All of the Precepts of Socialism are based on community.

 

The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, indeed all the Socialist partys, believed in the dictatorship of the "workers and peasants" where all would live in peace and harmony, from each, according to their ability, to each, according to their need.

 

In order to achieve this utopia, the "class enemy" must be fought and defeated and the instruments of oppression (bourgoiuse captialist government) overthrown in a revolutionary mass movement. In Bolshevik terms, that revolution is to be led by the "vanguard", the elightened activists.

 

The National Socialists beleived in the racial community of all Germans, an Aryan volksgemeineshaft. They were opposed to and fought the existing bourgeouise government, which was viewed as a tool of the racial enemy,  and as such the National Socialists were revolutionary. 

 

Both philosophies were revolutionary. Revolution is a tool of the left.

Both philosphies had enemies. The Bolsheviks, for example, had the bourgeoise and capitalists. The National Socialists, had the Jews.

Both philosophies were similar economicaly. Socialism entails the State the owning the means of production. National Socialism was hybrid, private ownership under the direction of the state for the benefit of the state was permitted, and the government owned other economic concerns (viz, the SS economic empire).

Both philosophies were "mass movements". Everything was to be a benefit to either the "people" or the "volk"

 

The very fact of their revolutionary nature demonstrates that National Socialism is left wing.

 

The fact that National Socialists are also Socialists is amply demonstrated by the foregoing.

 

Socialism in all its forms mandates mass murder because of its disregard of human nature.

 

 

Accepted......next.

5 hours ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

Accepted......next.

Wow, you really are joining humanity

21 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Wow, you really are joining humanity

When are you going to join it?

5 hours ago, Yagoda said:

All of the Precepts of Socialism are based on community.

 

The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, indeed all the Socialist partys, believed in the dictatorship of the "workers and peasants" where all would live in peace and harmony, from each, according to their ability, to each, according to their need.

 

In order to achieve this utopia, the "class enemy" must be fought and defeated and the instruments of oppression (bourgoiuse captialist government) overthrown in a revolutionary mass movement. In Bolshevik terms, that revolution is to be led by the "vanguard", the elightened activists.

 

The National Socialists beleived in the racial community of all Germans, an Aryan volksgemeineshaft. They were opposed to and fought the existing bourgeouise government, which was viewed as a tool of the racial enemy,  and as such the National Socialists were revolutionary. 

 

Both philosophies were revolutionary. Revolution is a tool of the left.

Both philosphies had enemies. The Bolsheviks, for example, had the bourgeoise and capitalists. The National Socialists, had the Jews.

Both philosophies were similar economicaly. Socialism entails the State the owning the means of production. National Socialism was hybrid, private ownership under the direction of the state for the benefit of the state was permitted, and the government owned other economic concerns (viz, the SS economic empire).

Both philosophies were "mass movements". Everything was to be a benefit to either the "people" or the "volk"

 

The very fact of their revolutionary nature demonstrates that National Socialism is left wing.

 

The fact that National Socialists are also Socialists is amply demonstrated by the foregoing.

 

Socialism in all its forms mandates mass murder because of its disregard of human nature.

 

 

Is that your idea of intelligent comment? It's literally nonsense.

Hitler order the killing of the leader of the left wing of the party. It may have started off as a Worker's party, but that isn't how it ended.

https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, AlwaysThere said:

 

 

Is that your idea of intelligent comment? It's literally nonsense.

Hitler order the killing of the leader of the left wing of the party. It may have started off as a Worker's party, but that isn't how it ended.

https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists

 

 

 

 

 

I think he just copies and pastes……probably doesn’t even read it.

46 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

When are you going to join it?

Wow thats clever.

22 minutes ago, AlwaysThere said:

 

 

Is that your idea of intelligent comment? It's literally nonsense.

Hitler order the killing of the leader of the left wing of the party. It may have started off as a Worker's party, but that isn't how it ended.

https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists

 

 

 

 

Not that your comment makes that much sense, but didnt the Bolsheviks start off as the workers party?

 

So you will rely on what someone else says than analyzing my points?

36 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

I think he just copies and pastes……probably doesn’t even read it.

Did you? Care to contest the arguments made?

29 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Wow thats clever.

It would be if you joined the rest of the world!

27 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Did you? Care to contest the arguments made?

 

No way am I reading that……got manflu……be lucky to see the New Year in. 

