Hamilton County Nazis?

[indyartisan]

 

[jamil]

View attachment 283376

And that’s not even photoshopped.

Was THAT an unforced error? I think they were just taking creepy out for a test spin. See how she takes the corners.

 

[BigRed]

View attachment 283376

To Hell with the mother ******.

 

[Tombs]

Maybe if they’re an honest broker. And that’s only still a maybe. Let’s assume LG is. He still was very reluctant to concede that there was a context in which that quote was appropriate.

This fear of quoting Nazis is dangerous. Let’s keep the lessons learned in front of us so that they’re not repeated. That group has a valid point with that quote. Let it stand. The groomers are acting like Nazis with the child indoctrination they’re doing.

These groomers are following that tactic. Joe Biden’s speech a while back basically claiming the lefty talking point that kids belong to them? All that “takes a village” nonsense. Pride people marching and chanting that they’re coming for our kids?

I think many Democrats deserve to have Hitler, Mao, and Stalin figuratively hung around their necks like a necklace of shame because that’s who they’re acting like. They have the nerve to call conservatives fascists?

One pet peeve I have with the right claiming something on the left is fascist is that it's a misunderstanding of what fascism actually is. In fact it's the opposite of the principles, though a mirrored image.

The left uses authority and positions of perceived power to get their messaging, and deliver it, silencing the common people.
A fascist uses the words/traditions/beliefs of the common people and delivers it to the positions of power, silencing the people in positions of power.

For example, a group of parents ousting a state funded teacher for teaching degenerate beliefs, would be a micro example of fascism.

What the left does is the polar opposite, where they will build up that teacher and give her the power to have those parents sent to prison.

Of course this is why they fear fascism above all else, it's the roadmap for getting rid of them. And the nazis weren't very ideologically sound fascists, the italians land closer to the mark, with Mosley being the purest example.

 

[buckwacker]

One pet peeve I have with the right claiming something on the left is fascist is that it's a misunderstanding of what fascism actually is. In fact it's the opposite of the principles, though a mirrored image.

The left uses authority and positions of perceived power to get their messaging, and deliver it, silencing the common people.
A fascist uses the words/traditions/beliefs of the common people and delivers it to the positions of power, silencing the people in positions of power.

For example, a group of parents ousting a state funded teacher for teaching degenerate beliefs, would be a micro example of fascism.

What the left does is the polar opposite, where they will build up that teacher and give her the power to have those parents sent to prison.

Of course this is why they fear fascism above all else, it's the roadmap for getting rid of them. And the nazis weren't very ideologically sound fascists, the italians land closer to the mark, with Mosley being the purest example.

We can talk about political THEORY all day long, but socialism, communism, fascism all end in authoritarianism despite how they are sold to the people. The "leadership" buy the people's approval by promising them power and ALWAYS renig when put in charge. ALWAYS. I just don't understand why people enjoy being ruled.

 

[Expat]

That is like the term Nazi, which stood for the National Socialist Party. The left wants to attach that term to the right only, but the Von Mises Institute wrote a very convincing article that the Nazis were in fact Socialists.

 

[manifest destiny]

What is it with MAGA and white supremacist talking points? Do you want people to associate you with the Nazis?

So anyone that wants to make America great again is a white supremacist and Nazi, according to you?

You're disingenuous, an idiot or you're attempting provoke and encite others. Go away.

 

[jamil]

That is like the term Nazi, which stood for the National Socialist Party. The left wants to attach that term to the right only, but the Von Mises Institute wrote a very convincing article that the Nazis were in fact Socialists.

Hayek wrote about that and I don't think he was correct. At least not in the way we understand socialism, especially with regards to the purpose. With what we traditionally think of as socialism, it is an attempt to level out society on an economic level. Redistribution of wealth, for example. Take from those who earn and give to those who don't.

The purpose of the Nazi Party's national socialism was not that. It was to establish a system where the state and national identity meant the same thing. National socialism was about "common weal". It is a collectivist ideal, but more in terms of oneness. Hitler didn't want to take money from people who earned it and give to people who didn't. He wanted to get rid of the people who didn't earn it.

Hitler once said that they could have named their party the "Liberal Party" but chose "National Socialists" because their socialism was all about collective unity of the Nation. He also said that they chose "Socialist" in their name to take back the word from the Marxists and return it to what was real socialism. In national socialism, the state doesn't own the means of production. The state, production, people, the race, everything is all the same thing. That's not what we think of when we think of a typical Democrat talking point. Not the same socialism.

On the other hand, Progressives like to claim that National Socialism was the capitalist response to Marxism, and that's not true. National Socialism was indeed a response to Marxism, but it had nothing to do with capitalism. It was all about national unity.

 

[jamil]

BTW, I suppose now I've made an unforced error by posting about what Hitler said regardless of context.

 

[buckwacker]

BTW, I suppose now I've made an unforced error by posting about what Hitler said regardless of context.

