Terrorism Denial: The Bloody Handshake Between the Far Right and the Far Left

Israel News ^

[1rudeboy]

Vote Ron Paul 2008!

[weegee]

"On the food chain of vile and disgusting behavior, 9/11 Conspiracists are one step above the Westboro Baptist Church. They comprise a collection of loons, who are the meeting place where the far-right and the far-left meet."

Westboro Phelps Love Cult is NOT FAR RIGHT!!! Phelps is just another bigoted Democrat politician (and he has run for office several times).

[ClearCase_guy]

Incorrect formulation. The Far-right has nothing to do with Nazism, holocaust denial, or hatred of Israel. Those are all attributes of the various flavors of Socialism. The Left is the problem here.

[weegee]

“The far right has dedicated enormous efforts to Holocaust denial.”

Uh, no.

[mnehring]

You’ve turned to the dark side.

[live+let_live]

I always thought the left-right line is actually a circle.

If you go too far right, you find yourself on the left.

[mnehring]

It depends on how far right you go.. remember Duke going to Iran for the big Holocaust deniers pot luck?

[mnehring]

Extreme right is anarchy, anarchy creates a power vacuum, a power vacuum is generally filled by the power hungry, the power hungry want to control everything, thus you swung to the far left.

If you go the other way, extreme control leads to extreme rebellion, the more rebellion, the more destruction of the controlling powers, resulting in anarchy.

You got something there with the circle.

[mnehring]

Westboro are marxist, thus the farthest point of the left.. I think when they are talking far right, they are going to the extreme, David Duke or anarchist level.

[ClearCase_guy]

I've been told about the circle thing many times. In my opinion it is a myth. It is a tool. It allows someone to say:

"Dictator X is a friend of the people, he is creating a future we can all be pround of."
"Really? I just heard that Dictator X massacred 200,000 people."
"Oh. Well, he's obviously drifted from good, solid far-left policies to the the extremist far-right policies. Politics is a circle, you know ..."

The Left is collectivist. The Right is Individualist. You cannot drift so far toward Individualism that you fall into Identity Politics. Nor does it work the other way.

[mnehring]

The Left is collectivist. The Right is Individualist. You cannot drift so far toward Individualism that you fall into Identity Politics. Nor does it work the other way.

See 9 for a challenge to that.

[ravingnutter]

Phelps is just another bigoted Democrat politician (and he has run for office several times).

He also supported Gore in 1998 and helped run his campaign.

[usurper]

Incorrect formulation.

I agree, as a dedicated member of the far right, I believe in a republic and a constitutional form of government that gives people the maximum amount of freedom by limiting the government’s power over people.

This very definition is the complete opposite of fascism, socialism and communism which are all just different forms of leftists’ collectivism.

[ClearCase_guy]

I'm not convinced. For a real world example, look at the USSR:

It was a Socialist state. A politicial elite, acting as an oligarchy, ruled the country and ignored popular sentiment.
The system eventually collapsed and verged on anarchy. There was much chaos as the Soviet empire fell apart.
Eventually organized crime flourished, acting as an oligarchy, and plundered the country while ignoring popular sentiment.
A strong leader, Putin, came to power and mastered the oligarchs, leading the country back into a dictatorship where a politicial elite, acting as an oligarchy, ruled the country and ignored popular sentiment.

We've got Left --> Anarchy --> Left here, but I don't see anything I would call Individualist or right-wing. I think all this took place on one extreme end of the political spectrum.

Do you have an example of a socialist state flipping directly over to a nation of individual rights, property ownership and free markets?

[drfury]

Now cmon, are you telling me that if someone suggests that actions have consequences that they are somehow connected to Stalin and Adolph Hitler? Thats a stretch.

Ron Paul and the CIA are right about blowback, our actions overseas DO have consequences... but does that mean we shouldnt have ever acted in the first place? No, not necessarily.

[mnehring]

Do you have an example of a socialist state flipping directly over to a nation of individual rights, property ownership and free markets?

Not individual rights as we define it, but there are a lot of Eastern European States who have fallen much closer to anarchy. I think a lot of folks here are stopping their line of 'far right' with our Constitutional freedoms instead of continuing the line to its furthest point (100% individual, 0% government- anarchy)

[ClearCase_guy]

I think you’re posting to the wrong guy. I was commenting on the shape of the political spectrum. I didn’t say anything about Actions, Consequences, Ron Paul, or the CIA.

[mnehring]

Ron Paul and the CIA are right about blowback, our actions overseas DO have consequences... but does that mean we shouldnt have ever acted in the first place? No, not necessarily.

The problem is they never talk about blowback the other direction, the blowback of inaction. What would happen if we didn't 'intervene'? What would happen if we didn't support Saddam against Iran? What would have happened if Iran beat Iraq and took over the ME? What would happen if we didn't base up in Saudi Arabia during the first Gulf War and keep Saddam from moving in there and push him out of Kuwait?

You can count major negative blowback events on one hand, but positive blowback, which is often overlooked.

IMHO, blowback is a cop-out answer.

[weegee]

It’s more of a cube.