That's like the third time you've dodged the question. Is an honest answer to hard?
That's like the hundredth time you've stuck your nose in where it doesn't belong. Is it "to hard" to understand that not all questions in this forum are addressed to you?
That's like the hundredth time you've stuck your nose in where it doesn't belong. Is it "to hard" to understand that not all questions in this forum are addressed to you?
I'll take that as a yes. Not in the least bit surprised about it.
Are you suggesting that it's me who dredges up this left wing/right wing BS in every second thread (no matter what the topic) here in O/T?
No, I wasn't suggesting that at all. I was simply offering up your previous comment regarding "rewriting history" in lieu of this comment of yours:
"Ya gotta wonder what motivates certain people here who feel a need to "educate" the rest of us about who's left and who's right in (what appears to be) every second O/T thread."
You don't see any inconsistancy there? Again, what is *your* motivation to "school" us with the earlier, "rewriting history", comment?
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 05-17-2009).]
IP: Logged
01:53 PM
Patrick Member
Posts: 37674 From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Registered: Apr 99
No, I wasn't suggesting that at all. I was simply offering up your previous comment regarding "rewriting history" in lieu of this comment of yours:
"Ya gotta wonder what motivates certain people here who feel a need to "educate" the rest of us about who's left and who's right in (what appears to be) every second O/T thread."
You don't see any inconsistancy there? Again, what is your motivation to "school" us with the earlier comment?
I'm glad you brought up "school".
I started grade one in the fall of 1961. This was during the height of the Cold War. When I first heard about communists and fascists it was probably in school. You would think during this era that if any mileage could've been gained by labeling Nazis as socialists or communists, it would've been done at that time. But no, it was explained to all of us in Social Studies that Hitler and the Nazi Party were right wing fascists.
On page one of this thread I posted a link to the Horseshoe theory which represents pretty well what was taught to us at the time.
Say what you wish, but it makes little sense for Hitler and the Nazi Party to now be considered socialists or communists when 40 to 50 years ago it would’ve made a lot more sense in regards to propaganda.
It makes me wonder what the true agenda is today then of those who are trying to... yes, rewrite history by promoting the notion that Hitler was a left winger.
As far as my “motivation to school” anyone here about Hitler and Nazis, it’s only in response to zealots like Phranc who do more to turn people off any idea than to inform them.
IP: Logged
02:30 PM
Patrick Member
Posts: 37674 From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Registered: Apr 99
I started grade one in the fall of 1961. This was during the height of the Cold War. When I first heard about communists and fascists it was probably in school. You would think during this era that if any mileage could've been gained by labeling Nazis as socialists or communists, it would've been done at that time. But no, it was explained to all of us in Social Studies that Hitler and the Nazi Party were right wing fascists.
On page one of this thread I posted a link to the Horseshoe theory which represents pretty well what was taught to us at the time.
Say what you wish, but it makes little sense for Hitler and the Nazi Party to now be considered socialists or communists when 40 to 50 years ago it would’ve made a lot more sense in regards to propaganda.
It makes me wonder what the true agenda is today then of those who are trying to... yes, rewrite history by promoting the notion that Hitler was a left winger.
As far as my “motivation to school” anyone here about Hitler and Nazis, it’s only in response to zealots like Phranc who do more to turn people off any idea than to inform them.
