# Fascism and Recession



## Polednice

I just read a little bit on a history site (unsubstantiated) that fascism is correlated with economic instability. Any ideas as to why this might be the case?


----------



## cwarchc

Yes of couse


----------



## regressivetransphobe

disenfranchised people 'n **** like that


----------



## cwarchc

It helps to bring a national idenity in times of instability
There's, of course, much more to it than this?


----------



## samurai

Also, during severe economic downturns, such as that experienced by Weimar Germany after WW1, it is far easier for a charismatic and demagogic leader such as Hitler to focus attention--and *blame--*on the "other" as the source for all the economic hard times and social woes which the country is experiencing. The word* scapegoat* readily comes to mind in this instance. As the poster before me so aptly pointed out, a movement like Fascism --more so than Communism--would appeal more to Nationalism as a unifying motif; indeed Hitler called his party and movement, *National Socialism*, an oxymoron {at least in theory, anyway} if ever there were one.


----------



## Ukko

samurai said:


> Also, during severe economic downturns, such as that experienced by Weimar Germany after WW1, it is far easier for a charismatic and demagogic leader such as Hitler to focus attention--and *blame--*on the "other" as the source for all the economic hard times and social woes which the country is experiencing. The word* scapegoat* readily comes to mind in this instance.


The terms of the armistice were stupidly harsh. Germany had no way to recover, and no assistance from the Ami. When the Depression deepened, Hitler had an easy target for his finger pointing.


----------



## cwarchc

However, National Socialism created employment, pride in the country and self esteem.
You can imagine the relief of the populace. A government that puts the people and country first
However misguided that appears now (with hindsight) at the time, with rampant inflation and low self esteem, it must have been enligthening?


----------



## samurai

cwarchc said:


> However, National Socialism created employment, pride in the country and self esteem.
> You can imagine the relief of the populace. A government that puts the people and country first
> However misguided that appears now (with hindsight) at the time, with rampant inflation and low self esteem, it must have been enligthening?


Since the trade-offs for this involved the brutal and senseless killing of millions of their fellow German citizens--men, women and children--not to mention all the German soldiers' lives which were sqaundered in the War--I would say the price paid for this "enlightenment" and "self esteem" was just a little too steep, wouldn't you?


----------



## cwarchc

Certainly
But at the time, especially at the start, the "price" wouldn't have been apparent
Don't read my response in the wrong context.
My father, dearly missed, was one of the "untermensch" a Polish slave of the regieme


----------



## Cnote11

The price was rather apparent. Nazi Socialism wasn't just something concocted by Hitler in his secret laboratory. It was a widespread sentiment amongst the Germans themselves, who also spacegoated jews and liberals for the downfall of their nation. Germany was looking for to go back to its roots and thought the jews and liberals were going against German values of the old days. This ideology had a strong religious undertone and was propagated by the church and helped bring rise to Hitler. It wasn't just Hitler hoodwinking a whole populace. There were several roots movements in Germany that were doing the same exact thing as the Nazi party was before they even took power.


----------



## Sid James

Cnote11 said:


> The price was rather apparent. Nazi Socialism wasn't just something concocted by Hitler in his secret laboratory. It was a widespread sentiment amongst the Germans themselves, who also spacegoated jews and liberals for the downfall of their nation. Germany was looking for to go back to its roots and thought the jews and liberals were going against German values of the old days. This ideology had a strong religious undertone and was propagated by the church and helped bring rise to Hitler. It wasn't just Hitler hoodwinking a whole populace. There were several roots movements in Germany that were doing the same exact thing as the Nazi party was before they even took power.


I agree with some of that, but there were many Christians who opposed the Nazis and paid the ultimate price for it. Yes, Hitler killed about 6 million Jews, but people forget the 5 million others he killed - among them Christians or anyone who opposed him (yes, liberals as you call them, or many on the left of the political spectrum), gypsies, homosexuals, people with disabilities, and so on. So around 11 million in total perished, and a large part of that in the last year or so of the war, the last months Germany was headed for inevitable defeat, but they continued killing, it was barbaric and irrational.

What I'd add was that Nazi ideology is seen as some as a distortion of Enlightenment thinking. Progress though science for the good of mankind was twisted into an ideology that basically legitimised and carried out death on an unprecedented scale.

Anyway, I could go on. In a word, I would answer yes, these extreme ideologies are related to economic instability, or often other instability (eg. after a war or civil war). Here are some examples other than Hitler. As people have said, dictators give the facade of order, but what it ends up as is exactly the opposite. So I'm broadening this to dictatorships in general, not just right wing. When they both get extreme, right and left wing are basically the same, or have same bad results.

Mao of China - came to power after revolution of 1949, following Japanese occupation and civil war with the Chinese Nationalists under Chang Kai-Shek.

Mobutu of Democratic Republic of Congo (which he renamed Zaire) - ousted elected President Lumumba, after a period of transition from Belgian colonialism to independence, wrought with unrest. The coup that bought him to power was backed by the CIA.

Castro of Cuba - like Mao, got rid of oppressors but eventually became one himself. The Cuban revolution followed decades of corrupt pro-USA governments in Cuba. Castro went the other way, to the left and USSR. I admit he did some good things to develop the country. But locking people up for decades for speaking out against his dictatorship wasn't one of them.

Soeharto of Indonesia - ousted left leaning former President Sukarno, the author of so-called _guided democracy _(who was no angel himself). Soeharto argued that there was a Communist conspiracy threatening the country, so he made a coup and took over (and Western powers didn't complain, cold war ideology was that a right wing dictator was better than a leftist one).

More recent leaders in Europe on the far right, playing on xenophobia, as mentioned above, fear of the other or society falling apart (whether with basis in fact or not) -

Pym Fortuyn of Netherlands
Jorge Haider of Austria
Silvio Berlusconi of Italy (said Mussolini was the best leader of Italy in history, a big worry)

A good book on 20th century history is Eric Hobsbawm's _Age of Extremes_, read it a long time ago, but remember it as good & informative on these and other big picture issues. He is more left-leaning, but no historian is totally unbiased, all they can do is aim at impartiality, whether they get there or not in reality is another issue. But he's not too ideological as far as I can remember.


