ADVERTISEMENT

This is what the scum on this board are so proud to support.

I agree using Fascism as a way to describe Trump is just as lazy as calling Biden a socialist or communist. But to deny Trump has real authoritarian tendencies is also off base.

Trump's appeal was for those of us who despise more Government control over our God given Freedoms, snuffing out political dissent, or seeking more restrictions over our free choices. Can you cite the legislation Trump either sponsored or signed into Law that offered Americans less freedom to pursue their desires or restricted their ability to seek happiness within the confines of a moral and just society?

I'm listening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Snow Sled Baby
I agree using Fascism as a way to describe Trump is just as lazy as calling Biden a socialist or communist. But to deny Trump has real authoritarian tendencies is also off base.
I've NEVER called Biden a socialist or communist. Name one President that has not had authoritarian tendencies....all have had it.
 
So, are you aware that fascism is considered to be on the far right side of the political spectrum? Are you saying you believe Biden be to both too far left for you and too far right?

Based on your lack of knowledge of what fascism means and the fact you had to copy and paste the definition of fascism from Wikipedia tells me all I need to know.

One of the biggest ironies of Trump's presidency is that he became a more effective catalyst for progressive social change than Obama.

He discredited core conservative beliefs, boosted the popularity of left-wing causes and caused millions of Americans to face ugly truths about racism and bigotry that they used to deny.

Question: Are you a racist? You may not like the answer.

White liberals inform us all that people of color, especially those who live in urban areas, are somehow too poor or too stupid to obtain an ID in order to vote. We all know that in order to function in America, we have to have an ID. Whether it be obtaining services from the government, buying alcohol or cigarettes, picking up your prescription, going to a doctor, etc., you have to have an ID — but to White liberals, minorities can’t crack the code to get one.
Then there are the Black Lives Matter riots. White liberals seem to really enjoy going into poor urban communities in inner cities and destroying them. They set minority-owned businesses on fire and destroy homes all while screaming about some type of systemic racism that they claim exists. When these rioters are arrested, it nearly always comes out that some are White lawyers and teachers; people who would never think to live or invest in the parts of town they destroy. They’re outside White people traveling to Black neighborhoods to create chaos and ruin the lives of the residents there.

White liberals are racist.
 
I've NEVER called Biden a socialist or communist. Name one President that has not had authoritarian tendencies....all have had it.

Biden and his party seek greater controls over virtually every aspect of American life. No difference between them and most power hungry Socialists in that respect.
 
I agree, but you have used those terms. So, backing off of it now is a weak move. Words do mean things. You obviously don't know what the words communism, socialism and fascism mean though.

I hope above almost all hopes it doesn't happen, but...

Let the "Democrats" win the 2 Georgia senate seats. We'll see exactly how big of socialists and communists they are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atlkvb
For members on the Left of this forum who may despise Socialism and/or Communism can any of you tell us what aspects of either you are most opposed to? I've never heard Leftists strenuously criticize the worst aspects of Socialism or denounce Communism. Never.

Now would be good time for one of you to tell us what you'll join us on the Right in opposition to either or both?

Any takers?
 
Trump's appeal was for those of us who despise more Government control over our God given Freedoms, snuffing out political dissent, or seeking more restrictions over our free choices. Can you cite the legislation Trump either sponsored or signed into Law that offered Americans less freedom to pursue their desires or restricted their ability to seek happiness within the confines of a moral and just society?

I'm listening.
Authoritarianism is not a political ideology. It would be almost impossible to pass legislation to gain more control...it wouldn't be in the Congress' best interests to relinquish power. That said, if you don't think Trump would be a dictator if the rules would allow it, or he had the power to change the rules, I don't know what to tell you.
 
Authoritarianism is not a political ideology. It would be almost impossible to pass legislation to gain more control...it wouldn't be in the Congress' best interests to relinquish power. That said, if you don't think Trump would be a dictator if the rules would allow it, or he had the power to change the rules, I don't know what to tell you.

