US Politics Thread 2021-24

[Rockstar]

… wealthy white DEMOCRAT donors had no food in front of them and were not yet eating, there was not a mask in sight — except on the faces of the overwhelmingly non-white people hired as servants, all of whom had their gratuitous faces covered. Servants, apparently, are much more pleasant when they are dehumanized. There is no need for noses or mouths or other identifiable facial features for those who are converted into servile robots.

Similar scenes were visible at the even more opulent birthday bash which former President Barack Obama threw for himself to commemorate his 60 years on the planet. Held at his sprawling $12 million weekend estate on Martha's Vineyard, Obama and 400 of his closest maskless friends spent hours in indoor tents dancing, chatting in close circles, and yelling in each other's ears over the live music. While custom-made masks engraved with Obama's renowned humility were provided to the guests (“44×60”), only the servants were reported to have worn masks. Who can throw a Hawaiian luau-themed party at one of the country's wealthiest retreats in the middle of a pandemic and joblessness crisis while wearing disfiguring masks, however chic and carefully hand-crafted they might be?

[mapuc]

I've read more accurately in A Danish article about this Gen. Milley case

Here I say-It's up to you American to decide if there should be a case against him or not.

Markus

[Rockstar]

IMO all that’s going on now is media hype and controversy. It stirs people up to want to know more about the latest gossip. Unfortunately, if you want to know more you’re going to have to shell out $29.49 on Amazon for the book.

[Rockstar]

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

IMO all that’s going on now is media hype and controversy. It stirs people up to want to know more about the latest gossip. Unfortunately, if you want to know more you’re going to have to shell out $29.49 on Amazon for the book.

Well, not like there's no right-wing material in the fantasy section. But they learned from Goebbels .... so there's that.

[Rockstar]

Funny you should bring up Goebbels.

Propaganda Minister Goebbels was an impoverished intellectual in the days when the menace of national socialism seemed remote to the German people. Until 1933 he lived on a meager salary which he received as a Party functionary. His rise illustrates the operation of direct power - getting, without giving. He simply let it be known to his Party friends in the Municipal Council of Berlin that a larger gift would be acceptable to him. He then became the new owner of extensive estates near Berlin, formerly the property of the municipality, recently given to him as a ‘present’ by the Berlin Chamber of Commerce in recognition of his “services to the nation”.

Goebbels doesn’t sound like something from the right wing fantasy books section. He sounds just like that left wing Democrat Chicago street activist who is now living in a mansion on a 12 acre estate in Martha’s Vinyard.

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Goebbels doesn’t sound like something from the right wing fantasy books section. He sounds just like that left wing Democrat Chicago street activist who is now living in a mansion on a 12 acre estate in Martha’s Vinyard.

Right wing extremists have been trying to project that for years. Which .... is very Goebbellian. Sorry, make that Orwellian. Well, both.

[Arlo]

[Deepslick]

Originally Posted by Arlo

Well, not like there's no right-wing material in the fantasy section. But they learned from Goebbels .... so there's that.

Goebbels was a leftist like his national socioalist party. A big fat lie made after the war placed the nazis on the right. Muossolini was a life long marxist. Hitler himself said they were socialists. History books written after the war was made by leftist progressives. You will not find it anywhere before the war anyone placing the nazis and the fascists on the right. Everyone knew it back then and there wasnt even an argument about it. The nazis fought the communists in germany in the 20s and 30s but only because those communists looked to moscow for leadership. Well made scam and a rewriting of history after ww2. Communism, socialism, fascism...all born of the same whore mother. Leftists all. The leftists have been busy since ww2 after they lose the war and positioned themselves in all the important places in the societies where they could change the societies from within but in a hidden way. Bit by bit. Here we are with a full blown remaking of marxism called cultural marxism. Good luck.

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by Deepslick

Goebbels was a leftist like his national socioalist party.

No need to read the rest. There's a degree of ignorance there that's a bit too proud of itself, sir.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Arlo

No need to read the rest. There's a degree of ignorance there that's a bit too proud of itself, sir.

Funny you should bring up ignorance.

Here’s a portion of a letter from a German businessman.

“….You have no idea how far State control goes and how much power National Socialist party representatives have over our work. The worst of it is that they are so ignorant. In this respect they certainly differ from the former Social-Democratic officials. These National Socialist radicals think of nothing except “distributing the wealth.”

Some businessmen have started studying Marxist theories, so they have a better understanding of the present economic times.

