Why my mind is closing towards Capitalism

Originally posted by mastahunta

Fascism can exist with a capitalist model, goods and services are exchanged in consideration for other
goods or services. Nazi's would go to a store, give money in exchange for bread, a capitalist exchange.

Now I will not save that capitalism is and evil force, but it is not what you seem to think it is
when it is applied to the world.

And yet again another one trying to claim NATIONAL SOCIALISM is rightwing?... and that capitalism is evil?...

Do tell us, do socialist/communist nations make no money at all?...

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

HE WAS A FASCIST.

A fascist is a right-wing authoritarian.

A state-communist is a left-wing authoritarian.

EITHER ONE IS GOING TO KILL DISSIDENTS AND SEIZE PROPERTY/POWER. End of story.

And Fascism is a LEFTWING ideology...

I already showed what WIKIPEDIA has to say about socialism and that even "cooperative enterprises" as in BUSINESSES/CORPORATIONS can be in control of a nation, and that is FASCISM...

Nice try but you fail YET AGAIN...

edit on 2-2-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)

We have another "either you're trolling or you're an idiot" here...

Seriously... are you just trolling right now or are you really that thick?? Seems like you're just giving an endless runaround while completely ignoring points/facts laid against you in the past.

Here's Fascism, did you even TRY to wikipedia THAT???? Should've been the FIRST thing you did...

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by NoHierarchy


I think the problem here is people are confusing the real left, with the false left of the state/government.

On the political line left is anti-authority with Anarchism/Libertarianism being the extreme, right is more authority with fascism being it's extreme.

The original political meanings of ‘left’ and ‘right’ have changed since their origin in the French estates general in 1789. There the people sitting on the left could be viewed as more or less anti-statists with those on the right being state-interventionists of one kind or another. In this interpretation of the pristine sense, libertarianism was clearly at the extreme left-wing.

www.la-articles.org.uk...

There is no left in the US government, just different degrees of right.

Originally posted by Shred
reply to post by mastahunta

 

Because he was talking about communists, not the left in general. Nazi Germany and Communist Russia were two sides of the same coin; one was national and the other was international.

No, he was talking about the left... read your history... The Nazi's greatest political opponents
were leftwing communists, they used to shoot eachother in the streets...

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by mastahunta

Fascism can exist with a capitalist model, goods and services are exchanged in consideration for other
goods or services. Nazi's would go to a store, give money in exchange for bread, a capitalist exchange.

Now I will not save that capitalism is and evil force, but it is not what you seem to think it is
when it is applied to the world.

And yet again another one trying to claim NATIONAL SOCIALISM is rightwing?... and that capitalism is evil?...

Do tell us, do socialist/communist nations make no money at all?...

Tell me why Hitler would be afraid of Left Wing Communists???

Tell me in plain English why he would fear his political allies... Right now, lets hear it

Originally posted by aravoth

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

Originally posted by aravoth

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

 

Again if you read through this damn thread you will see this have been covered already.

The right appropriated left wing terms to gain support from the people who were heavily left wing at that time. Hitler was lying about being a socialist in that speech.

Hitler supported capitalism, no workers ever owned the means of production in Nazi Germany. He was a fascist, he was in league with Mussolini and Franco, he put socialists in the camps, he fought the socialist in Spain.

You are the one that doesn't understand the history of Europe.

"I absolutely insist on protecting private property... we must encourage private initiative" Hitler.

edit on 2/2/2012 by ANOK because: typo

yeah, now Hitler is a capitalist? ROFL he used Jewish slaves to work in state sponsored corporations, and that makes him a capitalist?

First Hitler is a capitalist, then he's a fascist, those are two completely opposite ideologies, fracken pick one and make up your mind.

You say Hitler lied about being a socialist. Then you post a quote about him protecting private property. But you apparently missed the part where he seized private businesses, and all private property owned by people like me. You think he did that because he was....what..... "insisting on protecting private property"?

your entire argument is crap.

edit on 2-2-2012 by aravoth because: (no reason given)

HE WAS A FASCIST.

A fascist is a right-wing authoritarian.

A state-communist is a left-wing authoritarian.

EITHER ONE IS GOING TO KILL DISSIDENTS AND SEIZE PROPERTY/POWER. End of story.

