope. Who else is shooting innocent, unarmed people? Over and over again.
They're cowardly little shits.
America was founded by men who hated niggers. If you can't support good ol' fashioned nigger hating then you're not a real American. You can cry about the constitution this and the constitution that but you're using an edited version. The original unedited version makes it clear America is for white christian men, not niggers, spics, gooks or faggots.
Where in the Constitution does it say anything about "white christian men?" It doesn't. Christ, Christian, God, none of those words are in the constitution.
Article VI: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be Required as a Qualification To any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Doesn't sound like it's a government for "Christian men."
1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Nope. Not describing a Christian state.
The USA is not a theocracy as much as you would like it to be.
There are plenty of us on this board.
Thanks for joining us.
Well, someday we'll be facing off, I suppose. I will never let this country go fascist without a fight. There's nothing more un-American than fascism.
Pedophile
Thank you for the introduction. I'll be sure to keep my kids away from you.
I guess I'd be Anarchist.
you don't even know what fascism is
Yes, I do.