How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary National Socialist government decisions concerning quantity, quality, and prices for materials.”


I bet that sounds like capitalism to such a learned fellow as yourself huh?

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Funny you should bring up ignorance.

Here’s a portion of a letter from a German businessman.

“….You have no idea how far State control goes and how much power National Socialist party representatives have over our work. The worst of it is that they are so ignorant. In this respect they certainly differ from the former Social-Democratic officials. These National Socialist radicals think of nothing except “distributing the wealth.”

Some businessmen have started studying Marxist theories, so they have a better understanding of the present economic times.

How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary National Socialist government decisions concerning quantity, quality, and prices for materials.”


I bet that sounds like capitalism to such a learned fellow as yourself huh?

Actually, examples of such were indeed gone over in scholastic settings, going far to explain both confusion and delusion then. As it apparently still does now.

https://fullfact.org/online/nazis-socialists/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

https://www.bundestag.de/en/parliame...sm/third_reich

https://escholarship.org/content/qt7...8d3ec02202.pdf

But never mind that. Winning you over with historical facts will never be a thing.

[derstosstrupp]

The answer is not a straightforward one because it is hard to view what the Nazis were trying to achieve through the lens of what socialism looks like today, which is more akin to the Social Democrats Hitler combatted. Hitler was very much a socialist and intended for Germany to become a national socialist state. He drew a very clear distinction between what he called international Socialism, and national Socialism. He was in support of the old Prussian adage “Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz”, the concept of putting the community before your own interests. For them that meant national community, not international community. And the policies that he put into place throughout the 1930s are reflective of this principle. The stressing of the Volksgemeinschaft and demand of individuals to subjugate themselves to that principle was a reality, not only in daily life but also in economic life.

I studied this quite a bit when I was doing some independent study of Austrian economics years ago. And since I speak German I went to Hitler’s speeches. The evidence there is everywhere. What rockstar posted, that letter, is very consistent with what I have come to understand about national socialist economic policy. It was state run, it did allow individual businessmen the opportunity for initiative, but within the guidelines set by the government.

This topic came up here not long ago, and rockstar posted a very good in-depth analysis video. I also contributed to that thread and I recommend looking over those contributions, one of which is below. Hitler himself explains his outlook and economic policies (and what he’s already done, not what he’s just saying he’ll do):

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/sho...1&postcount=24

I made it clear there and I will make it clear here, I do not view the evils of that regime as lying in their socialism. The evils lie elsewhere. If a nation can make socialist policies work for themselves, stressing sacrifice for the greater good, compulsory labor and military service, emphasis on physical fitness, keeping rapacious business practices in check, etc., more power to them. Probably wouldn’t work for some, particularly the US with the individualistic outlook that defines us (often to our detriment), but certainly elsewhere it might.

I also said this there and I will say it again, people really really really really want him to not be associated with Socialism because of the emotional response that that regime elicits. But looking at it objectively through the lens of history, he clearly was. But again, not an indictment of Socialism itself.

[Arlo]

Of course it was state run. Nazism required everything to be totally controlled by the state for the benefit of the state. Where today's extreme right wing is involved, is its poorly fashioned attempt to divorce itself from Nazism's extreme right identity and project it on to liberals. Ironically, in the U.S., nazis/neo-nazis are not attracted to liberal politics, causes or ideology. Instead they have been attracted to authoritarian ideology (imagine that) while attempting to project that image onto their political enemies (their preferred term instead of 'opponent'). That meant being fervent supporters of Republicanism as it began its slide toward 'the party of Trump.' If there is a political litmus paper, that would be it.

There won't be an eventual 'coming to reality' on this forum (or any) from those devoted to that viewpoint. But then, there won't be any swaying from their viewpoint by anyone already immersed in historical relevancy and current reality.

So, in that, all I can offer is love, understanding and sympathy.

[derstosstrupp]

Fwiw, the extreme right in the US supported Trump in spite of his alignment with the Republican Party, and cheered whenever Trump bucked “traditional conservatives”. They didn’t become Republicans. They hate both parties for the same reason the Nazis hated them - they view them as ineffectual. Far-right-wingers call Republicans “cucks” and “Democrats just going the speed limit”, as they typically come around to agree with the left eventually (“caving in” as they see it).

The true extreme right wing also is very much in support of socialistic policies that the Nazis implemented. Just for white people.

Proud Boys etc isn’t really the true far right. They are much more moderate than the real ones.