YEAH WELL, TELL THAT TO THE GREAT ABOVETOPSECRET LIBERTARIAN SOCIALIST AUTHORITY ON ALL THINGS HISTORICAL ANOK WHO SEEMS TO THINK THAT ANYONE WHO INFLUENCED THE WORLD IN A GOOD WAY WAS A SOCIALIST, AND ANYONE WHO INFLUENCED IT IN BAD WAY WAS A CAPITALIST.

This is how you guyS win arguments isn't it. By just saying the most outlandish crazy crap you can get your hands on. Wether it's correct or not won't matter, because there is nothing on earth more frustrating to argue with than a useful idiot.

And I say that in the most loving way possible.

Who have we said is Socialist that is NOT Socialist??

GANDHI=Socialist, EINSTEIN=Avid Socialist, JESUS=Ample Socialist rhetoric, ANARCHISTS=Socialist... the list goes on and on because LIBERTARIAN SOCIALISM IS AN IDEOLOGY FOR THE PEOPLE, FOR THE OPPRESSED. If you truly research it, you cannot conclude otherwise.

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by aravoth

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

Originally posted by aravoth

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

Originally posted by aravoth

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

 

Damn look at your own signature...

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams

Liberty was a left wing term until the 1950's, when it was appropriated by the right in America.

Understanding history will help you understand the rest. Samuel Adams was an early left-wing thinker.

"Were the talents and virtues which heaven has bestowed on men given merely to make them more obedient drudges, to be sacrificed to the follies and ambition of a few? Or, were not the noble gifts so equally dispensed with a divine purpose and law, that they should as nearly as possible be equally exerted, and the blessings of Providence be equally enjoyed by all?

Classic early left wing thinking, before left wing ideas were fully realised that became socialism. Again you are confused because you are taught socialism is something other than the original definition. Socialism as it is seen now by the mainstream, is not the way people saw it in the 1700, 1800 and early 1900's.

"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." --Samuel Adams

Which is what capitalism has done. That is not what Sam Adams was advocating.

EVERY SINGLE PERSON WITH ANY HISTORICAL INFLUENCE AT ALL WAS A LEFT WING THINKER TO YOU!

And liberty was NOT a left wing term, that is by far the most stupid thing you have said today. Like the "left" invented the word..... good god you people are insane.

Do your homework:

en.wikipedia.org...

Yep... Libertarianism was LEFT-WING and utilized by Anarchists and... GASP!... even Anarcho-COMMIES!!!

RUN FOR THE HILLS!!!

So let me get this straight, Anarchists, and classic liberals, people who wanted the absolute least amount of government possible, are the same people you are comparing with todays left wing?

I get it, you're confused... it's ok, there are a lot of people like you out there.

You're either trolling or you have no common sense.

I'm not confused, but your logic is confusing and silly.

I'm saying today's left-wing, the ACTIVIST left-wing is libertarian in many ways, ESPECIALLY folks that you're debating with here. Historically, libertarianism is liberalism is left-wing up until the laissez-faire crowd stole the term and forced it into the lexicon as their own.

So the activist arm of the people I debate here want me to pay off their student loans? What is libertarian about that?

NO, it is just, we don't want to be gouged and indebted worse than we have to, for 20 years just so we can
get a good education, so we can experience a good life. What is so unreasonable about that?

Whats wrong with it? I'm going to have to be the one that pays for it. You are willing to steal from someone else to pay for your own mistakes.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by mastahunta

Fascism can exist with a capitalist model, goods and services are exchanged in consideration for other
goods or services. Nazi's would go to a store, give money in exchange for bread, a capitalist exchange.

Now I will not save that capitalism is and evil force, but it is not what you seem to think it is
when it is applied to the world.

And yet again another one trying to claim NATIONAL SOCIALISM is rightwing?... and that capitalism is evil?...

Do tell us, do socialist/communist nations make no money at all?...

I never said capitalism was evil, I will never say that, I only think capitalism needs to be regulated
by the consent on the people.

reply to post by mastahunta


Communists, not "left wing communists" because that doesn't make sense. The national socialists were leftists themselves. As I've pointed out yes they were each others biggest enemies because both had their own view of how socialism should work and both viewed the other as a threat. The USSR wanted the whole world to rise up in a communist revolution while the Germans wanted to form a German socialist utopia.