I think you might still be stuck on the graphical representation of the horseshoe theory. If you read Bertrands comments on it, you might note that he actually argues the "horseshoe" into a completed circle with both fascism and communism actually meeting at the top of the graph. Bertrand discourses this extensively throughout his article. He cites example after example where he holds that the supposedly two different ideologies are historically the same under various criteria as totalitarian. In essence what Bertrand argues is a two dimensional X-Y graph, not unlike Slomps model of European politics with the X axis for Authoritarian and Libertarian inverted 180 degrees. What remains unexplained by Bertrand in the "horseshoe" graphic is the criteria for the X axis. Slomp similarly fails to fully define the same axis. In point of fact, one could effectively argue that Slomp's 2 dimensional graph theory simply duplicates the X axis in the Y axis. We need to give some definition to the X axis of the horseshoe graph. Nolan seems to well define both his X and Y axis in terms of cultural and economic focus so I'll use his, but I'm sure several others would serve the same purpose. Overlaying Nolan's model over the horseshoe, it's worth noting that the extremes of both cultural and economic focus on the community, (state), meet at the extreme left upper corner. Nolan's model also represents the extreme of economic focus on the individual to the extreme right of center, at the far right upper corner of what Nolan terms "right-ism". While the cultural focus on the state is inarguable, the extreme of economic focus on the individual is hardly a trait one could reasonably associate with Nazi Germany. We know that individual property rights were respected under the NSDAP, as were most small businesses, yet virtually all industry in Germany was effectively nationalized or under firm government control as WW II began. Again overlaying Nolan's model over the horseshoe, this would tend to indicate that the majority of economic focus was on the community, (state), effectively placing the Nazi government somewhat left of center since the greater portion of the overall economy was under state control. Given the forgoing, I think it would be difficult for you to utilize the horseshoe graph you cited as supportive of any far right extremism to define the nazis as you have stated. While certainly better than a simple one dimensional scale, the horseshoe theory you cite actually argues against such.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 05-17-2009).]
IP: Logged
03:56 PM
CoryFiero Member
Posts: 4341 From: Charleston, SC Registered: Oct 2001
while I agree the horseshoe should be a more ''C-clip like form as there is a closeness between the end points and followers but not leaders did and do jump the gap
that said all three graffix charts slomp's JP's and the HS show the nazi on the right none show them on the left
has anyone found a chart with nazi's on the left? or a nolan chart with people [ leaders ] or partys esp the nazi or fascists placed on it?
"virtually all industry in Germany was effectively nationalized or under firm government control as WW II began'' yes and so was all major american and british industry under firm government control and direction with rationing and production quotas so whats your point??????????????????? were we just as socialist as germany at that point in the war?????????????? or it that just what most governments do in war time
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
[This message has been edited by ray b (edited 05-17-2009).]
IP: Logged
06:00 PM
Wichita Member
Posts: 20686 From: Wichita, Kansas Registered: Jun 2002
while I agree the horseshoe should be a more ''C-clip like form as there is a closeness between the end points and followers but not leaders did and do jump the gap
that said all three graffix charts slomp's JP's and the HS show the nazi on the right none show them on the left
has anyone found a chart with nazi's on the left? or a nolan chart with people [ leaders ] or partys esp the nazi or fascists placed on it?
"virtually all industry in Germany was effectively nationalized or under firm government control as WW II began'' yes and so was all major american and british industry under firm government control and direction with rationing and production quotas so whats your point??????????????????? were we just as socialist as germany at that point in the war?????????????? or it that just what most governments do in war time
The thing that makes Nazi's in line with the right end of the spectrum along with attracting the "extreme-right" is its pro-nationalism stance.
But as my previous post, if you are "today's" leftist socialist, then you have the same ideology and thinking as Adolph Hitler and Nazism. There is no dispute about that.
Originally posted by Wichita: The thing that makes Nazi's in line with the right end of the spectrum along with attracting the "extreme-right" is its pro-nationalism stance.
But as my previous post, if you are "today's" leftist socialist, then you have the same ideology and thinking as Adolph Hitler and Nazism. There is no dispute about that.
why??? just because you do not like liberals or leftest socialists they donot all think alike each other let alone hitler
and TODAYS nazi punks in gangs are 100% rightwing they are not and never have been socialists
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
while I agree the horseshoe should be a more ''C-clip like form as there is a closeness between the end points and followers but not leaders did and do jump the gap
that said all three graffix charts slomp's JP's and the HS show the nazi on the right none show them on the left
has anyone found a chart with nazi's on the left? or a nolan chart with people [ leaders ] or partys esp the nazi or fascists placed on it?
"virtually all industry in Germany was effectively nationalized or under firm government control as WW II began'' yes and so was all major american and british industry under firm government control and direction with rationing and production quotas so whats your point??????????????????? were we just as socialist as germany at that point in the war?????????????? or it that just what most governments do in war time
Still stuck on the pictures aren't you Ray?
