Liberalism is Dead and Evangelicals Don't Deserve It Anyway

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nihilo

BANNED
Banned
I could make similar arguments about Islam, marxism, neoconservatism, etc.

If anything, I'm inclined to think that the political ideology of the neocons is way more violent than anything that's central to naziism.

But let's be clear:

I grant that naziism was likely required for the holocaust. I just don't think that the inverse of that is true.
We see "the leader principle," "Führerprinzip," the essential problem of Nazism, in criminal organizations, totalitarian regimes and dictatorships of all kinds. When those liberals the framers of the founding documents of America set to write, they addressed and attacked and prevented entirely Führerprinzip. In the place of the Führer in America, is the President; but wait, the President is only the Chief Executive of the Executive branch. This branch is permanently balanced by Congress, and by the Courts. The Führer principle is not only unwelcome, but it is actively planned against, so that it can never happen here. America is already Nazism without this glaring error in it. In the Constitution, the Führer is the Executive branch, the Legislative branch, and the Judicial branch, all together, though not all doing or responsible for the same things. So the POTUS might be the closest thing to the Führer that we have, the POTUS is only the leader of one of the three branches of government, each equal in power, although sort of in a rock/paper/scissors way.

Federalism and Antifederalism is one ideological crossroad where Americans divide, both have strengths and weaknesses, and both are positively fatal to Führerprinzip, as they both uphold and defend the three branches of government, that in Führerprinzip, collapse upon the Führer alone.

Hitler's flag is brilliant. Can I tell you, when I had to scroll through this thread, I dimmed my eyes, and I easily saw your avatar among all the others, it stood out like a sore thumb, and Hitler himself designed this flag, he was an aspiring artist. He designed it on purpose, exactly that way, so that it would stand out, even when people were dimming their eyes and not paying much attention. He made it easy for them to see what flag it was, that color, and shape combination does something to the human brain, and the story goes that Hitler wanted, in the main, to evoke fear, in the Russians in particular, with that flag.

The rest is history, of course, but that was his idea before the train wreck. Innocent, as far as ideas go. Germany's Antisemitism was not, as we sadly, tragically, and horrifiedly learned. The question is, if not for Führerprinzip, would Germany's Antisemitism have ever materialized into the Holocaust that Nazism did, with Führerprinzip? You say no, and I agree.

Führerprinzip, plus Hitler's obsession with Russia, led to the Holocaust, which started due to a food supply shortage to a camp. Without food, prisoners were starving, which gave the regime just the outside nudge it needed to succumb to their built up psychological momentum, and begin one of the most gruesome, horrid, brutal, unfeeling, evil, twisted, malicious, murderous, wicked, merciless, psychopathic events the world's ever seen. Due to Barbarossa, Germany, which had caught everyone in Europe snoozing militarily, endured a major defeat, costing ordnance, lives, and armor.
 

Ktoyou

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
a middle way between communism and capitalism, then no,

What you fail to understand is no social system will ever trump the human will for self gain. Capitalism is the highest and only workable principle for social progress, even on a global plane.
Capitalism means to work for the benefit of self interest by working for the betterment of other based on ones own personal gain.

Here is an example: Today, right at this moment, China stock is down, but the Japan market i is and has been on an upswing. When Asia is on an up swing, it indicates the London market will be up and in turn, the New York stock market will be up.

If we hurt China, or any part of Asia, we lose as nations will not come together and help each other . they lose; the same with Europe, they lose, and then we lose.

Someday, all nations will come to embrace Capitalism, or they will perish.

Life on earth is learning to trade for mutual benefit. Where the flaw comes in is when greed, for its own sake, rules the heart.
 

ClimateSanity

New member
Is there a non-negligible amount of people who label themselves as Nazis in the first sense you give? Because what I see in you is a wanna-be Hitler at worst and at best a provocateur who wants to use swastikas and Nazis as a way to generate attention on an online forum. There is simply no good reason to talk about being a Nazi or save the label from the scrapheap of history.
A wanna be Hitler? Really? Just because he blames Jews for everything doesn't mean he seeks to exterminate them.
 

ClimateSanity

New member
Political satire or commentary is not the same as personally espousing the symbol so I don't think there is a double standard.

Having said that, as a rule I wouldn't advocate using Nazi symbols for Trump even in a cartoon because I tend to think using Nazism hurts productive dialogue rather than helping it.
So a person's reason for posting an objectionable symbol is the deciding factor on whether a moderator chooses to allow it or not?
 

ClimateSanity

New member
Yes I saw that in your previous post but cut it off in my quote because I don't think it's a good comparison. People aren't dogs and cats and reasons for liking them and wanting to be around them aren't going to be the same. I don't know how you'd translate the dog example to people.
Does a person who wishes not to be around certain people in their home, hate that person ?
 

ClimateSanity

New member
Wow, I disappear for a while and Traditio shows back up with a swastika avatar . . . Trad, did you wash out of philosophy grad school?