----------



## Ukko

"Last edited by Sid James; Today at 19:57."

What did you edit it _for_, Sid?


----------



## Sid James

^^This time, did not edit anything big deal, just spelling errors.


----------



## Ukko

Sid James said:


> ^^This time, did not edit anything big deal, just spelling errors.


Yeah, that's usually my reason. Thought maybe you were going for concision.


----------



## Sid James

Hilltroll72 said:


> Yeah, that's usually my reason. Thought maybe you were going for concision.


Well I would go for concision but I am going from the basis of people not knowing the history of these dictators. In many cases, it's so long ago, people who are not into history may not know it (but I'd assume, you living through these things yourself, those names would not be _strangers_ to you).


----------



## Ukko

Excellent restraint, _Sid_. You are right, and I apologize for... how can I get this by the censor... being a Throckmorton P. Gildersleeve.


----------



## Cnote11

I hope you know, Sid, that I did not mean to imply that there weren't Christian groups, among others, who were anti-Nazism. There were some very influential groups in that respect, but alas they suffered the same fate, as you pointed out. The great thing about dictators is that they are so fascinating to study.


----------



## Sid James

^^Well it's fine. Truth is, that the Catholic church gets a bad rap as a whole due to the Vatican signing the _Concordat _with Hitler and Mussolini, promising to stay out of politics (thus letting them get off the hook of any possible criticism of the horrible things they were doing, these dictators where not stupid, they knew that the church had a huge social justice component down the ages). But unlike that treaty which is on paper, there were many acts by Christians across occupied Europe against the Nazis, in the resistance. But that's only the tip of the iceberg, and certainly it was not as formally documented as a legal treaty is.

But you are right. Dictators are fascinating, but I'm basing what I'm saying on research & study I did ages ago, reading about their depraved acts is also depressing. All we can do is make sure we remember and keep in memory those that died fighting these injustices, and also the victims, I certaily do. & for Europe today, I am worried history is repeating itself in some ways, which is indeed very disturbing (eg. the recent elections in France, the far right getting huge traction there).


----------



## moody

Cnote11 said:


> The price was rather apparent. Nazi Socialism wasn't just something concocted by Hitler in his secret laboratory. It was a widespread sentiment amongst the Germans themselves, who also spacegoated jews and liberals for the downfall of their nation. Germany was looking for to go back to its roots and thought the jews and liberals were going against German values of the old days. This ideology had a strong religious undertone and was propagated by the church and helped bring rise to Hitler. It wasn't just Hitler hoodwinking a whole populace. There were several roots movements in Germany that were doing the same exact thing as the Nazi party was before they even took power.


What's spacegoated?


----------



## moody

You will note that a Nazi type party has just picked up eleven seats in the Greek election.
The way things are you had all better keep your eyes open.
Some people say that the continual running of programmes about the Nazis and the Holocaust shold stop---no they should not!


----------



## Sid James

^^Yes, I heard a bit about that on the radio, moody. You probably know more than I do, this was a report from the BBC. The Greek economy is already bad due to internal reasons, but added to that, recession in the rest of the EU has resulted in tourists staying away. Hotels are the emptiest they've been for decades in Greece. Tourism being one of their biggest industries, this has fed unrest and anger of all kinds. But they also seem to have a short memory, Fascism only ended there in the 1970's, but maybe to some people the old saying we have here that _a week is a long time in politics _applies in a literal way. Yes, it's very worrying.


----------



## Badinerie

moody said:


> What's spacegoated?


You're obviously not going to the right clubs!


----------



## Moira

moody said:


> You will note that a Nazi type party has just picked up eleven seats in the Greek election.
> The way things are you had all better keep your eyes open.
> Some people say that the continual running of programmes about the Nazis and the Holocaust shold stop---no they should not!


Human nature never changes. We need constant reminders to prevent us from being awful.


----------



## Moira

In South Africa we have a character, Julius Malema. He was gaining power rather rapidly. He's just been expelled from the ANC, but I still think he is one to watch. He was the Youth League boss until he got a bit big for his boots. The youth in South Africa are not happy. The education system now is worse than it was under apartheid and there is no employment for the ones who do get through their bad schooling thanks to the ever dropping standards - in South Africa one can now 'matriculate' with some subjects as low as 30%. Let me not get started on what I think of that.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

I hate threads on politics.


----------



## brianwalker

The Communist party did even better.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

brianwalker said:


> The Communist party did even better.


Workers of the world, unite!


----------



## Lenfer

Sid James said:


> ^^Yes, I heard a bit about that on the radio, moody. You probably know more than I do, this was a report from the BBC. The Greek economy is already bad due to internal reasons, but added to that, recession in the rest of the EU has resulted in tourists staying away. Hotels are the emptiest they've been for decades in Greece. Tourism being one of their biggest industries, this has fed unrest and anger of all kinds. But they also seem to have a short memory, Fascism only ended there in the 1970's, but maybe to some people the old saying we have here that _a week is a long time in politics _applies in a literal way. Yes, it's very worrying.


As far as I know the *Greek* economy has been in recession for five years. Normally what would happen is the *Greeks* would renege on their debt obligations which would cause their currency to fall in value to a point that holidays and goods made in *Greece* would be able to compete with say the *Germans*. Not that this would be painless for the *Greeks* but it would allow them to start growing their economy, employment would rise etc.

However they cannot devalue as they do not control it and they are stuck with rates that do not favour them. On the other hand *Germany's* currency would have sky high interest rates and make their goods uncompetitive compared to the rest of *Europe*. There is your problem *German* goods are kept competitive by the other countries in the *Eurozone*. To the detriment of to all the poorer countries, this is why *Germany* foots the bill for a lot of the bailout of the overall *Eurozone* economy. Because they have gotten very fat from the easy meal the *Euro* has given them.

