A link to the full-text Free Republic thread.
Posted on 12/19/2014 9:07:12 PM PST by farming pharmer
Obama, with his screaming, hysterical crowds, is the affirmative action Hitler; i.e., a more incompetent copy of the original. Hitler would not have needed a teleprompter; he could write a few words on paper and give a 45 minute speech off of it (a gift he shared with Lenin). Hitler killed six million Jews directly; Obama wants to lead from behind to (so to speak) in killing Israel’s six million Jews by having Iran do his dirty work for him.
just because tyranny happens on a state-level doesn’t make it okay
Of course, if Vendome counted down, it would have meant something completely different.
nOOb
4, 3, 2, 1.... (zot!)
Psychological defense mechanisms are purposely mirrored by propaganda techniques, in this case Projection.
noob?
On the factory floor we call them FNGs for F-ing New Guys. Because of their lack of knowledge of the job their doing they screw up and cause more work for the people down the line.
A link to the full-text Free Republic thread.
M, I read “In the Garden of Beasts” by Erik Larson, based on your recommendation. Our library system had it.
What an excellent read it is.
And quite well documented as well. The footnotes and author’s notes were excellent, and in the notes, the author points to some youtube videos of prewar Berlin which were helpful in understanding the nature of the city then.
Reading the book, it became easier to understand one of the mysteries of life—how a technologically, educated country like Germany got suckered into a dictatorship by a lying, conniving ex-Army corporal thug.
We are seeing a replay before our very us right now, just 80 years later.
And it is frightening.
Communist->Fascist->Liberal->Democrat->Moderate->Republican->Conservative->Libertarian->Anarchist
LEFT---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------RIGHT
Yes we are. The outcome or final form of dictatorship will probably not resemble what happened in Germany. But the mechanics of how tyranny was installed are very similar to what we’re seeing today. I hope you will read Atkisson’s “Stonewalled” next.
Yes. It seems a real stretch to tag Republicans with nationalized healthcare because one far-left state adopted a state-only scheme under a Democrat legislature.
You are correct. I am not saying I support Romney Care, just that it falls under the authority granted to the states by the 10th Amendment.
I don’t think states have authority to implement mandates like that nor force some to pay higher premiums to private companies for others subsidies.
But if the people of the state willingly vote in such a system, can you really say it is “implemented” (forced) upon them?
doesn’t matter if 99% of the people want it if it is wrong, it is still wrong.
I’d probably change the bit about strong nationalism under Nazi from “yes” to “partially”, and put under **** that the definition of Nationalism under the Nazis is not the same as Nationalism under traditional definitions (certainly not the same as the definition used by the Republicans or Tea Party members), and in fact, they hate the traditional definition due to being “bougeoise”. He hints at this in the December 6th, 1931 edition of Der Angriff, and elaborates a bit further in his pamphlet “Those Damned Nazis”, which I’ll briefly quote:
“We are nationalists because we see the nation as the only way to bring all the forces of the nation together to preserve and improve our existence and the conditions under which we live.”
“The nation is the organic union of a people to protect its life. To be national is to affirm this union in word and deed. To be national has nothing to do with a form of government or a symbol. It is an affirmation of things, not forms. Forms can change, their content remains. If form and content agree, then the nationalist affirms both. If they conflict, the nationalist fights for the content and against the form. One may not put the symbol above the content. If that happens, the battle is on the wrong field and one’s strength is lost in formalism. The real aim of nationalism, the nation, is lost.”
“That is how things are today in Germany. Nationalism has turned into bourgeois patriotism and its defenders are battling windmills. One says Germany and means the monarchy. Another proclaims freedom and means Black-White-Red [The imperial colors]. Would our situation today be any different if we replaced the republic with a monarchy and flew the black-white-red flag? The colony would have different wallpaper, but its nature, its content would stay the same. Indeed, things would be even worse, for a facade that conceals the facts dissipates the forces today fighting against slavery.”
“Bourgeois patriotism is the privilege of a class. It is the real reason for its decline. When 30 million are for something and 30 million are against it, things balance out and nothing happens. That is how things are with us. We are the world’s Pariah not because we do not have the courage to resist, rather because out entire national energy is wasted in eternal and unproductive squabbling between the right and the left. Our way only goes downward, and today one can already predict when we will fall into the abyss.”
“Nationalism is more wide-reaching than internationalism. It sees things as they are. Only he who respects himself can respect others. If as a German nationalist I affirm Germany, how can I hold it against a French nationalist who affirms France? Only when these affirmations conflict in vital ways will there be a power-political struggle. Internationalism cannot undo this reality. Its attempts at proof fail completely. And even when the facts seem to have some validity, nature, blood, the will to life, and the struggle for existence on this hard earth prove the falsity of fine theories.”
You can read more here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20020213233649/http://www.calvin.edu:80/academic/cas/gpa/haken32.htm
Ah, I’m not fond of that graph of left and right, mostly because of where anarchist is placed, heck, even libertarian to a certain extent (since the latter also promotes some left-wing ideologies like unfettered abortion). Left and right, contrary to popular belief, doesn’t even have to do with which has more government. If it did, then technically Sacco and Vanzetti and Bill Ayers would qualify as right-wing simply because they adhered to anarchism, as would Marxists, because they actually do advocate for the complete collapse of government, or creating a stateless society in other words. And make no mistake, there have been plenty of anarchists who specifically adhere to the left-wing.
To elaborate a bit further regarding Der Angriff, he briefly says, and I quote, “the NSDAP [Nazi Party] is the German Left. We despise bourgeois nationalism.”
From 2014, WOW! Anyway, the graph is titled “government control”. It is an interesting academic exercise to replace government control with “taxes”, “immigration”, “abortion”, “regulation”, etc. whatever your hearts desire.
As to the placement of anarchist, I placed that there as an illustration from a right-side point of view. That is the only logical step for NO government control is anarchist. If it was through a left-side point of view, I would place the anarchist next to the totalitarian, as that is the next logical step because that what the Left craves.
Last, I find that the Lefties lose their collective mind when they see this graph, while low information voters tend to collectively be enlightened.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.