I've often said that the Leftists of today are worse than the National Socialists were, in that they've gone much further, much faster than their forebears. As for the Communists, at least they kept up some semblance of the "equality" ethos the whole time, many decades.
For historical comparison with the Commies, the Leftists are now embarked on what the Marxist-Leninsts called the "Kulak Operation", or Dekulakization.
The Kulaks were the only group with the resources and therefore potential to organize and challenge the Communists for control. Thus, they were systematically liquidated.
I will leave everyone to guess who 21st Century America's Kulaks are.
You mean the NatSocs that prioritized physical health, love of nature, respect for family and traditions, love of elders... is that really that horrible?
The internet's really tough for tone, and I'm also particularly bad at it.
You mentioned that the communists are worse than the NatSocs, so I was just pointing out that the NatSoc ethos was actually quite beautiful, whereas the communist ethos is obviously complete bollox. We'll never know if NatSoc could have stood the test of time, like Rome or Holland. Communism never has, and never will.
I was trying to say that the Leftists today are demonstrably worse than the Nazis are popularly believed to be. They were quite up front, and quite mild, when you compare their legislation to that of the Democrats. Today's Democrats object to the formal necessity of legislation, and to the Constitution that won't just die.
As for the Commies, there's a fundamental aspect of human nature that they weaponized, which is why it ever had success in the first place. That is, for all the talk of individual rights and free enterprise and so forth (with which I entirely agree), cooperation and sharing and altruism are deeply embedded in the human psyche, perhaps even the soul. These give satisfaction and fulfillment in ways no bank draft ever has. So I wouldn't go along with there being nothing there; it was just entirely perverted.
But back to the National Socialists, I've developed the theory that a small group of agents was sent in with the multi-decade task of destroying Germany (and Russia). They collected "true believers" like Hitler and Hess and Goebbels and formed the NSDAP, advancing the principles you mentioned. That's exactly why they gained strength and a devoted following.
In the fullness of time, agents like Bormann and traitors like Goering turned Germany to it's doom. All of it was orchestrated behind the scenes by the "Cabal". It's a terribly tragic tale from which the German people have not yet recovered.
By far the best recounting of the nature and programs of the true believers of National Socialism was in "The Greatest Story Never Told". I'm sure you're already familiar, but if anyone else is reading this it's a "must watch".
I've often said that the Leftists of today are worse than the National Socialists were, in that they've gone much further, much faster than their forebears. As for the Communists, at least they kept up some semblance of the "equality" ethos the whole time, many decades.
For historical comparison with the Commies, the Leftists are now embarked on what the Marxist-Leninsts called the "Kulak Operation", or Dekulakization.
The Kulaks were the only group with the resources and therefore potential to organize and challenge the Communists for control. Thus, they were systematically liquidated.
I will leave everyone to guess who 21st Century America's Kulaks are.
You mean the NatSocs that prioritized physical health, love of nature, respect for family and traditions, love of elders... is that really that horrible?
No, did I say it was? Are Leftists today doing that? Are you just looking at things to criticize? Am I totally missing your tone?
If you don't answer any of these questions, I will not be disappointed.
The internet's really tough for tone, and I'm also particularly bad at it.
You mentioned that the communists are worse than the NatSocs, so I was just pointing out that the NatSoc ethos was actually quite beautiful, whereas the communist ethos is obviously complete bollox. We'll never know if NatSoc could have stood the test of time, like Rome or Holland. Communism never has, and never will.
I was trying to say that the Leftists today are demonstrably worse than the Nazis are popularly believed to be. They were quite up front, and quite mild, when you compare their legislation to that of the Democrats. Today's Democrats object to the formal necessity of legislation, and to the Constitution that won't just die.
As for the Commies, there's a fundamental aspect of human nature that they weaponized, which is why it ever had success in the first place. That is, for all the talk of individual rights and free enterprise and so forth (with which I entirely agree), cooperation and sharing and altruism are deeply embedded in the human psyche, perhaps even the soul. These give satisfaction and fulfillment in ways no bank draft ever has. So I wouldn't go along with there being nothing there; it was just entirely perverted.
But back to the National Socialists, I've developed the theory that a small group of agents was sent in with the multi-decade task of destroying Germany (and Russia). They collected "true believers" like Hitler and Hess and Goebbels and formed the NSDAP, advancing the principles you mentioned. That's exactly why they gained strength and a devoted following.
In the fullness of time, agents like Bormann and traitors like Goering turned Germany to it's doom. All of it was orchestrated behind the scenes by the "Cabal". It's a terribly tragic tale from which the German people have not yet recovered.
By far the best recounting of the nature and programs of the true believers of National Socialism was in "The Greatest Story Never Told". I'm sure you're already familiar, but if anyone else is reading this it's a "must watch".