Neo-Nazis Fly Under Radar

[Darth]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Democr..._(Germany) nowhere in that parties definition is the word "libertarian"

1st sentence, classical liberalism,

I do believe that it's been explained before that 'libertarian' means something else in europe. I remember checking to make sure we were on the same page on the definition of the term in that obama care thread, you know? The thread where you said that somalia didn't have an oppressive government and then provided a wikipedia link that said that it did. That thread.

[cratehorus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Democr..._(Germany) nowhere in that parties definition is the word "libertarian"

1st sentence, classical liberalism,

I do believe that it's been explained before that 'libertarian' means something else in europe.

You've been brain washed into thinking those are same thing. What are you an 18th century Utilitarian? Does ron paul own a fucking time machine I don't know about? Seriously you brainwashed paulbots will say anything to defend ein fuhrer

Many modern scholars of liberalism argue that no particularly meaningful distinction between classical and modern liberalism exists. Alan Wolfe summarises this viewpoint, which


reject(s) any such distinction and argue(s) instead for the existence of a continuous liberal understanding that includes both Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes... The idea that liberalism comes in two forms assumes that the most fundamental question facing mankind is how much government intervenes into the economy... When instead we discuss human purpose and the meaning of life, Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes are on the same side. Both of them possessed an expansive sense of what we are put on this earth to accomplish. Both were on the side of enlightenment. Both were optimists who believed in progress but were dubious about grand schemes that claimed to know all the answers. For Smith, mercantilism was the enemy of human liberty. For Keynes, monopolies were. It makes perfect sense for an eighteenth-century thinker to conclude that humanity would flourish under the market. For a twentieth century thinker committed to the same ideal, government was an essential tool to the same end... modern liberalism is instead the logical and sociological outcome of classical liberalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_l...liberalism

[Darth]

It's almost as though you don't even read your own links.

[cratehorus]

It's almost as though you don't even read your own links.

you mean this part? the part that basically says for "some strange reason" americans are using this word wrong?.... that part?

Libertarianism has been used in modern times as a substitute for the phrase "neo-classical liberalism", leading to some confusion. The identification of libertarianism with neo-classical liberalism primarily occurs in the United States, where some conservatives and right-libertarians use the term classical liberalism to describe their belief in the primacy of economic freedom and minimal government

[thesummerqueen]

This thread is a Godwin nexus of shit.

[Something completely different]

Ron Paul and his cult the american libertaryan party, the tea party, the golden dawn party from Greece..... etc........ all call "themselves" libertarians, would you consider them libertarian?

The golden dawn party is a fashist party. The tea party (from a european view) are just dumb old men, Ron Paul?

I understand the conection betwen Tea Party and Ron Paul but Golden Dawn?
You say that a lot of fashists call themselves liberterian to disguise.
I think you simply call all liberterians fashist to avoid bringing up actual arguments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Democr..._(Germany) nowhere in that parties definition is the word "libertarian"

"neo-liberalism" if i`m not completly deceived that`s how we here in europe call liberterianism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-liberal

Crypto-fascists use the term "the libertarian party" to disguise what they really are, in order to spread nazi propaganda, and their idealogy, to people that normally would reject them outright.

What are "Crypto-fashists"? Castle Wolfenstein?

Hitler used the word socialist in national socialism under the advice of joseph goebells, in order to appear like a "middle of the road party", left of the right wing socialists............... and to the right of the left wing communist party.

I have shown before, with a 1932 campain speech from Hitler, that Hitler never tried to look like a "middle of the road party"

you'd be surprised, how this word is used in america, I invite you to research ron paul and the comparisons between him and adolph hitler.

Hitler was a drugfree vegetarian, is being a methadict on a hamburgerdiet a antifashist statement?
I dont know about you, but the scariest thing about fashism for me wasn`t that much about Hitler, but about his followers, and how it is possible that a entire population of "ordenary" citizens was convinced and indoctrinated into commiting systematic murder.
By always repeating the phrase "Hitler ordered it" you are simply giving a excuse to the people who said "i simply followed orders"
thesummerqueen meantioned before a "godwins law" a expresion i didn`t know, but which i now find very fitting for your behavior.

So, then whats the appropriate term? if not racist or fascist? then nationalist, maybe ?

analyse the political views of an individual bit by bit, and then draw conclusions out of these small bits.

Ghandi was a left wing nationalist, wasn't he? ghandi was a left winger but he was technically a nationalist so by your simplified "everything is black&white" logic ghandi is racist.................

