 willhelm says: "Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand" I see the election of Obama as a huge positive on many levels. I can remember being bewildered a few years back when Dems suggested a hard turn to the left. They were right and I was certainly wrong about the success of this tactic. In retrospect, it makes a lot of sense. They basically followed the Reagan model and even picked up part of his mantra. Maybe, just maybe, we are seeing the beginnings of a new 2 party system in America, where the right will shed off it's progressive dead weight, as it did for most of the past 30 years. We have truth. The Left has NEVER improved an economy anywhere on Earth and never will. Their aim is artificial equality, not growing an economy. Artificial equality, fascism, always comes at the expense of liberty. No one in modern American history has been more fascist than Mr. Bush. The Bush administration has defended the use of the rescue money to pay dividends to shareholders. "Giving money to shareholders is important to the economy." Besides fighting needless wars, that sentence sums up the entire Bush Administration philosophy. And Republicans have the gall to worry about what Obama will do. Sheeesh." Mish Well, Bush may run second to Woodrow Wilson, but it would be a distant second. Every fascist movement I've ever studied hated liberals and hated communists. Wilson was a liberal and disliked communism. He was racist and a sexist as were 95% of white men at the time and he did attempt to suppress dissent during the war, but he isn't in my definition of modern American history (50 years) and he doesn't beat Bush, in my humble perspective. Liberal fascism is a friend of the right wing conservatives, but it's a red herring. The Left has NEVER improved an economy anywhere on Earth and never will. Heh heh... you don't travel much, do you?  Their aim is artificial equality, not growing an economy.Artificial equality? As opposed to the American real version of "equality". Hahahahahahahahaha!! As for growing economies? One word: Scandinavia. You know it is so, but admitting it would mess up your deranged and illogical leftist phobia, wouldn't it? Even our right wingers here realise the truth. Why do ýou think the number one right wing party here is called Venstre? Which means.... wait for it......LEFT. Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! It is interesting that Bush likes Wilson's ideaology. He says of Wilson: "The last President to stay at Buckingham Palace was an idealist, without question. At a dinner hosted by King George V, in 1918, Woodrow Wilson made a pledge; with typical American understatement, he vowed that right and justice would become the predominant and controlling force in the world." Our leftist "artificial equality" seems to be doing wonders for our economy! Read it and weep, "Poirot": http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/1CC96E58-14DF-43B3-93E1-EB536517E143/ lol, Read it and weep "Poirot"  interesting clip link this...........thanks. It is interesting that Bush likes Wilson's ideaology.I've always said the Bush presidency is Wilsonian. Deb, if you are trying to convince me that neo-conservatives are fascistic, then it won't take much convincing. However, you should include in your argument the fact that the neoconservative movement started of out of the trotsky-ist left. Artificial equality? As opposed to the American real version of "equality".America does not have a "version" of equality. America consists of the principles: "liberty", "e pluribus unum", and "in God we trust". Equality and liberty do not coexist except under these principles and guided by the rule of law. Where equality is of increasing primacy, liberty is of decreasing importance (fascism). Where liberty is of increasing primacy, equality is of decreasing importance (anarchy). By the way, mstaken, helluva garden. Ms taken, (regarding this clip) where your hate and ignorance shines. If someone claimed they harmed you, Barrack Obama, or Joseph Stalin for one of their policies, would you blame them for holding the policy or the culprit that attacked them? You're basically saying that it would be Obama's fault if a healthcare executive flew a jet into the White House because he disagreed with his socialized medicine policies. The Left has NEVER improved an economy anywhere on Earth and never will....thanks to the Right. willhelm, I wasn't trying to convince you neo cons are fascist, but that leftists with their goals of "artificial equality" are not fascist, as you implied. Wilson's leftist failures were mostly in the area in supporting inequality for a minority. Wherever one could possibly attempt to categorize him to be fascist doesn't have to do with his leftist beliefs, but rather in his efforts to propagandize in wartime. Comparing the communist left of Trotsky (opposing Stalinism) to democratic left in America tells me the most about your point. Wherever one could possibly attempt to categorize him to be fascistWrong, deb, Wilson was a corporatist and Internationalist. In Wilson's book, The State, he advocated authoritarian state leadership as the ideal. He plied societal mobilization for war socialism. He increased the power of bankers and unions. Ultimately, he organized the most abyssmal calamity on America with the creation of the FED and the individual income tax, which transfers wealth from individuals to corporations