17 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

It would be if you joined the rest of the world!

Meanwhile, avoiding the subject at hand. I suggest that means you agree.

2 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

No way am I reading that……got manflu……be lucky to see the New Year in. 

I realize that 271 words is way too much for some folks, hope you feel better, Happy New Year, when you recover you can read and admit Im right.

Overall, according to historian Richard Overy, the Nazi war economy was a mixed economy that combined free markets with central planning; Overy describes it as being somewhere in between the command economy of the Soviet Union and the capitalist system of the United States.^[13]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany#cite_note-12}

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

Meanwhile, avoiding the subject at hand. I suggest that means you agree.

About what?

What a stupid nonsensical post!

13 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

About what?

What a stupid nonsensical post!

Tell us what you disgree with in the opening post.

 

Are you able to ?

3 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Tell us what you disgree with in the opening post.

 

Are you able to ?

 

Pity the fool who felt the need to make up such a pile of steaming horse💩 on New Year's eve.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/02/05/right-needs-stop-falsely-claiming-that-nazis-were-socialists/

8 hours ago, Yagoda said:

All of the Precepts of Socialism are based on community.

 

The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, indeed all the Socialist partys, believed in the dictatorship of the "workers and peasants" where all would live in peace and harmony, from each, according to their ability, to each, according to their need.

 

In order to achieve this utopia, the "class enemy" must be fought and defeated and the instruments of oppression (bourgoiuse captialist government) overthrown in a revolutionary mass movement. In Bolshevik terms, that revolution is to be led by the "vanguard", the elightened activists.

 

The National Socialists beleived in the racial community of all Germans, an Aryan volksgemeineshaft. They were opposed to and fought the existing bourgeouise government, which was viewed as a tool of the racial enemy,  and as such the National Socialists were revolutionary. 

 

Both philosophies were revolutionary. Revolution is a tool of the left.

Both philosphies had enemies. The Bolsheviks, for example, had the bourgeoise and capitalists. The National Socialists, had the Jews.

Both philosophies were similar economicaly. Socialism entails the State the owning the means of production. National Socialism was hybrid, private ownership under the direction of the state for the benefit of the state was permitted, and the government owned other economic concerns (viz, the SS economic empire).

Both philosophies were "mass movements". Everything was to be a benefit to either the "people" or the "volk"

 

The very fact of their revolutionary nature demonstrates that National Socialism is left wing.

 

The fact that National Socialists are also Socialists is amply demonstrated by the foregoing.

 

Socialism in all its forms mandates mass murder because of its disregard of human nature.

Thanks for bringing up what many leftists deny!

46 minutes ago, AlwaysThere said:

 

Pity the fool who felt the need to make up such a pile of steaming horse💩 on New Year's eve.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/02/05/right-needs-stop-falsely-claiming-that-nazis-were-socialists/

Translation: I dont know the first thing about the subject so I will just do the usual Socialist technique of insults combined with someone elses analysis

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

Overall, according to historian Richard Overy, the Nazi war economy was a mixed economy that combined free markets with central planning; Overy describes it as being somewhere in between the command economy of the Soviet Union and the capitalist system of the United States.^[13]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany#cite_note-12}

Does Overy differentiate between the various Bolshevik economic systems such as War Communism, the Central Planning, and the NEP together with the economic aspects of the Gulag,(a system copied by Himmler) and does he recognize that as an organized system itself Bolshevik economic policies adapted throughout the life of the Bolshevik regime?

 

Does he further acknowledge the fact that even during the Central Planning Era, there was no ostensible difference between a Bolshevik industrial satrap and a National Socialist one.

 

Does he also acknowledge that each system was philosophically collectivist?

 

Read his book and let us know. If you dont know, admit it or just stay away.

33 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Translation: I dont know the first thing about the subject so I will just do the usual Socialist technique of insults combined with someone elses analysis

 

Let's not neglect the totally moronic or mentally ill technique of calling anyone who doesn't agree with your crud, as a Socialist.

Please detail the analysis that you undertook to determine that I am such.

Don't you have any friends at all? Is your total existence determined by who here you can involve in your mental illness?

What I do know, is just like myself, you weren't there, so we both read/heard about it from someone else.

 

But unlike yourself, I do not suffer from bipolarity and therefore do not find it necessary to pigeonhole into left or right or to express opinions only black or white in order to present myself as an intellectual. 