IP: Logged
06:24 PM
GT86 Member
Posts: 5203 From: Glendale, AZ Registered: Mar 2003
why??? just because you do not like liberals or leftest socialists they donot all think alike each other let alone hitler
and TODAYS nazi punks in gangs are 100% rightwing they are not and never have been socialists
What exactly makes them right wing? Have you looked at the nazi platform of today's nazi party? Did you know just because some dumbass says heil Hitler and has 88 tattooed on him doesn't make him a nazi?
Try to use facts.
IP: Logged
06:27 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
From a practical viewpoint, there's little actual difference as far as the people are concerned. In both cases, the government maintains control over industry. In Socialism, the government says it's owned by the people, which means the state. Facists say control is centralized by the state for the people. Argue semantics, but the end result is basically the same. The means of getting there may be different, but that just shows which leg of the horseshoe you went down.
IP: Logged
06:28 PM
Wichita Member
Posts: 20686 From: Wichita, Kansas Registered: Jun 2002
why??? just because you do not like liberals or leftest socialists they donot all think alike each other let alone hitler
and TODAYS nazi punks in gangs are 100% rightwing they are not and never have been socialists
That because today's leftist socialist are BAD people. You do not want leftist socialist controlling the government or your lives.
But to repeat myself:
Nazi publications and speeches included anti-capitalist rhetoric. (hmmmm... like today's leftist).
The Nazi Party’s “Twenty-Five Point Programme” demanded:
…that the State shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens… the abolition of all incomes unearned by work… the ruthless confiscation of all war profits… the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations… profit-sharing in large enterprises… extensive development of insurance for old-age… land reform suitable to our national requirements…
hmmmmm... still goes hand in hand with today's leftist.
Hitler said in 1927, “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance.” However, Hitler wrote in 1930, “Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true Socialism is not." In a confidential 1931 interview, Hitler told the influential editor of a pro-business newspaper, “I want everyone to keep what he has earned subject to the principle that the good of the community takes priority over that of the individual. But the State should retain control; every owner should feel himself to be an agent of the State… The Third Reich will always retain the right to control property owners.
All in all, you can say that today leftist socialist are actually Nazi's, because their line of thinking and ideology follows that of Hitler. Word for word, you Ray B, Patrick and Neptune have the EXACT ideology as Adolph Hitler.
pictures [ charts ] are harder to spin I repeat show a chart with hitler nazi or fascist on the left all 3 I have seen put them on the right and that is exactly where I have allways put them I hear spin and handwaving that they are not rightests but no proof or charts just spin and spin is not proof or facts
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
IP: Logged
07:41 PM
Wichita Member
Posts: 20686 From: Wichita, Kansas Registered: Jun 2002
pictures [ charts ] are harder to spin I repeat show a chart with hitler nazi or fascist on the left all 3 I have seen put them on the right and that is exactly where I have allways put them I hear spin and handwaving that they are not rightests but no proof or charts just spin and spin is not proof or facts
You can keep on posting that horseshoe chart all day long, but you cannot deny the exact quotes of Hitler and his ideology is in line with leftist socialist like you.
You can keep on posting that horseshoe chart all day long, but you cannot deny the exact quotes of Hitler and his ideology is in line with leftist socialist like you.
He can and will deny it all day long. He will even tell you that Hitler lied about every thing so his quotes can't be used. Then he will tell you that the nazi platform was socialist but Hitler killed all of them or some crap.
[This message has been edited by Phranc (edited 05-17-2009).]
so you guys believe what the politico's speachs say is exactly what they do???
sorry but I never have or will do that but do believe that the actions speak a far truer picture then the words
Lets see here. Hitler said they were socialists and then enacted socialist programmes based on their socialist platform. Some times they do as they say. But you don't want little facts like that since they get in the way of your delusional little world.
pictures [ charts ] are harder to spin I repeat show a chart with hitler nazi or fascist on the left all 3 I have seen put them on the right and that is exactly where I have allways put them I hear spin and handwaving that they are not rightests but no proof or charts just spin and spin is not proof or facts
I didn't offer you any "spin" or "handwaving" as you call it Ray. I simply discussed some known political theory, and rather than simply glance at a graphic representation of those theories, I went on to actually offer the theory and commentary supportive of those. None of that was my personal opinion, or preconcieved notion. In simple terms you might better understand, "I showed my work, along with the answer."