The *Germans* and a lot of the right of centre parties in *Europe* and *America* think that an "age of austerity" will fix this problem. It will not the problem was man made for the profit of the few over the many and the only solution will be "*Eurobonds*". That is the debt of each country in the Eurozone would guarantee each others debts. However the *Germans* claim to fear hyper-inflation like that seen in the *Weimar Republic* - in my opinion another man made and punitive measure taken against *Germany* as punishment for losing the war - before the *Nazi's* seized power.

I doubt hyper-inflation would happen if and when *Eurobonds* are introduced. I think they will be but how much more pain will *Europe* have to suffer before hand? I do not know I only hope *President-elct Hollande* can move things along faster but I doubt it.

*Greece* had lower debts than most of *Europe* before the "crisis" they are not feckless or lazy. They work more hours than the *Germans* and *Brits* but some of their systems do need modernising, this is not the same as being lazy. Many in *Europe* see the current problems as man made in the "*Anglo-Saxon*" trading floors of *New York* and the *City of London*. Fascism may have withered in most of *Europe* by the 1970s but capitalism had already failed.

Since the oil price hikes in the 70s the *West* has been unable to function in a truly capitalist system. It is no longer possible to reach "_reasonable_" (say 5%) unemployment figures in the west without major state subsidy. That is people working for the government etc. Cutting back these jobs as you can see by looking at *America*, *Britain*, *France*, and *Spain* (20% unemployment) with public sector involvement.

"*They*" build things up to knock it back down again and reap the rewards it's a vicious circle. I'm not sure I'm making sense anymore be so kind as to let me know please.  Rant over off for a nap. :tiphat:


----------



## Cnote11

moody said:


> What's spacegoated?


Your age is showing.


----------



## moody

Cnote11 said:


> Your age is showing.


OK but you still didn't tell me what it means.


----------



## mitchflorida

Polednice said:


> I just read a little bit on a history site (unsubstantiated) that fascism is correlated with economic instability. Any ideas as to why this might be the case?


We have a recession in America now, and Obama is certainly more of a neo-Marxist, not Fascist.


----------



## Ukko

spacegoat: South African slang. Refers to the male club goer who always has a clear space around him, because he smells strongly of billy goat. There is a growing market in the larger cities for a cologne which approximates the scent. Purchasers believe that it accentuates their aura of sexual prowess. The rumor that it has a market among claustrophobic club goers can be discounted, there being no such crittur.


----------



## Polednice

mitchflorida said:


> We have a recession in America now, and Obama is certainly more of a neo-Marxist, not Fascist.


Your historical awareness is astoundingly slim. The thing I find most amusing about people who cry "COMMUNIST!" or other such misguided squeals at Obama is that if they took one look at the political systems of some European countries, they'd find _genuinely_ left-wing ideas enacted (though not _that_ far left) and everyone's ******* fine with it. America is such a ******* mess of a country, yet Obama is the best thing you've got going for you. Here, have some pity. :tiphat:


----------



## mitchflorida

Polednice said:


> Your historical awareness is astoundingly slim. The thing I find most amusing about people who cry "COMMUNIST!" or other such misguided squeals at Obama is that if they took one look at the political systems of some European countries, they'd find _genuinely_ left-wing ideas enacted (though not _that_ far left) and everyone's ******* fine with it. America is such a ******* mess of a country, yet Obama is the best thing you've got going for you. Here, have some pity. :tiphat:


We'll trade Obama to you for a six pack of beer. Is it a deal?


----------



## Polednice

mitchflorida said:


> We'll trade Obama to you for a six pack of beer. Is it a deal?


Hell yeah! I'm sure many European countries wouldn't take him, but he'll do just nicely instead of Cameron.


----------



## cwarchc

Polednice, can you tell me which country has a "true" communist government?
The closest I can come up with is Cuba, and that's not ideal 
I have to admit to having, very strong, socialist ideals, but can't find anywhere where I can say that it works.
I suppose greed gets in the way?


----------



## Polednice

cwarchc said:


> Polednice, can you tell me which country has a "true" communist government?
> The closest I can come up with is Cuba, and that's not ideal
> I have to admit to having, very strong, socialist ideals, but can't find anywhere where I can say that it works.
> I suppose greed gets in the way?


I don't know of any true communist governments. I also don't know of any governments that work ideally.


----------



## Ukko

Polednice said:


> I don't know of any true communist governments. I also don't know of any governments that work ideally.


Even the Swedish design, which I admire, has hitches in its giddyup. I suspect that no government can work 'ideally' unless nearly all of its citizens are also ideally suited to it.


----------



## mitchflorida

Communism works perfectly in a bee hive or ant hill.


----------



## Cnote11

Too bad ants and bees don't have communist societies.


----------



## Cnote11

moody said:


> OK but you still didn't tell me what it means.


It means "typo". I hope that slang isn't too new for you.


----------



## Ukko

mitchflorida said:


> Communism works perfectly in a bee hive or ant hill.


If you consider the necessity for forced ejection (of drones and worker-birthed queens) to be part of perfection...

And of course, as _Cnotell_ may be alluding to, bee and ant colonies tend to be tyrannies.


----------



## mitchflorida

Hilltroll72 said:


> If you consider the necessity for forced ejection (of drones and worker-birthed queens) to be part of perfection...
> 
> And of course, as _Cnotell_ may be alluding to, bee and ant colonies tend to be tyrannies.


Doubt if there are tyrannies in the bee hive. Just one big happy family. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" A very sweet situation and all that honey to boot.

We need to make human beings act more like bees, that would solve a lot of our problems.


----------



## Sid James

Similar things are said or insinuated about our current Labor goverment in Australia. I saw a cartoon on the front page of a newspaper here, it had our treasurer Wayne Swan with the old Soviet flag (red with the 'workers' hammer and sickle) behind him. It's only a joke but him and his government are not Communists. But I'm not a fan of this government or Communism either.