Well you said he seeks ultimate control as a Dictator would. I asked for examples. You give as examples what you'd imagine he'd do if he were allowed? Dictators don't ask for permission to seize power from the people. If you can't give examples to back up what you said Trump's goals and practices are, then why did you say that? Because you imagine it?

That's not intellectually honest or defensible. Please give me some specific polices that back up your assertion. Shouldn't be hard to do, you said it.

Why?
 
Authoritarianism is not a political ideology. It would be almost impossible to pass legislation to gain more control

Joseph Stalin would disagree with you. So would Mao Zedong. So would Fidel Castro. So would Idi Amin Dada. So would Ho Chi Mihn. So would Hugo Chavez. So would Kim Il Sung. What do all of those power hungry Supreme leaders have in common?

They're all Socialists.
 
I agree, but you have used those terms. So, backing off of it now is a weak move. Words do mean things. You obviously don't know what the words communism, socialism and fascism mean though.

Communism and Socialism are umbrella terms referring to two left-wing schools of economic thought; both oppose capitalism.

These ideologies have inspired various social and political movements since the 19th century. Several countries have been or are currently governed by parties calling themselves communist or socialist, though these parties' policies and rhetoric vary widely.

As an ideology, communism is generally regarded as hard-left, making fewer concessions to market capitalism. and electoral democracy than do most forms of socialism. As a system of government, communism tends to center on a one-party state that bans most forms of political dissent. These two usages of the term communism one referring to theory, the other to politics as they are practiced—need not overlap: China's ruling Communist Party has an explicitly pro-market capitalist orientation and pays only lip service to the Maoist ideology whose purist adherents regard Chinese authorities as bourgeois counter-revolutionaries.

Socialism can refer to a vast swath of the political spectrum, in theory, and in practice. Its intellectual history is more varied than that of communism. Socialists can be pro or anti-market. They may consider the ultimate goal to be a revolution and the abolition of social classes, or they may seek more pragmatic outcomes. Universal healthcare for example, or a or a universal pension scheme. is a socialist policy that has been adopted in the unabashedly capitalist United States as are the eight-hour working day, free public education, and arguably universal suffrage. Socialists may run for election, forming coalitions with non-socialist parties, as they do in Europe, or they may govern as authoritarians, as the Chavista regime does in Venezuela.

Fascism is a system of government led by a dictator who typically rules by forcefully and often violently suppressing opposition. A government system led by a dictator having complete power forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

Fascism is generally defined as a political movement that embraces far-right nationalism and the forceful suppression of any opposition, all overseen by an authoritarian government. Fascists strongly oppose Marxism, liberalism and democracy, and believe the state takes precedence over individual interests. They favor centralized rule, often a single party or leader, and embrace the idea of a national rebirth, a new greatness for their country. Economic self-sufficiency is prized, often through state-controlled companies. Youth, masculinity and strength are highly fetishized.

The first modern fascist parties emerged in the aftermath of World War I. The ideology swept through Italy — the birthplace of the term — then Germany and other parts of Europe. German intellectual Johann Plenge expected that class divisions would disappear in favor of "racial comrades," and that the future of Germany lay in "national socialism." That phrase is often shortened to "Nazism," which is a form of fascism.

Fascists also tend to embrace imperialism and the conquering of weaker nations. Mussolini was especially impressed with the ambitious expansion and militarism of ancient Rome. Hitler, an early admirer of Mussolini and his tactics, modeled his Nazi party on Italy's fascism in the 1920s.

Fascist regimes often meddle directly in their national economies, casting a suspicious eye on the perceived decadence of a system that relies too heavily on capitalism. The result: nationalized companies and cartels in key areas, such as manufacturing.

The end of World War II saw the downfall of several fascist regimes, but not all. In Spain, Francisco Franco, who incorporated fascist elements in his military dictatorship, hung around for several decades, while other governments, such as that of Juan Perón in Argentina, enacted a kind of fascism-lite, modeling its economy somewhat after fascist Italy.

More recently, people also started to use the word to inaccurately describe any kind of far right or violent group, as well as a range of authoritarian socialist or communist regimes such as Cuba's.