I read the blogs too Ray, on BOTH sides, and while it's gone unspoken in this thread thus far, we both know what this is really about don't we?
While it was more low-key during the elections, this particular rhetoric has ramped up since then. This is simply about liberals attempting to "poison the well" of conservatism by attempting to tar it with an objectionable political and historical heritage, ( i.e. nazism), no matter how specious the comparison might be if even casually analyzed. It's actually a perversion of "Memetics", in attempting to intentionally create a viral meme for a specific purpose. It's really no different than the "McSame" meme that was created during the election to describe John McCain as being the *same* as George Bush.
Memes are most effective on those without critical thinking skills, those who quickly and easily latch onto buzz words, catch phrases, and slogans and are prone to being easily propagandized. In the instant case we have been discussing throughout this thread the actual meme thats being pushed is "conservative =nazi".
You have already demonstrated that you accepted the meme of the word "progressive" to mean "looking forward", or "progress", and yet you have never demonstrated that you truly understand the actual ideology at the core of the modern "progressive" political movement. Your own posts have been rife with slogans, buzz words and nicknames, (memes). When offered discourse on various political theory and spectra, you consistantly revert back to the graphical representations that best support your preconcieved notions and refuse any discussion that might conflict with those notions.
Quoting from Bertrand:
"Both Fascist and Socialist regimes have been extremely intolerant of dissent, often using secret police or the military to round up dissents, and imprison, torture or execute them, usually without trial. Even today most members of the new left are extremely bigoted people who express hatred towards those who disagree with them, often labeling them ‘right-wing’ (as though this were an evidently bad thing in itself), ‘capitalist scum’ and ‘fascist’. The irony in the last insult is that it is often they, rather than the person to whom they have directed the insult, are the ones who are fascist.
Earlier I reiterated that you are out of your league when it comes to political debate Ray. Now I do not believe that to be completely correct. You are a simpleton Ray. A "tool".
For myself, I would accept Hitler and the nazi party as being either left *or* right, as it's completely subjective and inconsequential to U.S. politics today. You might as well argue that "Klingons" were right wing and "Romulans" were left wing
The real agenda behind the issue is the meme thats being propogated, and only a simpleton would accept it.
IP: Logged
09:44 AM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
wow - ya guys really went to town maybe y'all need to divide this up - it may help ALOT lets start with: are talking about Nazi, as is Nazi party, germany, 1930? or are we talking about Hitler? because there is a difference between the two. pre WW2 or during WW2? because that will change things as well. what about the SS? because I really think Hitler by himself was dipping into everypot, and using whatever worked. the Nazi (left) part is what put him in favor with the people. But, I really dont see how "blitzkrieg" fits into either righ or left wing? Genocide? is that right or left wing? but, I expect this is why the extremists on the board are playing "Hot Potato" with this. So, building a strong army - right or left wing? using that same army - right or left wing? lol - niether/both - dummies.
and, maybe some specifics & definitions are needed. because it seems many dont even know what left/right means - they just assumed a definition based on use in current political climate. and - next the time frame. because Hitler was not exactly consistant, nor predictable in his many years in power. And, Hitler is NOT the Nazi party. in fact - how much of the Nazi party actually existed or was in control of ANYTHING after the War started? because y'all are argueing over what color a rainbow is.
No doubt left wing. Besides the socialism aspect, it seems people that people here are missing another main aspect that drove the Hitler and the Nazi's as well as other left wing parties : eugenics and population control. HG Well's, one of the most prominent left wing socialist thinker's of his time, called for the extermination of christians and the handicapped. Tommy Douglas, hero of the Canadian left and founder of the New Democratic Party, called for the murder of aborignals, gays, as well as other groups deemed to be undesireable. Even today we have left wing groups such as Planned Parenthood continuing the leftist crusade to murder those they feel undesireable. These individuals and groups are just following in the footstep of their predecessors. Here is a great article from the National Post on the history of the left and it's shameful legacy of eugenics.