Re what Lenfer said, I think basically the EU is a bit of a failure. It overextended itself. At the start it was fine, when set up after the war (it was called the EEC - European Economic Community). The members were France, (then) West Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Belgium, Netherlands. It was initially an economic union, to unify standards of production of various commodities, esp. coal. Also, I think they did away with customs duties between those countries, starting with certain type of big trade commodities. So that worked, but then they kept expanding the union, getting it bigger than is practicable. It's just grown too big for it's boots, it should be scaled down, maybe split up. Some countries, like Switzerland & Norway have never joined it, never were interested, and I think they're better for it now that it's gone belly up.

The EU has benefits, but now it appears quite shaky. Too complicated, a far cry from just a glorified customs union. Not a totally failed experiment, it can be modified to reflect reality, not ideology of unity in Europe that is not useful to think of it as one country. Maybe different regions, but not one united entity.

As for real or pure (so-called) Communism, thing is that as I said, all these extreme ideologies taken too far produce the same result: death. It has emerged from the Russian archives that Stalin in his last years was planning a _Holocaust Mark 2_. We already knew about the _Jewish doctor's trial _that he cooked up to target certain members of Russia's Jewish community. But had he lived, we'd have had another Holocaust on our hands, most likely.

Bottom line is, most dictators or extremist leaders give the illusion of unity and order but behind that it's ugly. It goes way back to history. Eg. Napoleon sought to unify France after the French Revolution, but all they got was more war, this time not between themselves but with the rest of Europe. Like many of them, he was a warmonger. But I think people just forget history, esp. in Europe it seems. My opinion of so-called advanced European civilisation is not high. Yes, things like their science and arts may be high, but in terms of politics, it can be a nightmare (which I hope will not happen now).


----------



## samurai

mitchflorida said:


> We have a recession in America now, and Obama is certainly more of a neo-Marxist, not Fascist.


,

If President Obama is a neo-Marxist, then you and I must truly be living in two different Americas. I am rather surprised that in your otherwise well thought out and finely honed analysis of our {?} President you forgot to add that: 1. he is well-known to be a devout, practicing Muslim {though he and lefty friends do a damn fine job of keeping this from the rest of us} and: 2. that he is really not American at all {forged birth certificate and all that}, and thus should never have been elected president of this great country in the first place! Glenn Beck, you got nothing on me! :lol: :scold:


----------



## samurai

Polednice said:


> Hell yeah! I'm sure many European countries wouldn't take him, but he'll do just nicely instead of Cameron.


@ My good friend Polednice, Jeez, Poles, couldn't you have at least held out for a case instead of just a six-pack? Isn't my president worth at least that much? :lol:


----------



## graaf

Hilltroll72 said:


> The terms of the armistice were stupidly harsh. Germany had no way to recover, and no assistance from the Ami. When the Depression deepened, Hitler had an easy target for his finger pointing.


Agreed. But let us not forget what Germany's WW2 enemies had to say (few years before WW2) about rise of fascism in Germany:

"When there is suffering, the dissatisfied masses..swing to the Left. The rich and middle classes, in self-defense turn to Fascism. Fascism must succeed or the masses, this time reinforced by the disillusioned middle classes, will again turn to the Left. If Fascism cannot succeed by persuasion [in Germany], it must succeed by force."

-U.S. State Department's European Division, 1937

Hitler wasn't Time magazine's "Man of the year 1938" for nothing. After all: "Germany lost the Second World War. Fascism won it." (George Carlin)

I guess some might think I'm teasing Americans specifically, so let me say that I had my share of tyranny in 1990s in Serbia and many others are not much better either - EU is increasingly more like USSR used to be, and I (like anyone else) don't have a clue where it all leads, but God help us - I'm sure we'll need it.


----------



## Sid James

^^Yeah well it's odd to me that in former Yugoslavia, you had former Communists like Slobodan Milosevic turning virtually fascist. It appears to me that these kinds of people will use whatever means they can to get their own way and cause tragedy and havoc. They can change their political colours like a chameleon very quickly, they are basically opportunists riding on the waves of whatever discontent they can harness to their own ends.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

mitchflorida said:


> ... Obama is certainly more of a neo-Marxist, not Fascist.





Polednice said:


> ... misguided squeals about Obama...





samurai said:


> If President Obama is a neo-Marxist, then you and I must truly be living in two different Americas.


In fairness to 'Mitch,' Obama's more candid and less prepared statements don't discourage that impression, e.g.:


> "I think that when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." Barack Hussein Obama


Louis Blanc couldn't have said it any more clearly.


mitchflorida said:


> Communism works perfectly in a bee hive or ant hill.


Reagan was fond of saying that Communism works in two places- Heaven, where they don't need it-- and Hell, where they already have it.


----------



## Polednice

I'm afraid that quoting a comment about spreading the wealth and equating it with Marxism or communism is just as politically naive.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Me like this one










Mods: I demand that the smiley I have posted be turned back to a smiley face rather than a devil. I find it extremely rude that someone has changed my perfectly innocent post without telling me.


----------



## mitchflorida

Obama is not a Marxist in that he does not call for the violent overthrow of the government and he doesn't want to abolish freedom of the press. If left to his own devices, Obama is more of a Hugo Chavez and not a Fidel Castro.

For simplicity, I would term him a European Socialist, perhaps a neo-Marxist.


----------



## Ukko

Polednice said:


> I'm afraid that quoting a comment about spreading the wealth and equating it with Marxism or communism is just as politically naive.


Well, _I'm_ afraid that it isn't naivete. The plutocrats' 'spinners' are very good at what they do.


----------



## Ukko

mitchflorida said:


> Obama is not a Marxist in that he does not call for the violent overthrow of the government and he doesn't want to abolish freedom of the press. If left to his own devices, Obama is more of a Hugo Chavez and not a Fidel Castro.
> 
> For simplicity, I would term him a European Socialist, perhaps a neo-Marxist.


The simplicity seems to be yours, _mitch_.


----------



## Polednice

mitchflorida said:


> Obama is not a Marxist in that he does not call for the violent overthrow of the government and he doesn't want to abolish freedom of the press. If left to his own devices, Obama is more of a Hugo Chavez and not a Fidel Castro.
> 
> For simplicity, I would term him a European Socialist, perhaps a neo-Marxist.