Conservatism is grounded in fear, liberalism in the lack thereof, or at least acceptance of risk. Liberalism is far from dead. There will be a backlash to the whitelash and it's already started. Unfortunately Christianity may be attacked as a byproduct. But far too many right wing Christians ceded the moral high ground when they supported Trump. There are, however, left wing and centrist Christians working to take it back.
Conservatism is grounded in fear? The conservatism I subscribe to is that of the founding fathers. I do not trust the state. The state does not grant rights, nature does. People are very flawed and safeguards must be put in place to guard against abuse for those in power and for the will of the people at large, hence representative government. Also property rights are not to be violated whatsoever where every sense of the idea of property is in view.

If that is fear in your mind, then that kind of fear is a very good thing.
 

gcthomas

New member
The state does not grant rights, nature does.

Rights without a state, to describe and support those rights in terms of enforceable rights, are just so much whistling in the wind. What rights do you think you'd have without anyone to coerce the rest of the population into recognising those rights? Nature doesn't provide anything - society does.
 

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
It's obvious your of the opinion that Germany could have had a more truer form of Nazism? So...

"Truer"? That's the funny thing about political parties, isn't it? There are always factions. There are always different interpretations. Just look at the democratic party in the United States and consider the vast difference between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton.

For the record, this is why I disagree with the very framing of Tambora and Kmoney's debate about who was and wasn't a Nazi in Nazi Germany. There were as many reasons for being a Nazi, and as many interpretations of what being a Nazi meant, I am inclined to think, as there were actual Nazis in Nazi Germany.

A)Just Hitler was a really bad guy who in all reality to you, took over the Party?

I would be deeply reticent to call Hitler a bad guy. I think that he is an understandable guy, given his time and circumstances. My only point is that Hitler's version of Naziism is not Naziism absolute. Again, he purged people from his own party, especially those to the left of him economically.

What exactly is Nazism and its' benefits to you specifically?

When I use the term "Nazi" as a self-descriptor, I use it in this precise sense:

"an anti-marxist counter-reactionary movement which sought a middle way between communism and capitalism...an awareness of the Jewish problem...the recognition of a need for a white ethnostate."

Plus some kind of nationalism and traditionalism. Obviously.

Understood in this way, are its benefits not patently obvious? :p
 

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
Well, if you take the world population it seems that actual "whites" (with two white parents) are the true minority race.

But white nations need to accept racial and ethnic diversity!

The Jews in Israel don't.

Non-white nations don't. (In fact, if you say they do, then you are a RACIST! You have to respect their cultural heritage!)

But white people, they need to accept diversity!

White. Ethnostate.

HAIL VICTORY! :nono:
 

gcthomas

New member
That sounds pretty racist, if you ask me.

Thus the reason we need a white ethnostate. :p

The settlers brought with them bubonic plague, chickenpox, cholera, the common cold, diphtheria, influenza, malaria, measles, scarlet fever, sexually transmitted diseases, typhoid, typhus, tuberculosis, and pertussis. Sounds pretty diseased to me.
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
But white nations need to accept racial and ethnic diversity!

The Jews in Israel don't.

Non-white nations don't. (In fact, if you say they do, then you are a RACIST! You have to respect their cultural heritage!)

But white people, they need to accept diversity!

White. Ethnostate.

HAIL VICTORY! :nono:
It's all about power. The liberals want it, the blacks want it, the Chinese want it, the Jews have it, equality is a pipe dream. Whites are believed to be "in control" and possess all the power.
 

kmoney

New member
Hall of Fame
"Truer"? That's the funny thing about political parties, isn't it? There are always factions. There are always different interpretations. Just look at the democratic party in the United States and consider the vast difference between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton.

For the record, this is why I disagree with the very framing of Tambora and Kmoney's debate about who was and wasn't a Nazi in Nazi Germany. There were as many reasons for being a Nazi, and as many interpretations of what being a Nazi meant, I am inclined to think, as there were actual Nazis in Nazi Germany.



I would be deeply reticent to call Hitler a bad guy. I think that he is an understandable guy, given his time and circumstances. My only point is that Hitler's version of Naziism is not Naziism absolute. Again, he purged people from his own party, especially those to the left of him economically.



When I use the term "Nazi" as a self-descriptor, I use it in this precise sense:

"an anti-marxist counter-reactionary movement which sought a middle way between communism and capitalism...an awareness of the Jewish problem...the recognition of a need for a white ethnostate."

Plus some kind of nationalism and traditionalism. Obviously.

Understood in this way, are its benefits not patently obvious? :p

You can't even call Hitler a bad guy.

:vomit:
 

ClimateSanity

New member
Rights without a state, to describe and support those rights in terms of enforceable rights, are just so much whistling in the wind. What rights do you think you'd have without anyone to coerce the rest of the population into recognising those rights? Nature doesn't provide anything - society does.
If you declare rights originate from the state, you have a basis for tyranny.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top