President Trump's approach to campaigning and leadership has drawn comparisons to fascist-style authoritarianism. In a September 2020 interview, his Democratic rival Joe Biden pointed out some similarities.

President Trump has not embraced foreign military invasions as a way to make America great again — in fact, he campaigned on a promise to bring troops home. And he doesn't obsess over youth as particularly important in America's great rebirth.

Even Albright doesn't think Trump quite falls into the fascism category, though she's disturbed by the similarities.

Despite the differences, vocal opponents of fascism such as the loosely affiliated activists who go by antifa (short for anti-fascist) enerally see themselves as anti-Trump as well.
 
Authoritarianism is not a political ideology. It would be almost impossible to pass legislation to gain more control...it wouldn't be in the Congress' best interests to relinquish power. That said, if you don't think Trump would be a dictator if the rules would allow it, or he had the power to change the rules, I don't know what to tell you.

Authoritarianism is a form of government characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of a strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting.

Authoritarianism stands in fundamental contrast to Democracy. Examples of authoritarian regimes, according to some scholars, include the pro-Western military dictatorships that existed in Latin America and elsewhere in the second half of the 20th century.

Learn More in these related Britannica articles:
 
Yes. You finally got it. The republicans are capitalists.
As I've said before, I am a capitalist based on a literal definition. You, who works for someone else, it not. You may believe in the idea, but you don't partake in it. So, since I am an independent that leans left and a capitalist. Therefore, you are wrong.
 
As I've said before, I am a capitalist based on a literal definition. You, who works for someone else, it not. You may believe in the idea, but you don't partake in it. So, since I am an independent that leans left and a capitalist. Therefore, you are wrong.
Wait....

You cant be a capitalist if you work for someone else? Hahahahahahaha

Look. I realize some people just need to tell themselves something so they can sleep at night ao I get it with you but that is just ridiculous.
 
Wait....

You cant be a capitalist if you work for someone else? Hahahahahahaha

Look. I realize some people just need to tell themselves something so they can sleep at night ao I get it with you but that is just ridiculous.
Not in my opinion. You may favor capitalism, but you are not a Capitalist. And you certainly can't call someone that is a capitalist or who contributes to capitalism as a socialist or communist.
 
Both were maniacal dictators that wanted to control the same land and population with their own belief systems. One was racist socialist. The other was racist communist.
Russia signed an non agression pact with Germany in 1939. They had no intention of going to war until they were attacked by Germany. There is a difference between communism, socilaism and fascism. Hitler was a facist he wasn't a socialist. You have demonstrated on many occasions that you haven't a clue of what the difference is between the three. Socalism and facism do not exist in the same political spectrum. Get a clue fool.
 
So then explain why Hitler invaded Russia if he didn't want control over that land, and explain why Stalin annexed Germany after Hitler's war machine was defeated? (Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, and the rest of the Eastern block too...all territory Hitler had conquered) [winking]

I'm not sure you can easily explain the differences between German nationalism and Russian nationalism. My point is both sought control over the other, using force. Socialists seek nothing less for the entire World.
Russia had no intention of going to war they signed a non aggression pact with Germany in 1939. The super powers divided Germany after world war 2 to prevent history from repeating itself. German nationalsim was rooted in ultra right wing philosphy Russian nationalism was rooted in ultra Left wing philoshy. It isnt that hard to understand but obviously you don't. Its not that suprising that you struggle to grasp this concept. You are the type of guy who listens to the fools who said Biden didn't win georgia.
 