You should see Hilltroll:



Hilltroll72 said:


> Well, _I'm_ afraid that it isn't naivete. The plutocrats' 'spinners' are very good at what they do.


Mitch, have you looked even briefly at European politics? There is no real left-wing in America.


----------



## mitchflorida

Polednice said:


> Mitch, have you looked even briefly at European politics? There is no real left-wing in America.


That statement tells me more about you than it does about politics in America. You likely also thought Leon Trotsky to be a moderate.


----------



## Polednice

mitchflorida said:


> That statement tells me more about you than it does about politics in America. You likely also thought Leon Trotsky to be a moderate.


OK, mitch, have it your way - keep eating the propaganda. Taste nice, does it?


----------



## cwarchc

Trotsky wasn't moderate??????


----------



## Cnote11

I don't think this mitch fellow knows anything about political ideologies apart from what he's spoonfed.


----------



## Lenfer

mitchflorida said:


> We have a recession in America now, and Obama is certainly more of a neo-Marxist, not Fascist.


*Obama* a *Marxist*? Perhaps a *Groucho Marxist* but he's hardly even a socialist...

Just because *American* politics is dragged further to the right because of a small but vocal minority of people doesn't make someone who is slightly less right-wing a person of the left. I really hate it when people go on about how "left-wing" *Obama* is... *weeps*


----------



## mitchflorida

Obama is pushing the envelope as fast as he can, but people like me are fighting him every step of the way. Hopefully, he will be gone this November, and I will have sent Polednice a six pack of Heinekin like I promised.


Obama is handsome, I will grant you that.


----------



## Polednice

mitchflorida said:


> Obama is pushing the envelope as fast as he can, but people like me are fighting him every step of the way.


By spreading lies, or just by consuming them?


----------



## Polednice

I read the other day that some Republican grass-roots organisation sent letters round to its members saying that if Obama wins the next election, there needs to be an armed revolution.

Yay for Democracy! But only if people pick the right option.


----------



## Lenfer

mitchflorida said:


> Obama is pushing the envelope as fast as he can, but people like me are fighting him every step of the way. Hopefully, he will be gone this November, and I will have sent Polednice a six pack of Heinekin like I promised.
> 
> Obama is handsome, I will grant you that.


I don't understand just how he pushes the envelope?

If it wasn't for the fact that *America* was bombarded with socialism/communism is bad even being left handed is bad. Then perhaps *Americans* wouldn't be so confused. The reason those in power back then didn't and don't like communism is they have the money (lots of money) and the vast majority of *Americans* work hard very hard for little or no money. Surely those who would benefit from communism or more realistically socialism is the poorer folk?

Having a health system that is free for everyone at the point of use no matter what colour, creed or class you are is a good idea? You'd think the "greatest" richest country on the planet would provide for it's people better. You might even think that it's people would want better healthcare, schools and retirement prospects for all but it appears not.

*Obama* has done very little the only thing he's really done is give massive amounts of state aid to the car companies which is a good thing and saved many thousands of jobs. Ok that's a "socialist" move but I don't see people freaking out over it or demanding those dirty commies lose their jobs...

I forgot to say I don't find *Obama* handsome. I think he looks like a monkey, I don't mean that in a racist way if he was white I'd still think he'd be rather monkeyesque.


----------



## Polednice

Lenfer said:


> I forgot to say I don't find *Obama* handsome. I think he looks like a monkey, I don't mean that in a racist way if he was white I'd still think he'd be rather monkeyesque.


Let's just double-check that.


----------



## mitchflorida

. .. . . . . . .


----------



## samurai

mitchflorida said:


> That statement tells me more about you than it does about politics in America. You likely also thought Leon Trotsky to be a moderate.


Why do you think Stalin had his goons kill him?


----------



## mitchflorida

It is pointless to try to debate politics in a thread like this. 
This will be my last post on this thread. Thank you and good night.


----------



## Polednice

mitchflorida said:


> It is pointless to try to debate politics in a thread like this.
> This will be my last post on this thread. Thank you and good night.


You call _that_ debating? :/


----------



## Lenfer

Polednice said:


> Let's just double-check that.


Took me a second to work out what you did there... Bravo! :lol:


----------



## mitchflorida

Lenfer,

I don't necessarily disagree with you. But first you have to create an economy and get the unemployment rate down. You can't run an economy on Obama's b s . I mean let's judge him by his results not his promises.

How about Michelle Obama?


----------



## Ukko

mitchflorida said:


> [...]
> 
> How about Michelle Obama?
> 
> View attachment 5014


Hah. Is she looking at you?


----------



## Polednice

Hilltroll72 said:


> Hah. Is she looking at you?


I _love_ that comment. 

Mitch, if you take a look at a handful of European economies, you'll notice that the right-wing approach to the recession is not working. Their mantra seems to be that if we wait long enough, it'll happen, but that's just because no politician has ever been wrong about anything. What we need, if anything, is someone _more_ left-wing. But is it possible to be further left than Obama?!


----------



## Ukko

Polednice said:


> I _love_ that comment.
> 
> Mitch, if you take a look at a handful of European economies, you'll notice that the right-wing approach to the recession is not working. Their mantra seems to be that if we wait long enough, it'll happen, but that's just because no politician has ever been wrong about anything. What we need, if anything, is someone _more_ left-wing. But is it possible to be further left than Obama?!


It is very probably not possible in the US to be more left-wing than Obama and have any influence. Such a person would be even more anti-plutocrat, so would be taken down, one way or another, before getting 'too big'.

I find Obama to be a _dismaying_ person. He may be our last chance to restore the republic - and he hates the Second Amendment. I _have to_ support the guy, but he pisses me off. It ain't easy being an American.

[Edit: I maybe should mention the junior senator from my state, Bernie Sanders. He is considerably farther left than Obama - and has little influence outside Vermont.]


----------



## Cnote11

I don't fully support Obama, but he is the best thing we have at the moment, in my opinion. He's too right-wing for me.


----------



## Sid James

cwarchc said:


> Trotsky wasn't moderate??????