Michael Coren: Don't blame right-wing thugs for eugenics — Socialists made it fashionable Posted: June 16, 2008, 3:01 PM by Marni Soupcoff Michael Coren An exhibition of the history of those scientific ideas that gave a grimy intellectual veneer to the Nazi genocide opens this week at the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa. The collection centres on eugenics, the notion that humanity can be improved and perfected by selective breeding and the elimination of individuals and groups considered to be undesirable. Entitled Deadly Medicine: Creating the Master Race, it reveals how it was not thoughtless right-wing thugs as much as writers and scientists, the intellectual elite, who led the movement.
The exhibit is important, accurate but, regrettably, long overdue. It also fails to stress just how much the socialist left initiated and supported the eugenics campaign, not only in Germany but in Britain, the U.S. and the rest of Europe. Playwright George Bernard Shaw, English social democrat leader Sydney Webb and, in Canada, Tommy Douglas were just three influential socialists who called, for example, for the mass sterilization of the handicapped. In his Master’s thesis The Problems of the Subnormal Family, the now revered Douglas argued that the mentally and even physically disabled should be sterilized and sent to camps so as not to “infect” the rest of the population.
It is deeply significant that few if any of Douglas’s left-wing comrades in this country or internationally were surprised or offended by his proposals. Indeed the early fascism of 1920s Italy, while unsavoury and dictatorial, had little connection with social engineering and eugenics. The latter German version of fascism was influenced not by ultra conservatism in southern Europe but, as is made clear in the writings of the Nazi ideologues, by the Marxist left.
The most vociferous and outspoken of the socialist eugenicists was the novelist HG Wells, author of The Time Machine, The War of the Worlds and The Invisible Man. He argued in best-selling books such as Anticipations and A Modern Utopia that the world would collapse and from this collapse a new order should and would emerge.
“People throughout the world whose minds were adapted to the big-scale conditions of the new time. A naturally and informally organised educated class, an unprecedented sort of people.” A strict social order would be formed. At the bottom of it were the base. These were “people who had given evidence of a strong anti-social disposition”, including “the black, the brown, the swarthy, the yellow.” Christians would also “have to go” as well as the handicapped. Wells devoted entire pamphlets to the need of “preventing the birth, preventing the procreation or preventing the existence” of the mentally and physically handicapped. “This thing, this euthanasia of the weak and the sensual is possible. I have little or no doubt that in the future it will be planned and achieved.”
The people of Africa and Asia, he said, simply could never find a place in a modern world controlled by science. Better to do away with the lot. “I take it they will have to go” he said of them. Marriage as it is known would have to end but couples could form mutually agreed unions. They would list their “desires, diseases, needs” on little cards and a central authority would decide who was fitted for whom.
Population would be rigidly controlled, with forced abortion for those who were not of the right class and race. Religion would be banned, children would be raised in communes and all would be well. The old and the ill would, naturally, have to be done away with and doctors would be given the authority to decide who had a right to live, who had a duty to die.
In the United States socialist writer Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood and the mother of the abortion movement, called for a radical eugenics approach as early as the first years of the 20th century. She wrote of the need for “a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring. It is a vicious cycle; ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them. Herein lies the key of civilization.”
The key of civilization. Unlocking the doors of a hell once unimaginable but now, after the Holocaust, the Ukrainian genocide, Pol Pot and Mao’s mass slaughter, entirely within the grasp of contemporary sensibilities. History is often clouded by fashion and the whims of the victorious. Because some of the most pernicious intellectual criminals of the past century wore red they have escaped condemnation. It is time for the clouds to clear and the fashions to change.
[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 05-18-2009).]
IP: Logged
12:10 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
From a practical viewpoint, there's little actual difference as far as the people are concerned. In both cases, the government maintains control over industry. In Socialism, the government says it's owned by the people, which means the state. Facists say control is centralized by the state for the people. Argue semantics, but the end result is basically the same. The means of getting there may be different, but that just shows which leg of the horseshoe you went down.
I think Formula88 hit the nail on the head right here. On the basic political spectrum, left is total government and right is no government. This is a big picture view of politics and government. Our entire political spectrum fits in the middle of this kind of graph (see the video I posted earlier). When you talk about Nazis, Soviet Russia, other communist regimes...it really doesn't matter what their philosophy is, it's the main objective that is important - more power government, and more control over people's lives, or less. Does it really matter whether the government that rules over you completely has a swastika or a hammer and sickle emblem on their uniform?