The Nazis were left-wing socialists. National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, otherwise known as the Nazi Party, was indeed socialist and it had a lot in common with the modern left.
Hitler could not be clearer about his socialist commitments. He said in a 1927 speech, “We are socialists. We are the enemies of today’s capitalist system of exploitation … and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”
The Great Depression had spurred increased state ownership in most Western capitalist countries. This also took place in Germany during the last years of the Weimar Republic.[40] However, after the Nazis took power, industries were privatized en masse. Several banks, shipyards, railway lines, shipping lines, welfare organizations, and more were privatized.[41] The Nazi government took the stance that enterprises should be in private hands wherever possible.[42] State ownership was to be avoided unless it was absolutely necessary for rearmament or the war effort, and even in those cases “the Reich often insisted on the inclusion in the contract of an option clause according to which the private firm operating the plant was entitled to purchase it.”[43] However, the privatization was "applied within a framework of increasing control of the state over the whole economy through regulation and political interference,"[44] as laid out in the 1933 Act for the Formation of Compulsory Cartels, which gave the government a role in regulating and controlling the cartels that had been earlier formed in the Weimar Republic under the Cartel Act of 1923.[45] These had mostly regulated themselves from 1923 to 1933.[4

 
Not in my opinion. You may favor capitalism, but you are not a Capitalist. And you certainly can't call someone that is a capitalist or who contributes to capitalism as a socialist or communist.
I hate to break it to you but people own businesses in communist and socialist countries. To suggest you cannot be a capitalist while working for someone else is ridiculous. It is the epitome of capitalism to sell your services to the best offer.
 
I hate to break it to you but people own businesses in communist and socialist countries. To suggest you cannot be a capitalist while working for someone else is ridiculous. It is the epitome of capitalism to sell your services to the best offer.
I disagree.
 
The Great Depression had spurred increased state ownership in most Western capitalist countries. This also took place in Germany during the last years of the Weimar Republic.[40] However, after the Nazis took power, industries were privatized en masse. Several banks, shipyards, railway lines, shipping lines, welfare organizations, and more were privatized.[41] The Nazi government took the stance that enterprises should be in private hands wherever possible.[42] State ownership was to be avoided unless it was absolutely necessary for rearmament or the war effort, and even in those cases “the Reich often insisted on the inclusion in the contract of an option clause according to which the private firm operating the plant was entitled to purchase it.”[43] However, the privatization was "applied within a framework of increasing control of the state over the whole economy through regulation and political interference,"[44] as laid out in the 1933 Act for the Formation of Compulsory Cartels, which gave the government a role in regulating and controlling the cartels that had been earlier formed in the Weimar Republic under the Cartel Act of 1923.[45] These had mostly regulated themselves from 1923 to 1933.[4

Thanks .....Nazi Germany had socialist traits......just like we do.......Social Security and Medicare for two. Read your comment below:
"However, the privatization was "applied within a framework of increasing control of the state over the whole economy through regulation and political interference,"
 
  • Like
Reactions: atlkvb
Sounds like Jason is a fan of either Nazi Germany or Soviet Communist Russia. Wonder which brand of total Government control he'd like to see American Socialism emulate?
 
Last edited:
31228.jpg
I've never met a Socialist I didn't like. Nazis, Communists, doesn't matter to me...Socialism now, Socialism forever as far as I'm concerned. Makes no difference to me atl.
 
Last edited:
Hey @Jason Voorhees ...tell us what parts of Nazi style Socialism, or Soviet brand Communism you disliked the most? You've explained to us how different they are, point out for us some of the worst aspects of each we should avoid?

Can you do that as easily as you told us how dissimilar they are?
 
@Jason Voorhees

Why were you so eager to tell the board how Hitler led Nazi style totalitarianism was so different from the Bolshevik led revolutionary Stalin style totalitarianism yet you are mute explaining to us what the worst parts of each were we here in America should avoid?

Let me give you an example. I sell Ford products. The F-150 nameplate is the #1 seller among light trucks. If you asked me to differentiate its finest selling attributes vs its chief competitors I could easily do so. Yet, they are all light trucks are they not?

Similarly, Socialism as expressed by the German nationalist Nazis or the Bolshevik Soviet Russian nationalists was still Socialism, yet you were eager to point out to the board what differed between them were you not? So logically, you should be properly informed to let this board know what the worst aspects of each were as dissimilar as they apparently are according to your defense of each. I'm assuming through the question you agree both were equally detestable as alternatives to American free market Capitalism?

So I ask you again, are those forms of Socialism something we here in America should strive to emulate? If not, why not?