Compared to Stalin, Trotsky and Lenin where not as outright horrible (but not by today's democratic standards, but standards of their time, very different). But both those guys brutally supressed the Kronstadt rebellion.

I think people should maybe read up on history, do the old fashioned thing and read a few books? Or enrol in a community college course in relation to the period in history they want to know about? Better than making things up as you go along.

I find the earlier poster's putting the hammer and sickle (of the old Soviet Union flag) tasteless. Even if for a joke, would you put the Nazi swastika up like that? Millions died under that symbol, which in the end did not represent freedom for workers (or anyone else) but the worst forms of repression and death. Maybe if you knew what actually happened, you would not do this.


----------



## Couchie

Sid James said:


> I find the earlier poster's putting the hammer and sickle (of the old Soviet Union flag) tasteless. Even if for a joke, would you put the Nazi swastika up like that? Millions died under that symbol, which in the end did not represent freedom for workers (or anyone else) but the worst forms of repression and death. Maybe if you knew what actually happened, you would not do this.


You have really got to be kidding. This symbol is still in pretty wide use in Russia, ie. their national airline, not to mention the Communist Party itself, which millions of Russians still vote for. Comparing it to the Nazi swastika is what's tasteless here.


----------



## Sid James

Couchie said:


> You have really got to be kidding. This symbol is still in pretty wide use in Russia, ie. their national airline, not to mention the Communist Party itself, which millions of Russians still vote for. Comparing it to the Nazi swastika is what's tasteless here.


WEll, I was not necessarily thinking of the Russians, quite a few of them still think Stalin was Russia's best leader in history, maybe after Peter the Great. Or that the biggest national tragedy was the break up of the dictatorship, the end of the Soviet Union in 1990. So who cares about that kind of distorted thinking of the past?

I'm thinking of the countries that were invaded by the old Soviet Union in East Europe. Poland, former Czechoslovakia, former East Germany, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, the three Baltic states. These were the victims of Russian expansion and political oppression. You won't find many or any hammer and sickle flags flying in these countries. Indeed, if you flew it yourself, it would be torn down. You would probably be told to remove the flag from your house or window if you did that kind of thing.

That's what I'm saying. Similar to in Germany today, there will be some neo-Nazis who fly the swastika. But you won't find it flown by those countries that were their victims and invaded by them.

Again, my view of history is for the victims, not the oppressors. I am very emotional about this. Maybe not objective, but I have little time for a country that didn't even stop meddling in others affairs after Soviet era was over. Just read up on what Russian Federation has done in places like South Ossetia. Not nice.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Sid James said:


> I find the earlier poster's putting the hammer and sickle (of the old Soviet Union flag) tasteless. Even if for a joke, would you put the Nazi swastika up like that? Millions died under that symbol, which in the end did not represent freedom for workers (or anyone else) but the worst forms of repression and death. Maybe if you knew what actually happened, you would not do this.


You must be thinking of something else. Pure Nazi is pure evil; pure communism is a classless society in which everyone is equal and has equal rights for everything and everything is shared equally between them. Communism has also sone some great things in history. For example, when Russia became a communist country women were finally allowed to vote, and when China became a communist country there was a huge drop in number of homeless people, starvation, cannibalism etc.


----------



## Sid James

^^Women got the vote in South Australia in 1890's, 1896 I think, and we didn't have to be Communist for that.

Anyway, as I said, better to read book on this, and watch documentaries, also do a course on it if you can. You are still young. I think you have not been exposed to the full history and the full facts, and different views on these facts.

In my history studies, and just for my interest and also with acquaintances, I have talked to survivors of both extreme left and right regimes, some actually went through both. Eyewitness accounts bear out the horrors that went on under that flag, under both flags, and also the Japanese rising sun flag, with the rays going out (they got rid of this after 1945, they adopted the red sun in the middle, no expanding rays symbolising the spread of tentacles of the empire?). Flags can be symbols of these horrible regimes, they may be fun to you, but not fun to those who studied the dark side of their history, and not to the survivors.

All governments have a honeymoon period, this was often the case with Communist and Fascist regimes. But after a while, the saying _power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely _becomes inevitably true.

As I said, try wearing that on a t-shirt in places that were oppressed by the old USSR. You would not get a friendly response.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

^^^I know. But I do find the whole concept of communsim very interesting.


----------



## samurai

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> ^^^I know. But I do find the whole concept of communsim very interesting.


But, unfortunately--perhaps due to the very nature of human beings--it is fine as a concept *only in theory *and not in its actual practice.


----------



## Couchie

Sid James said:


> WEll, I was not necessarily thinking of the Russians, quite a few of them still think Stalin was Russia's best leader in history, maybe after Peter the Great. Or that the biggest national tragedy was the break up of the dictatorship, the end of the Soviet Union in 1990. So who cares about that kind of distorted thinking of the past?


Because after the Soviet Union fell Russia blossomed into an idyllic democratic utopia. See your own advice about reading up on history above. People preferring their lives under communism than the mafia doesn't seem all that distorted to me.



Sid James said:


> I'm thinking of the countries that were invaded by the old Soviet Union in East Europe. Poland, former Czechoslovakia, former East Germany, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, the three Baltic states. These were the victims of Russian expansion and political oppression. You won't find many or any hammer and sickle flags flying in these countries. Indeed, if you flew it yourself, it would be torn down. You would probably be told to remove the flag from your house or window if you did that kind of thing.


Some day take a good long hard look at your own country's flag and ask yourself why the Union Jack is on there and what it meant for the indigenous Australians.



Sid James said:


> That's what I'm saying. Similar to in Germany today, there will be some neo-Nazis who fly the swastika. But you won't find it flown by those countries that were their victims and invaded by them.


It is illegal to display a swastika in Germany. In Russia they have the hammer and sickle on their national airplanes. How is that "similar"?



Sid James said:


> Again, my view of history is for the victims, not the oppressors. I am very emotional about this. Maybe not objective, but I have little time for a country that didn't even stop meddling in others affairs after Soviet era was over. Just read up on what Russian Federation has done in places like South Ossetia. Not nice.