The left in this country wants more government. The left wants more control. You can see this in the policies they push. Universal health care (do you REALLY think this is some altruistic gesture?), carbon credits (tax and regulate EVERYTHING in your life), mandatory service (didn't the left object to this when they accused the right of wanting to reinstitute the draft?), socialist programs, tax the rich and redistribute (economic justice? what the f*** is that?)...and it goes on and on.
As for the right in this country, they basically want less government and more self-determination and responsibility for oneself. If a right wing politician is pushing for bigger government and more control over you, then they aren't really right wing. It doesn't matter if there's a "D" or an "R" after their name, it doesn't matter if they have a swastika, hammer and sickle, or American flag on their chest, if they want more government, they're left, if they want less, they're right.
IP: Logged
12:16 PM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
yes, maybe we should have everyone posts wtf they think "left" & "right" actually mean - because it sure seems many have it mixed up, and just use the terms using definitions they created themselves thru observation.
I'm sure we will see that there really isnt a absolute definition. and, in fact - that it means different things to different people.
after we get that worked out - THEN we need to find out what kind of Nazi we want to attempt to place in the proper slot. pre-ww2? during ww2? after ww2? gang/thug of present day? political Nazi of present day? and, do we include Hitler himself? and again - what era Hitler?
IP: Logged
01:52 PM
Blacktree Member
Posts: 20770 From: Central Florida Registered: Dec 2001
Nazi Germany was run by the National Socialist German Workers' Party. The word "Nazi" is a contraction of "national socialist".
Think about that for a minute... the workers' party... socialist...
Nazi Germany is often characterized as right-wing, in an attempt to differentiate them from Communist Russia. But make no mistake: the economic aspects of the Nazi Party were definitely left-wing. However, their social aspects are extremely right-wing. And that's what most people think of when they think of Nazi Germany.
If you were to take the political compass and wrap it around a sphere, Nazi Germany and Communist Russia would be in almost the same spot. They came from two different directions, but still reached a similar destination. They both have many similarities including a ruthless dictator, a single-party government, a socialist economy, suppression of religion, and imperialism.
IP: Logged
01:53 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
yes, maybe we should have everyone posts wtf they think "left" & "right" actually mean - because it sure seems many have it mixed up, and just use the terms using definitions they created themselves thru observation.
There *is* a lot of "apples and oranges" arguing in this thread. It's like I said...it doesn't matter about Nazi, Socialist, Communist, Democrat, Republican...you're either for more government and more restrictions or less. It doesn't really matter in the end what your reasoning or ideology is, you're either for making us freer or more captive.
IP: Logged
02:18 PM
PFF
System Bot
4-mulaGT Member
Posts: 1210 From: Somewhere beetween raisin' hell... and saving grace. oh... and MN Registered: Jan 2006
Nazi Party = Socialism in the name of the country (extreme nationalism, big government) Communist Party = Socialism in the name of the people (extreme communism, big government)
They are the exact same, the only difference is how this government control was reasoned to the people.
Now defining which is left and right YOU NEED TO DEFINE WHAT IS LEFT AND WHAT IS RIGHT?
Is Left communism (people oriented) and Right Nationalism? I believe this is what leads people to believe the Nazis were Right wing.
Or is left big government and high control, with the Right being the exact opposite?
However there are many more political "dimensions" that are suggested that blur things even more, one of the most popular dimensions added would be one for religion having "atheist" on one side and "zealot" on the other.
So are the Nazis right wing? Depends on your definition of right wing.
IP: Logged
10:00 PM
May 19th, 2009
Patrick Member
Posts: 37674 From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Registered: Apr 99
Tommy Douglas, hero of the Canadian left and founder of the New Democratic Party, called for the murder of aborignals, gays, as well as other groups deemed to be undesireable.
Let's see a direct quote. If there's any truth to it I'm surprised you don't worship the guy.
You just HATE Canada, don't you? Every freakin' chance you get you've got something nasty to say about this country or the people in it. For cryst sakes, even in a thread about Nazis of all things you feel the need to slam a true Canadian icon.
What's keeping you here? Why don't you (please!) go live in another country (if it's so bad here) and then you can b!tch and whine endlessly about that place.
[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 05-19-2009).]