by transferring burden. What does that have to do with him being more fascist in fact than Bush? Some say it made him one of our greatest Presidents, others say it made him one of our worst. But I was speaking about the definition of fascism and it's tendency to be found in right leaning politicians over left. But I was speaking about the definition of fascism and it's tendency to be found in right leaning politicians over left.Fascists are only "right-wing" in relation to communism. Fascism is directly opposed to libertarianism. Fascism is a Progressive ideology. Your confusion is to get caught up in the semantics of left and right, which changes in relation to one's vantage point. The left to right ideology moves roughly... communism (Stalin referred to everyone to his right a fascist) progressive-ism fascism progressive-ism socialism ( of varying degrees) progressive-ism libertarianism anarchy ...as you move down the scale, authoritarianism and nationalism decreases. BY the way, Deb, what is wrong with fascism? wait a second, maybe I am confused. Are you saying the democratic platform is socialist, progressive libertarianism, and that the republican platform is communist progressive fascism? Maybe my terminology is fundamentally flawed based on your definition? Clarify? I don't know what you're talking about. If I were plotting the position of each party by the focus or their dominant leadership, I would plot neoconservative republicans as progressives-toward-socialism with more libertarian social views. I would plot the Left as progressives toward fascism with a much stronger bent on societal unity, mobilization, and decreased individual liberty. Where equality is of increasing primacy, liberty is of decreasing importance (fascism). Where liberty is of increasing primacy, equality is of decreasing importance (anarchy).Whatever. That's just a flat boring dusty recitation. Definitions and boxes to fit things in, are useless. It's about what works. Different kinds of governance are not static entities, either. They evolve. Social democracy is socialism that floats on capitalism. The best of both worlds and very productive too, I might add. Fascism is a risk in a society based on a governmental and economical "authoritarian" hierarchy, as in America. Not in a flat, networked economy and society, as ours. A happy, content... Thank you for that wilhelm. I think I now understand why I sound nonsensical to you. I was really stunned to see that neoconservatives are libertarians on social issues and democrats are for decreased individual liberties such as civil rights. I can't write in your language because my definitions are different than yours. As thisname is really saying, I'm wasting my time. As thisname is really saying, I'm wasting my time.  Well, fascsim certainly works. That is for sure. Sorry, Deb If I were plotting the position of each party by the focus or their dominant leadership, I would plot neoconservative republicans as progressives-toward-socialism with more anti-libertarian social views. I would plot the Left as progressives toward fascism with a much stronger bent on societal unity, mobilization, and decreased individual liberty.There is no doubt that the modern left in America is on a warpath against individual liberty. (PS) My helluva fascist garden is very productive, healthy and thriving too. Later... Talk about flat, boring recitation. 10:51 am takes the cake, along with vast appeals to ignorance, insecurity, and emotion. You're all wrapped up in tidy little box already. No one has to put you there. It must come from your vast intolerance and perhaps insecurity. emotionYes, it IS kinda sad standing here on the safe shores of social democracy, just waving goodbye and watching your predatory capitalist ship goes down. So sad.... bon voyage. .  *sniff* Anyway, busy busy, I have veggies to pick and I don't even have a money sucking black hole like "Homeland Security" to *protect* me at all. Gee, what ever shall I do? I DO feel SO scared and insecure. There may be evil-doers in my cabbage patch! Wish me luck! Have a nice day, to both you and your *isms* . Yes, it IS kinda sad standing here on the safe shores of social democracy, just waving goodbyeInteresting that you would leave a country that just elected a minority to a country that probably does not have 1 single black resident (I know I overstate, but I'm probably not that far off). I guess you've found you homogeneous, welfare state utopia. Too bad the only constant is change. Everyone seems to know that except Obama and his loyal brown-shirts. Say hello to David Duke. Interesting that you would leave a country that just elected a minorityAnd you speak of ignorance. I'm not American, never have been. (Thank God!) homogeneous, welfare state utopiaWe have scary Muslims in our government. Does that count? *LOOOL* .  Go educate yourself, Fluffy. Your lights are on, but there's definitely no one home. We have scary Muslims in our government.That's an interesting race. lol I'm not American, never have been.My apologies. I don't know where I got that impression, but it does answer many questions. I think I need a paper towel. I wouldn't be surprised by that need. Or, the need for toilet paper, for that matter. OK. That was uncalled for. |
View the Top Clips from November 11, 2008
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|
|
|
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|
