Darwin's Theory of Evolution and Darwinism Has Led To The Holocaust And Genocide Of Blacks

[Darkstorn]

So yeah, you've got very different types of Fascism, and National Socialism is just one. The worst one.

According to him, modern social democracy and liberalism are right there with them. And by right i mean left... I think that's the funniest thing about him.

 

[Nietzsche]

National Socialism is a TYPE of Fascism, but Fascism is not National Socialism. There's a lot of subtle but important differences.

This is something a lot of people forget.

How about Brazilian Integralism? That was Fascism that was (shock!) not racist!

Ehhhhh. It's racist, it's just not racist in the traditional sense. Their whole schtick was that Brazilians were a sort of Master Race because they believed due to the extensive mixing that occurred, they combined all the supposed "best traits" of the worlds' races. A sort of racism that works from the opposite end of the spectrum, the notion that "racial purity" is inferior to a "thorough mixing".

Mussolini's Fascism wasn't particularly anti-Semitic, though he would occasionally burn some Jews to keep Hitler off his back.

Eh. While by no means as proactive regarding intolerance and violence against Jews, they were not at all hesitant to hand over their Jews to the Nazis, knowing full well that meant either instant death, being worked to death, or being experimented on until death.

He also was far more socialist in his rhetoric (ironically).

How is it ironic? The entire point of Fascism was that it posited a "Third Way" between Capitalism and Socialism. Retaining notions of a privatized economy so long as the companies were willing to put the Fatherland before profits.

Franco? His Falangists were basically Mussolini-style Fascists to my understanding, but mi Caudillo himself was more of an old-school monarchist (something Hitler hated) with staunch support for the Catholic Church.

...as he should of, considering Franco wasn't a Falangist, or rather, he was by no means an "authentic" Falangist. The opposite of what happened in Germany happened in Spain. Rather than the Traditionalist-Conservative parties and people being co-opted and radicalized into Fascist-National Socialism, the Fascists were greatly moderated by the Traditionalists and Conservatives. Really, what happened to the Falange is what von Papen, Hindenburg and so on was hoping would happen to the Nazis. They were banking on Hitler either being "reined in" by the responsibilities of governing or failing that, Goering(by far one of the most reasonable and level-headed of the Nazis) being able to wrestle control of the NSDAP from Hitler.

So yeah, you've got very different types of Fascism, and National Socialism is just one. The worst one.

Fascism runs the spectrum of barely-fascist, generic military-authoritarian(your Francos, Horthies, Jozef Tisos) to the absolutely insane, balls-out madness(Himmlers, the Ustase, the Iron Guard).

The Ustase in particular are notable, some of the **** they were doing made Himmler and the SS tell them to tone it the **** down.

 

[Nietzsche]

It's just another name for Nazism or national socialism, both of which control business and industry (and by extension, the people)--as opposed to communism which owns it. Academia has lead the way for socialism with the it's first target being the lixicon (same for anarchy and communism).

You are aware that the Nazis were actually loosening corporate and such laws, right? Their actual policies were more fiscally liberal(that is the traditional sense of the term, encouraging free markets and what not) than both Weimar Germany and the Kaiserreich, right?

 

[Revoltingest]

Fascism is a rightwing concept.....

It can be right or left wing.
(The biggest examples happen to be leftish, eg, USSR).
But since both terms are so loaded with ambiguity, we
should just agree that fascism is terrible, wherever it's found.

 

[Revoltingest]

You are aware that the Nazis were actually loosening corporate and such laws, right? Their actual policies were more fiscally liberal(that is the traditional sense of the term, encouraging free markets and what not) than both Weimar Germany and the Kaiserreich, right?

Reading the Wikipedia entry on the subject, it sure strikes me that Nazis exercised great
control over the economy & business. And this control increased as time marched on.
Ref...
Economy of Nazi Germany - Wikipedia
Was Hitler a "pure" socialist?
No.
But he was more so than many modern countries which are called such.
So the label fits....like a cheap suit of the wrong size.

 

[ChristineM]

So basically you just go back to the tried and true lib strategy of name calling when ya got nuthin' else. That with intimidation and voila, Goebbels.

Well you see when you need to make a mockery of the US constitution to justify your hatred then you deserve to be treated like a stupid child in pictures which represent your mindset

Note Goebbels was right winger, rather like you

 

[ChristineM]

It can be right or left wing.
(The biggest examples happen to be leftish, eg, USSR).
But since both terms are so loaded with ambiguity, we
should just agree that fascism is terrible, wherever it's found.

Fascism tends to be centre to right of the political spectrum, opposed to Marxism, liberalism and anarchism, two or the three can be leveled at the USSR.

The USSR was centre left authoritarian, somewhat Marxist and built on anarchism so technically not a fascist government. (It can even be argued that Marxism is a form of liberalism.

Let wing authoritarian governments are often called fascist as a pejorative label by right wing groups who wish to a/ discredit communism and b/ distance them selves from fascism.

But yes, fascism is not nice.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Thus, Darwin's ToE ideas led to the Holocaust and black genocide.

And not, say, the writings of Martin Luther? You know: the ones that vilified Jews and advocated violence against them? The ones that Hitler quoted extensively in Mein Kampf?

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Also, posting an internet picture doesn't really qualify to me as "name calling" or intimidation. At least any more than you making up a political agenda and then assigning people of your choosing to the side opposite of yours by default.

I wish it was. And I don't care what names you call me (and yes pictures can be used to do that, not to mention yours had words in it for emphasis to be sure the few literate libs out there got it).

Libs everywhere..!

Yeah, and we can't shoot em.

/E: Your posts do make you seem like a crackpot conspiracy theorist. Just sayin'.