Originally posted by mastahunta

Fascism is right wing dodo, read my signature below. Why would Hitler feel Germany was being
attacked by leftists if he was a leftist?

Humm, why would Lenin and Stalin differ in opinion?... Why would Stalin order the poisoning of Lenin when they both were communists?...

Why would Castro order the death of Camilo Cien Fuegos and then make it look like he died in a plane crash?...

Why would socialists turn against other socialists or communists against other communists dodo?... Because they want different versions of their leftwing ideologies and they want to be top dog dodo...

Originally posted by aravoth

Whats wrong with it? I'm going to have to be the one that pays for it. You are willing to steal from someone else to pay for your own mistakes.

Capitalists have been stealing from the people since the end of feudalism.

They steal from workers when they take profit from the workers. Why should someone get rich off my labour?

Originally posted by aravoth

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

Originally posted by aravoth

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

Originally posted by aravoth

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

 

Damn look at your own signature...

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams

Liberty was a left wing term until the 1950's, when it was appropriated by the right in America.

Understanding history will help you understand the rest. Samuel Adams was an early left-wing thinker.

"Were the talents and virtues which heaven has bestowed on men given merely to make them more obedient drudges, to be sacrificed to the follies and ambition of a few? Or, were not the noble gifts so equally dispensed with a divine purpose and law, that they should as nearly as possible be equally exerted, and the blessings of Providence be equally enjoyed by all?

Classic early left wing thinking, before left wing ideas were fully realised that became socialism. Again you are confused because you are taught socialism is something other than the original definition. Socialism as it is seen now by the mainstream, is not the way people saw it in the 1700, 1800 and early 1900's.

"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." --Samuel Adams

Which is what capitalism has done. That is not what Sam Adams was advocating.

EVERY SINGLE PERSON WITH ANY HISTORICAL INFLUENCE AT ALL WAS A LEFT WING THINKER TO YOU!

And liberty was NOT a left wing term, that is by far the most stupid thing you have said today. Like the "left" invented the word..... good god you people are insane.

Do your homework:

en.wikipedia.org...

Yep... Libertarianism was LEFT-WING and utilized by Anarchists and... GASP!... even Anarcho-COMMIES!!!

RUN FOR THE HILLS!!!

So let me get this straight, Anarchists, and classic liberals, people who wanted the absolute least amount of government possible, are the same people you are comparing with todays left wing?

I get it, you're confused... it's ok, there are a lot of people like you out there.

You're either trolling or you have no common sense.

I'm not confused, but your logic is confusing and silly.

I'm saying today's left-wing, the ACTIVIST left-wing is libertarian in many ways, ESPECIALLY folks that you're debating with here. Historically, libertarianism is liberalism is left-wing up until the laissez-faire crowd stole the term and forced it into the lexicon as their own.

So the activist arm of the people I debate here want me to pay off their student loans? What is libertarian about that?

Wow... you don't get it do you. Stop being intentionally thick, seriously, it's tiring and useless.

Free higher education and free health care are STATE Socialist solutions, but they are NOT authoritarian, they are PEOPLE-FRIENDLY and common sense. If governments are to raise taxes (which is arguably their CORE power since the inception of nation-states) then we have a CHOICE as to what to spend the money on. Social Democracies (combination of Socialism, Democracy, and Capitalist markets) tend to tame Capitalism with Democracy and Socialism by providing far freer society, more open/benevolent government, and ample social benefits/welfare. And the results, at least as far as nation-states are concerned, HAVE BEEN GREAT! They are the most advanced nation-states on the planet. And even thought I'm ultimately an Anarchist, I don't see why we shouldn't AT LEAST advance to these forms of society so long as governments/markets exist. It's a no-brainer.

Originally posted by aravoth


Whats wrong with it? I'm going to have to be the one that pays for it. You are willing to steal from someone else to pay for your own mistakes.

What is wrong with being gouged and heavily indebted for 1/4 of my life , just so I can have a good life?

Are you serious? Or am I mis understanding your question?

I never said, you pay for me, I said, if people want to lend money for education, create laws
that minimize the gouging. Not in every act of lending, education is different because it is
a necessary investment in life.