I'm not really a fan of how you conflate a country's citizens with their governments. Russian citizens were the biggest victims of the Soviet Union.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

samurai said:


> But, unfortunately--perhaps due to the very nature of human beings--it is fine as a concept *only in theory *and not in its actual practice.


That's something I have heard an awful lot. It's fine by me if it just stays a theory, but something that I would _really_ want to see is a communist country that doesn't become corrupt.


----------



## Sid James

^^Well then put Karl Marx on your avatar, he was at least an economist and founder of the ideology. I have some respect for his work, as theory it had some good applications in practice (eg. governments of all kinds after legislating for better working conditions and pensions, etc), but the Soviet Union was not one of them. Places like the Scandinavian countries put in practice some more workable aspects of his theories though which in their democratic context/way of doing it, worked.


----------



## Sid James

Couchie said:


> ...
> 
> It is illegal to display a swastika in Germany....


Well illegal in practice, but neo-Nazi skinheads wear it on t-shirts, earrings, rings, other jewellery, have it on their bags, etc.

Anyway, I would appreciate a better tone from you, not this rude tone. I spoke emotionally but not rude. I am logging off now but will be willing to continue this discussion in next few days maybe if you can do it a bit more politely.


----------



## Couchie

Sid James said:


> Well illegal in practice, but neo-Nazi skinheads wear it on t-shirts, earrings, rings, other jewellery, have it on their bags, etc.


As neo-Nazi skinheads do in a good many other countries.



Sid James said:


> Anyway, I would appreciate a better tone from you, not this rude tone. I spoke emotionally but not rude. I am logging off now but will be willing to continue this discussion in next few days maybe if you can do it a bit more politely.


My tone is frank but not particularly rude unless you go out of your way to receive it that way.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Sid James said:


> ^^Well then put Karl Marx on your avatar, he was at least an economist and founder of the ideology. I have some respect for his work, as theory it had some good applications in practice (eg. governments of all kinds after legislating for better working conditions and pensions, etc), but the Soviet Union was not one of them. Places like the Scandinavian countries put in practice some more workable aspects of his theories though which in their democratic context/way of doing it, worked.


I don't see any harm in showing people in my avatar something I'm greatly interested in. It's not like I'm killing millions of people or anything.


----------



## samurai

Sid James said:


> ^^Well then put Karl Marx on your avatar, he was at least an economist and founder of the ideology. I have some respect for his work, as theory it had some good applications in practice (eg. governments of all kinds after legislating for better working conditions and pensions, etc), but the Soviet Union was not one of them. Places like the Scandinavian countries put in practice some more workable aspects of his theories though which in their democratic context/way of doing it, worked.


Sid, I think you hit it on the head with your observations vis a vis the Scandinavian countries and their "mixed economies" { a reasonable amalgm of both private and government run enterprises and programs}. The problem as I see it, especially in my country, is that any such talk of such reasonable compromises is met by outraged cries of Socialism, or even worse Communism! Witness an earlier poster calling President Obama a "Neo-Marxist". Say what? It's funny that in America all the politicians have gold-plated health care run by the government for themselves and their loved ones, but when John Q. Public wants the same type of quality care for himself and his/her loved ones, it suddenly assumes the guise of the dreaded "socialized medicine" and thus is dead on arrival. Look at how successful that radical Neo-Marxist Obama was in shepherding through his much vaunted "health care reform" bill. The only ones who profited--and will continue to do so quite handsomely--are the private, for profit giant health insurance companies. Neo-Marxist is he, *PHULEESE!*


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

You have really got to be kidding. This symbol is still in pretty wide use in Russia, ie. their national airline, not to mention the Communist Party itself, which millions of Russians still vote for. Comparing it to the Nazi swastika is what's tasteless here.

Of course this flag can still be regularly seen in the Southern US states:










I doubt many black Americans appreciate holding on to this old tradition.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

I'm thinking of the countries that were invaded by the old Soviet Union in East Europe. Poland, former Czechoslovakia, former East Germany, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, the three Baltic states. These were the victims of Russian expansion and political oppression. You won't find many or any hammer and sickle flags flying in these countries. Indeed, if you flew it yourself, it would be torn down. You would probably be told to remove the flag from your house or window if you did that kind of thing.

That's what I'm saying. Similar to in Germany today, there will be some neo-Nazis who fly the swastika. But you won't find it flown by those countries that were their victims and invaded by them.

Again, my view of history is for the victims, not the oppressors. I am very emotional about this. Maybe not objective, but I have little time for a country that didn't even stop meddling in others affairs after Soviet era was over. Just read up on what Russian Federation has done in places like South Ossetia. Not nice.

Leads to a real appreciation for this bit of "graffiti".


----------



## Polednice

Sid James said:


> ^^Women got the vote in South Australia in 1890's, 1896 I think, and we didn't have to be Communist for that.


I'm perhaps unnecessarily bringing up a quite heated topic, but I think this displays a double-standard of yours, Sid (and perhaps one of those illogical traps I suggested "common sense politics" can lead us into?). Regarding religion, I've seen you state in its defence the good that Christians do and have done, and claim that as an ideology, it's only when the ideology goes wrong that people are led astray (as if there's a "right" version of dogma...).

Yet, the flipside of your statement, "we didn't have to be Communist for [the right to vote]" is that we don't need religion for charity, and therefore the good work Christians do is not a point in defence of Christianity. Similarly, while you would advocate that people should be allowed to practice benign forms of religion (though who and how we deem which ones are benign is anybody's guess), CoAG is advocating a benign form of Communism.

So I think we need a little more consistency here. We've got ideologies under which good and bad things can and have been done. Are we going to say that the flaws are fundamentally with the ideologies and throw out religion along with Communism, or are we going to say that bigoted Christians have just got it all wrong, and Stalin should have taken a leaf from CoAG's manifesto (which, therefore, is inoffensive)?


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

when China became a communist country there was a huge drop in number of homeless people, starvation, cannibalism etc.