And that's all you and most libs ever do say; remember, ad hominem aka name calling.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

It can be right or left wing.
(The biggest examples happen to be leftish, eg, USSR).
But since both terms are so loaded with ambiguity, we
should just agree that fascism is terrible, wherever it's found.

But it, by definition, controls business and industry, ergo it's socialist (leftist) by definition. The US has been a growing fascist state since the 1930s.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

And that's all you and most libs ever do say; remember, ad hominem aka name calling.

FYI: name-calling and ad hominem aren't the same thing.

 

[Darkstorn]

FYI: name-calling and ad hominem aren't the same thing.

Shh. It's more fun when he doesn't know, makes his hyperbole even more entertaining. He attacks his opposition more in the posts where he makes empty claims of being attacked.

And I don't care what names you call me (and yes pictures can be used to do that, not to mention yours had words in it for emphasis to be sure the few literate libs out there got it).

I didn't post any picture. Fun considering you're talking about literacy in this post. Heh.

Btw. You calling me a "lib" for no reason, and using malice as the basis(you are using it to make fun of me) doesn't count as name calling? Your usage is derisive by context alone, and you seem to delight in using it specifically to attack one's person.

Selective ignorance. :E

 

[Revoltingest]

Fascism tends to be centre to right of the political spectrum, opposed to Marxism, liberalism and anarchism, two or the three can be leveled at the USSR.

The USSR was centre left authoritarian, somewhat Marxist and built on anarchism so technically not a fascist government. (It can even be argued that Marxism is a form of liberalism.

Let wing authoritarian governments are often called fascist as a pejorative label by right wing groups who wish to a/ discredit communism and b/ distance them selves from fascism.

But yes, fascism is not nice.

We'll have to agree to disagree about the USSR having even a remote flirtation with anarchism.
Freedom & autonomy find no home in socialist/communist countries, eg, China, USSR, Cuba, N Korea.

But I notice that "anarchist" is another troubled label, since many of those who self identify want
a powerful government to implement their values, eg, banning voluntary economic relationships.

 

[ChristineM]

We'll have to agree to disagree about the USSR having even a remote flirtation with anarchism.
Freedom & autonomy find no home in socialist/communist countries, eg, China, USSR, Cuba, N Korea.

I guess the revolution and its immediate aftermath were considered anarchy by the tzars. As i said, built on.

The lack of freedom and astronomy don't make them politically fascist, but certainly authoritarian.

 

[Revoltingest]

I guess the revolution and its immediate aftermath were considered anarchy by the tzars. As i said, built on.

The tzars had a uniquely emotional perspective....all chaos & murder.
Such "anarchy" wasn't a political approach to governance...just feces hitting the fan.

The lack of freedom and astronomy don't make them politically fascist, but certainly authoritarian.

Using a common dictionary definition......

noun 1. (sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by adictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition andcriticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing anaggressive nationalism and often racism.

Ref....
the definition of fascism
.....it's safe to call the USSR "fascist".

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

FYI: name-calling and ad hominem aren't the same thing.

Ad hominem is "attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself." Name calling is the most common way of doing exactly that. Calling someone a conspiracy theorist is both, unless you can show that there is no conspiracy--in which case it's neither.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Well you see when you need to make a mockery of the US constitution to justify your hatred then you deserve to be treated like a stupid child in pictures which represent your mindset

Note Goebbels was right winger, rather like you

Justify my hatred of what? How have I made a mockery of the Constitution. And Nazis/Fascists are socialists because they control business and industry. The NAZIs gave such a bad name to being example of the left, that leftists had to distance themselves somehow--and no sooner said than done a la the media and academia.
BTW, once again you've resorted nothing but emotional name calling, no substance whatever.

 

[Darkstorn]

The NAZIs gave such a bad name to being example of the left, that leftists had to distance themselves somehow--and no sooner said than done a la the media and academia.

You still haven't demonstrated with any ability that the nazis aren't right wing, like yourself. So, this does give me an idea: Maybe you're doing it to distance YOUR stance from nazism? Good luck with that. That's all i'm going to reply to such inane daydreams.

BTW, once again you've resorted nothing but emotional name calling, no substance whatever.

you and most libs

(Calling me and everyone who opposes you "libs")

yours had words in it for emphasis to be sure the few literate libs out there got it

(Accusing me of being a lib & posting a picture i never did. Not to mention accusing libs of being mostly illiterate.)

This is rule #2 with Libs

You're like a broken record.

tried and true lib strategy of name calling

Insert a smiley of rolling eyes.

Yeah, you were "called names," boohoo. You did worse. Are you so hurt that you can't see your own inability at showing adult-like composure?

You are plain and simple, one of the most pathetic excuses for a human being i've ever seen. And note: I am not name calling you ANY more than you are name calling your every single opponent in your every single argument.

Your empty rhetoric and inane logic make your cries of you being targeted by name calling seem silly to the extreme: YOU are acting more hostile than anyone.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

You are aware that the Nazis were actually loosening corporate and such laws, right? Their actual policies were more fiscally liberal(that is the traditional sense of the term, encouraging free markets and what not) than both Weimar Germany and the Kaiserreich, right?

Yes, Hitler privatized some businesses, but that's essentially a shift from communism to Fascism or national socialism since he maintained control. He used that control to gradually shift industry to military production until it was essentially 100% military during the war. And then there was the issue of assuming a crushing national debt on top of the Depression, and of course there was forced/slave labor.

BTW, why is it assumed that oppressive governments are right-wing? Any form of government can be oppressive. Look at the communist governments as well as the US during slavery. The issue that separates the good from the bad is having a moral/legal double standard for any person or group. Socialism, by it's nature, is more prone to generating a legal elite class, because it concentrates power in the government.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

You still haven't demonstrated with any ability that the nazis aren't right wing, like yourself.

I did, but you ignored it...again.