Originally posted by Shred
reply to post by mastahunta

 

The national socialists were leftists themselves.

I see this debate is getting nowhere.

I give up LOL.

If people can't understand the difference between left and right, then how can they understand any of it?

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

*slaps head*

WHAT?!?

Oh my god you are seriously mixed up...

Corporate personhood was voted by RIGHT-WING AND CAPITALIST BARONS AND THEIR GOVERNMENT LACKEYS. CORPORATE PERSONHOOD IS BEING ATTACKED BY THE LEFT RIGHT NOW. STOP BEING A REVISIONIST AND TRYING TO RE-WRITE HISTORY.

And if you actually READ THE LINKS I PROVIDED, you'd find explanations as to how the progressive tax is constitutional. Each bracket is taxed UNIFORMLY, but each income bracket is at a different tax level. Please do your homework, how many times must I tell you??

*Slaps head* What?...

Do you forget that LEFTWINGERS put in power the Feds and gave them power over the economy of these United States, which in turn allowed for corruption to enter politics?...

You are making wild connections and have no clue what you're talking about.

DO YOUR HOMEWORK:

en.wikipedia.org...

and

reclaimdemocracy.org...

I often wonder and have for many years, how sickening it is to live in a world where you have to pay for things that you need to live. This is the problem with this- it gives the appearance that those who can not afford to pay, do not deserve to live. Point blank. Simple but complicated. Why should we have to pay for clean water, food, shelter? THIS IS JUST IN THEORY. I realize that there is no easy solution to this problem. Money being the kind of useless motivator. Gotta work to eat. But if you can't work? There is always assistance of some sort. Yes, but with this there is the risk of fraud. Do the benefits outweigh the gains? There are many various diverse questions, but there seems to be few solutions that will please everyone. What to do, what to do?

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by mastahunta

Fascism is right wing dodo, read my signature below. Why would Hitler feel Germany was being
attacked by leftists if he was a leftist?

Humm, why would Lenin and Stalin differ in opinion?... Why would Stalin order the poisoning of Lenin when they both were communists?...

Why would Castro order the death of Camilo Cien Fuegos and then make it look like he died in a plane crash?...

Why would socialists turn against other socialists or communists against other communists dodo?... Because they want different versions of their leftwing ideologies and they want to be top dog dodo...

I am not going to attack your intelligence, even though you just attacked mine with that rhetorical
contraption...

So, please tell us the name of the Right Wing party in Germany that opposed the Nazi's.
If I am full of crap surely you can do that in 10 seconds... GO!

Clock is ticking

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by NoHierarchy

 

I think the problem here is people are confusing the real left, with the false left of the state/government.

On the political line left is anti-authority with Anarchism/Libertarianism being the extreme, right is more authority with fascism being it's extreme.

The original political meanings of ‘left’ and ‘right’ have changed since their origin in the French estates general in 1789. There the people sitting on the left could be viewed as more or less anti-statists with those on the right being state-interventionists of one kind or another. In this interpretation of the pristine sense, libertarianism was clearly at the extreme left-wing.

www.la-articles.org.uk...

There is no left in the US government, just different degrees of right.

edit on 2/3/2012 by ANOK because: typo

Yeah, you could definitely put it that way.

I tend to go with the Political Compass in my view of the political spectrum, with "Authoritarianism VS Libertarianism" on one axis and economic "Right VS Left" on another, creating a higher dimensional grid than the simplistic "Left VS Right" linear scale...

www.politicalcompass.org...

Originally posted by ANOK

I see this debate is getting nowhere.

I give up LOL.

If people can't understand the difference between left and right, then how can they understand any of it?

If you can't even understand that Samuel Adams was one of the founders on the idea of AMERICAN REPUBLICANISM, yet you want to claim he was a leftist, how can you know the truth from all the other lies, and deceipt you keep believing is the truth?...

If something could be placed structurally into an anarchist system that would protect the people from individual power hungry psychopaths that would surely rise to challenge a seemingly weak system of government. Especially with the emphasis on liberty.

You know the famous quote...attributed to the great monopolist, capitalist, oligarch, robber baron, Jay Gould..."I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half."

They always throw us into the pit of winners and losers to fight...and unfortunately we always do.