If you know and can quote anything that Hitler said, you must be a Nazi. Why else would you know what he said or repeat it?

 

[Expat]

Hayek wrote about that and I don't think he was correct. At least not in the way we understand socialism, especially with regards to the purpose. With what we traditionally think of as socialism, it is an attempt to level out society on an economic level. Redistribution of wealth, for example. Take from those who earn and give to those who don't.

The purpose of the Nazi Party's national socialism was not that. It was to establish a system where the state and national identity meant the same thing. National socialism was about "common weal". It is a collectivist ideal, but more in terms of oneness. Hitler didn't want to take money from people who earned it and give to people who didn't. He wanted to get rid of the people who didn't earn it.

Hitler once said that they could have named their party the "Liberal Party" but chose "National Socialists" because their socialism was all about collective unity of the Nation. He also said that they chose "Socialist" in their name to take back the word from the Marxists and return it to what was real socialism. In national socialism, the state doesn't own the means of production. The state, production, people, the race, everything is all the same thing. That's not what we think of when we think of a typical Democrat talking point. Not the same socialism.

On the other hand, Progressives like to claim that National Socialism was the capitalist response to Marxism, and that's not true. National Socialism was indeed a response to Marxism, but it had nothing to do with capitalism. It was all about national unity.

It has been several years since I read the VMI article. When I searched for the one I read, there have been several new ones written since then.

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman

Contrary to myth, Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one, writes George Reisman.

mises.org

 

[Cameramonkey]

So anyone that wants to make America great again is a white supremacist and Nazi, according to you?

You're disingenuous, an idiot or you're attempting provoke and encite others. Go away.

They like to imply we want ALL of history returned, including segregation, etc. not just the good stuff.

 

[jamil]

It has been several years since I read the VMI article. When I searched for the one I read, there have been several new ones written since then.

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman

Contrary to myth, Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one, writes George Reisman.

mises.org

Germany was not a capitalist state, per se. Meaning that it wasn't intentionally capitalist. I would say economically it was more crony capitalism that was practiced. There was no concept of from each according to his ability to each according to his need.

At the risk of making an unforced error, I will again refer to what Hitler said about Socialism. Paraphrasing, what Communists or Marxist do is not real socialism. Real socialism is National Socialism. So instead of collective wealth, it's collective "oneness", for lack of a better term.

The article treats socialism as if both Marxists and Nazis mean the same thing when they say it. But they kinda mean opposite extremes. Like I said, Hitler made it clear national socialism's goal is NOT redistribution of wealth, which is a major goal of Marxist's definition of socialism.

Hitler also was not a free market guy. Oneness means sameness, espeically when it comes to race. The means of production was privately owned, but also heavily controlled by the party. However, National Socialism does fulfill the article's second point, that both the welfare state brand of socialism, and National Socialism require a dicktater. Neither are naturally evolving systems. They're both require authoritarian rule or society would naturally fall away from both systems.

 

[Tombs]

We can talk about political THEORY all day long, but socialism, communism, fascism all end in authoritarianism despite how they are sold to the people. The "leadership" buy the people's approval by promising them power and ALWAYS renig when put in charge. ALWAYS. I just don't understand why people enjoy being ruled.

The theory behind it is freedom on a broader level than just individual freedom.

Because you're always going to be ruled by someone, whether it's the government or powerful institutions. It sought to rectify the latter.
It's just... If you aren't aligned with the general public, you aren't going to be feeling that freedom lol.

 

[BugI02]

If you know and can quote anything that Hitler said, you must be a Nazi. Why else would you know what he said or repeat it?

So how do our accusers know what Hitler said, unless they have studied his writings too

They must be closeted Nazis, which seems apropos for such lockstep believers in LGBTQEIEIO

 

[manifest destiny]

Lockstep. It's the give away. See vidsanity. See rainbows, alphabets and punctuation. #hivemind. (did I pound sign hashtag right?)

 

[BigRed]

It has been several years since I read the VMI article. When I searched for the one I read, there have been several new ones written since then.

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman

Contrary to myth, Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one, writes George Reisman.

mises.org

I don't know that I have ever heard of Nazi Germany being described as a capitalist state. I'll need to read the article.

VMI often has excellent articles, lectures, etc.

 

[jamil]

I don't know that I have ever heard of Nazi Germany being described as a capitalist state. I'll need to read the article.

VMI often has excellent articles, lectures, etc.

It’s the charge of communists. So you’d have to read the literature from the ideological left to find exposure.

 

[BigRed]

It’s the charge of communists. So you’d have to read the literature from the ideological left to find exposure.

That makes more sense. I'll have to read the article later.

 

[Expat]

I think part of the problem is, has there ever been a true socialist country? Or communist? They all have their oligarchs, the ruling class and do not seek to redistribute any of their wealth. They just make the middle and lower class equally miserable.