Ghandi left wing?! Do you know why Ghandi started his movement?
Because as an attorney in south africa, he noticed that indians were treated like black people which he found disgusting. He fought the Indians were a race which was "worth more" than black people.
Would you call Ghandi a fashist?
Ghandi believed that people having to much sex in India caused earthquakes in India.
And his "economic" "spinningweel" idea, would have defenatly caused catastrophic famin of a "great leap forward" style.
Ghandi might have been great in mobilizing the Indian masses, but the more importent heros of the Indian struggle for independece are the members of the Indian National Congress such as Jawaharlal Nehru.

when concerning famous people who are hived up into heroic almoust "uncritiziseable" possitions, it is especialy importent to critizise those!
Just like Hitchens greatly did with mother theresa.

..... left-wing nationalism might be better than right wing nationalism but it's still nationalism. So, was ghandi a racist?

in short: yes! if you dont believe me read this great book:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhi_Behi...f_Divinity


you dont seem to understand that historicaly speaking, racism was whidly accepted all arround the world, and is only recently started to be officialy rejected. It had nothing to do with ideology - it was simply seen as a fact.

I said spoke english, not spoken as a first language, this also included patois, and dialects. there is some debate as to how one defines a "second language" but it's considered a global language.

now your just trying to talk yourself out of this mess you made for yourself. To think that 80 percent of the worlds population speak english, eaven when including those who speak as a second language is silly.
20 percent of the world population is illeterate and therefor doesn`t realy know their own individual languages.
http://www.worldliteracyfoundation.org/i...eport.html

racism is a core principle of fascism

but racism and fashism isn`t always connected. and if you think so, you are simply ignoring historic facts.

yes all those men were in albeit a lesser degree than mussolini, fascists

that is a pritty stupid answere. Franklin D. Roosvelt, Winston Churchill = Mussolini.

Eaven you must see how outrageusly stupid that statement is.

xenophobia is different than racism but it is inherently racist
Societies are far more complex than to be simply, labeled "racist" or "non-racist" there is an ENORMOUS grey area. If you're denying that there is a grey area, then you're just guilty of racism as adolf hitler

Are you not contradicting yourself? I constantly kept saying that you cannot lable every liberterian as a fashist and every racist as a fashist, aswell as in some cases some fashists aren`t racist: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindutva)
And now you come along and say there is a grey area and xenophobia and therefor racism cant be classefied so simply. But in the end you are the one who classified all liberterians as fashists.

[cratehorus]

never said the word 'libertarian" means national socialism

imagine if instead nazi's were calling themselves "anarchists" instead of "libertarians", they could redefine what the word is, even insert conflicting ideologies in and just "call them" anarchist. Then when you criticize their policies, they point to some random 17th century anarchist that has nothing to do with their movement. Then ask why do you support this part of anarchism but not this other part. They will say they support some other completely different conflicting ideology, but just in this one case. It would sure piss off "real" anarchists and since theres no real anarchist movement just these assholes "calling themsleves" anarchists. It would be accpetable in that hypothetical scenario to label anarchists, as nazis...........and if you dont go agree then you're a fuckin dumbass and I don't care what you think................


.... since were now talking about castle wolfenstein, let's try to get this back on track, remember this article is about a racist ethnic killing spree. I'm not sure if u read the article?

[Something completely different]

never said the word 'libertarian" means national socialism

but you acused all liberterian of being nazis in disguise.

imagine if instead nazi's were calling themselves "anarchists" instead of "libertarians", they could redefine what the word is, even insert conflicting ideologies in and just "call them" anarchist. Then when you criticize their policies, they point to some random 17th century anarchist that has nothing to do with their movement. Then ask why do you support this part of anarchism but not this other part. They will say they support some other completely different conflicting ideology, but just in this one case. It would sure piss off "real" anarchists and since theres no real anarchist movement just these assholes "calling themsleves" anarchists. It would be accpetable in that hypothetical scenario to label anarchists, as nazis...........and if you dont go agree then you're a fuckin dumbass and I don't care what you think................

i dont have time for conspiracy theories "what if nazis pretend to be anarchists" "what if nazis pretend to be liberterians" "what if nazis pretend to be black" "what if nazis pretend to be jewish" "what if nazis hide behind the moon on a secret base"
this weird apeal towards a other debate i am havin is simply weird!
You intentionaly accuse the liberterians with whom you happen to disagree with to be nazis, and i have tried to point out to you that that`s bogus.
To simply use a other term such as "anarchists" because i happen to disagree with those, for reasons of apeal is a low, i will hopefully never encounter again.

The only thing I am trying to bring across is
"Dehumanising people by calling them nazis, when they are not, in an attempt to thereby bully them out of a debate, for lack of argument or understanding, is wrong, and a prime example of intelectual cowerdess"

but you are probably the kind of personality who, when reading this will think. "oh he called me intelectual, thank you very much"
and who will repeat what he has done before.

.... since were now talking about castle wolfenstein, let's try to get this back on track, remember this article is about a racist ethnic killing spree. I'm not sure if u read the article?

the article was about underground neo-nazis in germany

[cratehorus]

then you're a fuckin dumbass and I don't care what you think................

[thesummerqueen]

well that escalated quickly.