That's only because the population of the nation as a whole was drastically lowered through the various purges. You seriously need to read your history.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Since CoAG doesn't "get it"....:devil:


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

CoAG is advocating a benign form of Communism...

And I'm advocating a benign form of Nazism.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

:devil:


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

StlukesguildOhio said:


> when China became a communist country there was a huge drop in number of homeless people, starvation, cannibalism etc.
> 
> That's only because the population of the nation as a whole was drastically lowered through the various purges. You seriously need to read your history.


I'm trying not to advertise its bad points.


----------



## Mesa

StlukesguildOhio said:


> :devil:


You have a very similar sense of humour to many people that i'm glad to know.


----------



## Couchie

StlukesguildOhio said:


> You have really got to be kidding. This symbol is still in pretty wide use in Russia, ie. their national airline, not to mention the Communist Party itself, which millions of Russians still vote for. Comparing it to the Nazi swastika is what's tasteless here.
> 
> Of course this flag can still be regularly seen in the Southern US states:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt many black Americans appreciate holding on to this old tradition.


The US flag can sometimes be seen in Iran, usually engulfed in flames.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

StlukesguildOhio said:


> when China became a communist country there was a huge drop in number of homeless people, starvation, cannibalism etc.
> 
> That's only because the population of the nation as a whole was drastically lowered through the various purges. You seriously need to read your history.


The _Great Leap Forward_ may have been a mistake the way Mao did it. I do disagree with some of the ideas Mao Zedong had put forward, however, during his reign China had some very good things happen such as housing for everyone, work for everyone, better health care for everyone, getting rid of inflation and promoting women's status in the community.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

The Great Leap Forward may have been a mistake the way Mao did it. I do disagree with some of the ideas Mao Zedong had put forward, however, during his reign China had some very good things happen such as housing for everyone, work for everyone, better health care for everyone, getting rid of inflation and promoting women's status in the community.

And Nazism resulted in many good things as well. The Weimar Depression was brought to an end. Germany rebuilt and re-established itself as a major European economic and military power. And then there was the Volkswagon. I'm not sure, however, that it was quite worth the cost.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

StlukesguildOhio said:


> The Great Leap Forward may have been a mistake the way Mao did it. I do disagree with some of the ideas Mao Zedong had put forward, however, during his reign China had some very good things happen such as housing for everyone, work for everyone, better health care for everyone, getting rid of inflation and promoting women's status in the community.
> 
> And Nazism resulted in many good things as well. The Weimar Depression was brought to an end. Germany rebuilt and re-established itself as a major European economic and military power. And then there was the Volkswagon. I'm not sure, however, that it was quite worth the cost.


I have always thought that Nazism had many good points apart from its obvious racist, violent intent that it's famous for today. Some excellent things in film, art and music came out of Germany in the time when it was under the power of Hitler. But still, I'm not all for Nazism.


----------



## samurai

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I have always thought that Nazism had many good points apart from its obvious racist, violent intent that it's famous for today. Some excellent things in film, art and music came out of Germany in the time when it was under the power of Hitler. But still, I'm not all for Nazism.


Please do tell me that you had tongue firmly in cheek when you made the above quote. Seriously, have you read any history? If you had, you must certainly know that the whole basis for Nazism was its violence and racism directed against targeted groups of "others" such as the Jews, gypsies and homosexuals. Neither you--nor any other decent person--should be to any degree in favor of such a barbaric and brutal type of rule. I am frankly astounded that anybody--except for the Nazis and their skin head neanderthal sympathizers--could even contemplate--let alone write such a sentence.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

samurai said:


> Please do tell me that you had tongue firmly in cheek when you made the above quote. Seriously, have you read any history? If you had, you must certainly know that the whole basis for Nazism was its violence and racism directed against targeted groups of "others" such as the Jews, gypsies and homosexuals. Neither you--nor any other decent person--should be to any degree in favor of such a barbaric and brutal type of rule. I am frankly astounded that anybody--except for the Nazis and their skin head neanderthal sympathizers--could even contemplate--let alone write such a sentence.


Yes that comment was meant to be a little tongue-in-cheek. NAZISM SUCKS. IT IS EVIL. ALL NAZIS SHOULD BE GIVEN A GOOD SPANKING! But seriously I do think that there were some good things when it came to art and film in Germany. Yes, prior to Hitler too.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

And the Italian Renaissance was born under some of the most rapacious leaders ever: the Medici, the Borgia, the Barberini, the Orsini... I can admire the art without admiring the political system or the brutal leaders. The Nazis, the Soviets, and the Maoists cannot even lay claim to anything even vaguely approaching the artistic achievements of the Italian Renaissance. In actuality all three regimes were brutally repressive. Germany prior to Hitler was undergoing a Renaissance unseen since the 1500s. Quite likely they would have surpassed the French in no short time: E.L. Kirchner, Gustav Klimt, Oscar Kokoschka, Max Beckmann, George Grosz, Otto Dix, Kurt Schwitters, Richard Strauss, Kurt Weill, Erich Korngold, Schoenberg, Anton Webern, Alban Berg, Zemlinsky, Mahler, Robert Wiene, F. W. Murnau, Paul Wegener, Fritz Lang, Peter Lorre, Samuel (Billy) Wilder, Franz Kafka, Frank Wedekind, Hermann Hesse, George Trakl, Gottfried Benn, Georg Heym, Die Brucke, Der Blaue Reiter, the Bauhaus... The rise to power of the Nazi party spelled destruction for the vast majority of German arts and culture. The same... even worse... was true of the Soviets and Maoists. One can only surmise what Prokofiev... and moreso Shostakovitch might have achieved without the strictures of the Soviet System.


----------



## samurai

@ Coag, You forgot to mention that after the Nazis took over, the *trains always ran on time,* especially those taking millions of innocent men, women, children and babies to their deaths in the extermination camps.


----------



## Ukko

_COAG_ is, I think, 16. Going by his/her posts, a childish 16 - which is quite possibly a good thing. Many children tend to think of thing idealistically - which I am sure is a good thing.

I have no idea what _mitch_'s excuse is.


----------

