NAZI GREENS - An Inconvenient History • Martin Durkin

originally posted by: greencmp
It has been on a steady downward trend since it was nationalized.

That means, if my assertion is to be accepted, that it would have been better if left alone.

But what was there before 1980 was still government run.

a reply to: daskakik

We have had local schooling for a very long time but, it was the federal consolidation that has produced the monster that we have before us.

Even local government may not have had much of a role in most schools until the 20th century.

originally posted by: greencmp
We have had local schooling for a very long time but, it was the federal consolidation that has produced the monster that we have before us.

So, it still doesn't make it worse than countries where education is a personal choice.

Even local government may not have had much of a role in most schools until the 20th century.

That means that there are 80 years in between which you don't seem to have a problem with.

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Kali74

I didn't write the article and I'm not alone. I have close friends who I do this to (to a lesser extent) in person so consider yourself lucky to be able to close the frame.

I don't pretend that this isn't provocative but, if the similarities aren't just coincidental, it deserves to be inspected.

Correlation does not equal causation.

Some people genuinely do want a fairer society and a cleaner planet. And I bet 99.9℅ of them are NOT fascists.

However there is such a thing as a Nipster. (Nazi Hipster)

.

a reply to: daskakik

I wouldn't go that far

But, local schools funded by local taxes are the business of that municipality and its residents so, it is outside of the nationalist conversation.

a reply to: Kali74

We've left too many bodies around the world not to be exquisitely cautious in dealing with this.HATE is a primitive thoughtless act that only gets you killed.
IT'S a measure of intelligence and knowledge of history that shows us that.

a reply to: nonjudgementalist

If they want those things to be implemented through redistribution of wealth by the force of state arms against private citizens, that would be fascist.

originally posted by: greencmp
I wouldn't go that far

But, local schools funded by local taxes are the business of that municipality and its residents so, it is outside of the nationalist conversation.

Seems you went from federal to municipal and left out the state, which was big government running things for a long time.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: greencmp
I wouldn't go that far

But, local schools funded by local taxes are the business of that municipality and its residents so, it is outside of the nationalist conversation.

Seems you went from federal to municipal and left out the state, which was big government running things for a long time.

How is municipal government "big government"? (NYC, I suppose)

It is not that I like local government.

I don't like municipal or state government either if that wasn't clear but, the national discussion about national programs is always about federal policy.

originally posted by: greencmp
How is municipal government "big government"? (NYC, I suppose)

Re-read what I posted.

I don't like municipal or state government either if that wasn't clear but, the national discussion about national programs is always about federal policy.

The post that you replied to simply said that the state is the provider of education. You are the one that tried to stear it into a discussion about education at the federal level.

The state in that posts includes local government.

a reply to: daskakik

You are right, I skimmed your initial statement framing the lack of a state position.

I argue that there should be a free market for education so, I am wholly opposed to all public education.

I hope that makes it clear.

That said, it is national policy, federal programs that constitute the manifest socialism in the US that cannot be escaped.

A resident of a socialized town or state can leave, a citizen of the United States cannot without expatriating.

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: nonjudgementalist

If they want those things to be implemented through redistribution of wealth by the force of state arms against private citizens, that would be fascist.

;

Actually the socialist state is the REVOLUTIONARY GUARD, that protects the will of the working classes who want to move away from Feudalism into a more equal fairer society. Its your NEO-FEUDAL beliefs that want to take us back to feudalism that are fascist!

originally posted by: nonjudgementalist

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: nonjudgementalist

If they want those things to be implemented through redistribution of wealth by the force of state arms against private citizens, that would be fascist.

;

Actually the socialist state is the REVOLUTIONARY GUARD, that protects the will of the working classes who want to move away from Feudalism into a more equal fairer society. Its your NEO-FEUDAL beliefs that want to take us back to feudalism that are fascist!

That is in direct opposition to the author's position.

To understand why green ideology emerged at all, and why it happened in Germany, we need to go back in time, a few centuries, to set the scene. We have described elsewhere on this blog (The Greens: A Warning from History), the transition from feudal society to capitalism. To the greens this great historical change is more or less the source of all evil. In Germany, it was a process which began, falteringly, in the 13th Century.

Capitalism was the liberator of the serfs under feudalism, not socialism.

originally posted by: greencmp
I argue that there should be a free market for education so, I am wholly opposed to all public education.

And I pointed out that countries with "free market" for education are doing worse than the US.

That said, it is national policy, federal programs that constitute the manifest socialism in the US that cannot be escaped.

That is the POV that certain groups in the US are pushing.

A resident of a socialized town or state can leave, a citizen of the United States cannot without expatriating.

You can drop out or leave whenever you want. You just have to live with your choice.

a reply to: daskakik

That's not true, the police will come and get you for truancy.

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: ScepticScot

To paraphrase Washington AP Bureau Chief Byron Price, "all politics is local (and should stay that way)".

So yes, absent any overarching administration, we can individually experiment within our immediate surroundings with whatever ecological hypotheses we may have. No central control is necessary or helpful.

As it happens, private individuals are much better stewards of resources, including land, than the federal government.

Apologies for delay replying, real world intruded.

Private individuals as better stewards of resources assumes two key points. One that there no externalities to the use of resources which is clearly false. Two that there is a relationship between land and those who own in. Globalisation and increased foreign ownership has broken this link.

As a non american I would not presume to comment on the specifics of federal government managing resources.

a reply to: greencmp

Good Read !


The fact that environmentalism disregards feeding people in favor of limiting the individual's freedom of action is a two-fer from the totalitarian perspective.

No wonder the NSDAP leadership loved it.

originally posted by: greencmp
That's not true, the police will come and get you for truancy.

I meant society and/or country, not playing hooky.

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: ScepticScot

I could argue this either way really. Traditionally religion has been the primary educating force in the world. When we look at modern education it is derived from *gasp* Germany

We cant say socialism failed somewhere because "they dont have the right mindset" or "democratic traditions". Really what does democracy have to do with socialist statism besides being a trojan horse?

I would argue there is clear distinction between authoritarian imposed socialist polices (communism for want of a better term) and social democracy. Economic success or failure is largely driven by the organisations and institutions within the economy. If these are undemocratic, disorganised, corrupt or inconsistent then economic performance will suffer.

a reply to: ScepticScot

I would agree but also disagree. Plenty of authoritarian/marxist states have arisen through populist support and democratic processes even the Nazis. The centralization and socialization work better with consent but when that runs out the apparatus is already in place through central planning policies. I look at the EU sure its voluntary until you decide you want to leave. I align with Plato when it comes to democracy it will eventually descend into a tyranny. Left or Right.