You'll need to find someone else to bore, as I have better things to do with my time. I've already devoted more time than was due to your rather pathetic commentary.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Tell us what you disgree with in the opening post.

 

Are you able to ?

Goebbels was a socialist, Hitler not so much. Did you read Goebbels diary? Goebbels more and more went away from socialism the more Hitler talked him out of it. The distinction for the German Nazis was Marxism (in Russia) and socialism in Germany. I agree however Nazis and Socialists are/were very close. The opposite of Nazis are libertarians like Hayek not socialists!

 

VIVA LA LIBERTAD CARACHO!

2 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Tell us what you disgree with in the opening post.

 

Are you able to ?

I suggest you try and stay on subject!

I have not disagreed about anything in this topic!

I asked "About what?" to your statement; "Meanwhile, avoiding the subject at hand. I suggest that means you agree."

I keep asking you on multiple threads to actually answer the simple one line questions that I ask!

So I ask again; What is the "subject at hand" that you imply I am supposed to be agreeing to?

 

PS; It might help to make your posts more intelligent/understandable if you posted  approximately 12 hours after smoking that Cambodian weed you keep boasting about taking!   

14 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Wow thats clever.

Thanks!

10 hours ago, AlwaysThere said:

 

Let's not neglect the totally moronic or mentally ill technique of calling anyone who doesn't agree with your crud, as a Socialist.

Please detail the analysis that you undertook to determine that I am such.

Don't you have any friends at all? Is your total existence determined by who here you can involve in your mental illness?

What I do know, is just like myself, you weren't there, so we both read/heard about it from someone else.

 

But unlike yourself, I do not suffer from bipolarity and therefore do not find it necessary to pigeonhole into left or right or to express opinions only black or white in order to present myself as an intellectual. 

You'll need to find someone else to bore, as I have better things to do with my time. I've already devoted more time than was due to your rather pathetic commentary.

 

 

 

Translation: I cant debate the issue, so I will just insult, like all Socialists do.

9 hours ago, stat said:

Goebbels was a socialist, Hitler not so much. Did you read Goebbels diary? Goebbels more and more went away from socialism the more Hitler talked him out of it. The distinction for the German Nazis was Marxism (in Russia) and socialism in Germany. I agree however Nazis and Socialists are/were very close. The opposite of Nazis are libertarians like Hayek not socialists!

 

VIVA LA LIBERTAD CARACHO!

And your point is? You seem to concede that Socialists were involved in the Nazi movement, do you know why Hitler "talked him out" of Socialism? 

 

What arguments can you offer against my assertion?

9 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

I suggest you try and stay on subject!

I have not disagreed about anything in this topic!

I asked "About what?" to your statement; "Meanwhile, avoiding the subject at hand. I suggest that means you agree."

I keep asking you on multiple threads to actually answer the simple one line questions that I ask!

So I ask again; What is the "subject at hand" that you imply I am supposed to be agreeing to?

 

PS; It might help to make your posts more intelligent/understandable if you posted  approximately 12 hours after smoking that Cambodian weed you keep boasting about taking!   

The subject is my assertion that National Socialism was a Left Wing Socialist Political Movement. Thats a subject you apparently are incapable of dealing with.

 

NB. Its not Cambodian weed, its Thai weed. Tell me what posts you are unable to understand and I can rephrase them and dumb them down for you. 

10 hours ago, AlwaysThere said:

 

Let's not neglect the totally moronic or mentally ill technique of calling anyone who doesn't agree with your crud, as a Socialist.

Please detail the analysis that you undertook to determine that I am such.

Don't you have any friends at all? Is your total existence determined by who here you can involve in your mental illness?

What I do know, is just like myself, you weren't there, so we both read/heard about it from someone else.

 

But unlike yourself, I do not suffer from bipolarity and therefore do not find it necessary to pigeonhole into left or right or to express opinions only black or white in order to present myself as an intellectual. 

You'll need to find someone else to bore, as I have better things to do with my time. I've already devoted more time than was due to your rather pathetic commentary.

 

 

 

You have enough time to troll though. None of your posts have any substance to them

29 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Thanks!

Your welcome. Encouragement helps the challenged.

Just now, Yagoda said:

Your welcome. Encouragement helps the challenged.

That is why I thanked you!