*editor's note:
ignoring this very reasonable question only suggests that Jason is obviously ill equipped to accurately separate the differences between Nazi Socialism and Soviet Socialism although he did indeed spend considerable time in the thread cutting and pasting to argue their dissimilarities.
 
Last edited:
@Jason Voorhees
31228.jpg
Hey atl, I don't do what YOU tell me to do because I hate your ever lovin' Trump nut suckin' guts OK dipsh*t?

giphy.gif
 
Last edited:
@Jason Voorhees visibly tongue tied answering a logical question on what we all should hate about Socialism
giphy.gif

31228.jpg
I have no clue how to answer your question atl, but I do have an idea how much I hate you for asking it.
 
Last edited:
Did you know @Jason Voorhees can't tell us what the worst parts of Socialism are to avoid?
giphy.gif


31228.jpg
I have an answer atl, I'm just not telling YOU because you'll just twist it all around to make me look stupid!

Uhm...you do that all by yourself Jason my Man. [winking]
 
Last edited:
Not in my opinion. You may favor capitalism, but you are not a Capitalist. And you certainly can't call someone that is a capitalist or who contributes to capitalism as a socialist or communist.

Why shouldn't we be Socialists? What should we avoid about it? I'd imagine you could easily tell us what's the worst thing about Capitalism, and how we should avoid it could you not?

I believe you could and do. Well, why not do the same for Socialism?

I respectfully ask that because as I've stated ITT, I rarely if ever see Leftists objectively critical of Socialism. They're always ready to defend it, or often suggest it's not really Socialism when in fact it always is, or that it somehow differs from one Socialist to another, but no one on the Left ever criticizes it. NEVER.

Why not?
 
Last edited:
German nationalsim was rooted in ultra right wing philosphy Russian nationalism was rooted in ultra Left wing philoshy. It isnt that hard to understand but obviously you don't. Its not that suprising that you struggle to grasp this concept


Fair enough. You now have the chance to set me straight explaining the worst parts of each that I, as a Freedom loving Capitalist American opposed to any forms of totalitarian Socialism should avoid. So what are they?

Correct my misunderstanding since you've now proven I know very little of the nuances between the various forms of "Left wing" or "Right wing" Socialism as it was practiced in those regimes.

Educate me.
31228.jpg
Kiss my grits atl

Translation: "I can't atl"
 
I disagree.

It's axiomatic that the more you gravitate Left the more Government control you desire. The more you celebrate and strive for individual Liberty, private property rights and personal accumulation of wealth, along with the Freedom to engage in profit driven market based entrepreneurialism, the less Government control you not only desire but do not need.

You disagree?
 
Hey @Jason Voorhees I know there is no way you are ever going to answer any of my questions in this thread, and I also know there is no way you can. The only reason I asked you is to prove to the rest of the board that like all Leftists, you cannot defend what you support (Socialism) and I did it to also just generally piss you off which I'm sure I have done by now mocking the Hell out of you and shutting your ignorant, uninformed, uneducated, "cut & paste" failed Socialistic ideological arguments all the way down. I mean 'yo ass has gone stone cold SILENT Bro!

I'm good at what I do huh? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

@Jason Voorhees acknowledging atl shut him up defending Socialism which he simply cannot do
giphy.gif


I must admit atl, I am impressed how effectively you've shut down my supporters
iu

Almost as completely as the DNC shut your Socialist ass down huh crazy Bernie?
 
Last edited:
It's axiomatic that the more you gravitate Left the more Government control you desire. The more you celebrate and strive for individual Liberty, private property rights and personal accumulation of wealth, along with the Freedom to engage in profit driven market based entrepreneurialism, the less Government control you not only desire but do not need.

You disagree?
Yes
 

OK, that's fine you disagree. Why?

On healthcare...the Left wants a "public option"....government run

some want Government subsidized care

some want Government controlled costs

some want government mandated care

some want Government paid and run care (single payer)

some want no private insurance at all, seeing health care as a government offered, controlled, and administered duty or "right".


See how as you move further Left on the spectrum of that issue the more government control you need and ultimately require?

Where's my error?
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT