Investment Strategies / Mechanical Investing
No. of Recommendations: 10
Witnessing Commonone and Albaby (and a few others) joust with the Trumpers here is like watching lions play whack-a-meerkat.
No. of Recommendations: 2
That's interesting. Most of us don't read left wing posts anymore. There's no point.
I'm here to talk to al and the other righties; most of the other lefties might as well not exist.
No. of Recommendations: 5
That's interesting. Most of us don't read left wing posts anymore. There's no point.
I'm here to talk to al and the other righties; most of the other lefties might as well not exist.
Why not block us then? you obviously read us
No. of Recommendations: 2
hat's interesting. Most of us don't read left wing posts anymore. There's no point.
I'm here to talk to al and the other righties; most of the other lefties might as well not exist.
Why not block us then? you obviously read us
****
LOL - WHAT'S NEXT. Burger King complaining about poor public health
No. of Recommendations: 1
LOL - WHAT'S NEXT. Burger King complaining about poor public health
Yup. When you launch threads to insult folks, post repetitively about the same thing (stalker alert) or just pop in to fling poo...why bother?
No. of Recommendations: 7
Actually, I was wondering why he didn't stick to the Conservative board (Conservative Shrewds, or something similar). Atheists tend to be more educated, and more liberal. Always exceptions, of course. But one will encounter a lot of left-leaning people on an "atheist" chat board.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Witnessing Commonone and Albaby (and a few others) joust with the Trumpers here is like watching lions play whack-a-meerkat. - G01
-------------------
LOL. Glad to be providing an amusing pastime to y'all to watch. But you should know we get something in return, the regular outburst's of industrial strength TDS and the soaring prose to describe the pure evil that is Trump. Really creative verbiage, very amusing.
That aside, I prefer to bat around ideas for solving the problems of the day where I sometimes learn a few things. I already know that Trump is Hitler. .
No. of Recommendations: 1
That's interesting. Most of us don't read left wing posts anymore. There's no point.
I'm here to talk to al and the other righties; most of the other lefties might as well not exist. =Dope
-----------------
I feel quite differently. I enjoy the banter with the liberals and like to learn about other perspectives on the problems of the day. And there is basic information to be had that I find interesting sprinkled throughout the threads. Example, I did not get into the debate about the value of Mar-A-Lago, but really enjoyed learning new details about the property and its history. Another was the deep dive into the asylum issue, the definition of asylum, and the laws governing the processing of claimants.
Anyway, as exasperating as the libs can be at times, I like the spice they bring to the stew and I would miss them if they weren't around.
No. of Recommendations: 2
I feel quite differently. I enjoy the banter with the liberals and like to learn about other perspectives on the problems of the day. And there is basic information to be had that I find interesting sprinkled throughout the threads. Example, I did not get into the debate about the value of Mar-A-Lago, but really enjoyed learning new details about the property and its history. Another was the deep dive into the asylum issue, the definition of asylum, and the laws governing the processing of claimants.
Anyway, as exasperating as the libs can be at times, I like the spice they bring to the stew and I would miss them if they weren't around.
Really? I don't know that I would describe what a lot of them bring as "spice". More like a Baby Ruth in the pool only it's not a Baby Ruth, if you catch my meaning. al's posts are opportunities to learn things but it gets thin past that.
Like you, I already know Trump is HitlerMaoStalinBushEvilSatanHitlerKillImpoverishUsAll. I wonder about the mental health of the people that post this kind of thing 24/7...what's the point?
No. of Recommendations: 3
I already know that Trump is Hitler.
Realistically, probably closer to Mussolini.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Realistically, probably closer to Mussolini.
Nah, more like Stalin. Mussolini was a socialist. Fascism grew from that branch of the tree, historically.
No. of Recommendations: 8
Nah, more like Stalin. Mussolini was a socialist. Fascism grew from that branch of the tree, historically.
Quite the contrary - fascism arose in opposition to socialism. Fascist theory emphasized heirarchical society and elitism, and deeply opposed the egalitarian and internationalist aspects of socialism - particularly socialism's rejection of nationalism, which is one of the key pillars of fascism. Fascism embraced capitalism and private ownership of property; though it called for capitalist systems to be subject to and controlled by the state, it completely rejected the idea that the means of production should be held in common by the workers (a core economic tenet of socialism).
Which is not surprising - politically, fascism rose to prominence in reaction to and in opposition to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. As Mussolini rose to power, the earliest targets he and his supporters went after were the socialists, the communists, and the trade unions. Those were fascism's enemies, not its roots.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Whichever. They were both brutal totalitarians. Stalin arguably murdered a lot more of his own people, so if you want that to be an analog to Trump, I'm OK with it. IMHO, Trump aspires to be that.
No. of Recommendations: 0
OK...I was just thinking about the people. But you are correct in your analysis of the economic ideologies behind socialism and fascism. Though the socialism of the USSR/Bolsheviks never attained that "ideal". Ownership was not held in common by the workers. In practice, he wasn't quite a fascist, but he was pretty close. There was no capitalism (except on the black market), but there was no common ownership, either. The government of the USSR owned the means of production for the most part, and at its head was a totalitarian not much different than any other dictator.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Quite the contrary - fascism arose in opposition to socialism.
Nope!
Mussolini was the publisher of Avanti! (Italy's leading socialist magazine). As Italy was being caught up in a wave of nationalism, a split emerged in the socialist party. They threw him out of it for supporting Italy's involvement in WWI - they wanted to stay out of it, he viewed it as a way to strike a blow against the anti-socialist monarchies of the Habsburg in Austria-Hungary and the Hohenzollerns in Germany. He also believed that the inevitable mobilization of Russian conscripts would destabilize the cazrist regime in Russia and hasten its move towards socialism (and he was right).
Mussolini felt that Italian socialists had therefore failed the original Marxian notion of a worldwide Revolution of the Proletariat and that WWI offered the opportunity for radical change around the globe.
After they threw him out he decided that he needed to go another way. In 1914 he formed Il Popolo d'Italia an interventionalist newspaper and started taking money from corporate clients - armament makers - and foreign intervention-minded socialists alike (who wanted Italy in the war on the allies' side).
Considering the nationalist fervor, he then decided that the nation-state wasn't something that class couldn't transcend, writing
The nation has not disappeared. We used to believe that the concept was totally without substance. Instead we see the nation arise as a palpitating reality before us! ... Class cannot destroy the nation. Class reveals itself as a collection of interests—but the nation is a history of sentiments, traditions, language, culture, and race. Class can become an integral part of the nation, but the one cannot eclipse the other.
and
The class struggle is a vain formula, without effect and consequence wherever one finds a people that has not integrated itself into its proper linguistic and racial confines—where the national problem has not been definitely resolved. In such circumstances the class movement finds itself impaired by an inauspicious historic climate.
At this point he decided to embark on a kind of a national socialist journey where anyone...regardless of class...could join in an advance the collective goals of the nation-state. With himself as the head of it, of course.
This where your statement of fascism rose to prominence in reaction to and in opposition to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 is both correct and incorrect. It's correct in that after the war he looked at Bolshevism's rise in the new Soviet Union as a threat to his idea of the nation-state's preeminence because Lenin was a proponent of the classical Marxian idea of a worldwide socialist revolution. It's incorrect to say that fascism's only rise was due to that because as we've shown, he'd begun moving in this direction as early as 1914 when the war started. In fact, he formed the Fasci d'Azione Rivoluzionaria in 1914 and started calling them Fascisti that same year.
After the war Mussolini determined that socialism had failed and what was needed instead was a strongman to run Italy. At this point the Mare Nostrum and spazio vitale stuff started.
No. of Recommendations: 3
But you are correct in your analysis of the economic ideologies behind socialism and fascism. Though the socialism of the USSR/Bolsheviks never attained that "ideal". Ownership was not held in common by the workers. In practice, he wasn't quite a fascist, but he was pretty close. There was no capitalism (except on the black market), but there was no common ownership, either. The government of the USSR owned the means of production for the most part, and at its head was a totalitarian not much different than any other dictator.
At some point the left/right divide doesn't matter and all authoritarian regimes converge on the same point, regardless of what ideological goals got them there:
*Repression of basic human rights
*State control of media and communications
*Tops-down driven control of the nation's economy
*Often militaristic tendencies
No. of Recommendations: 2
I agree. A dictator is a dictator. The authoritarian regimes may vary in the details around the edges, but they -historically- do seem to "converge on the same point". Which is probably why Mussolini was allied with Hitler, even though Hitler hated socialism (despite the name of his Party, which I always found interesting).
No. of Recommendations: 0
Hitler hated the Marxian idea of a worldwide class revolution, the aim of which was to overthrow all nation-states and replace them with a Dictatorship of the Proletariat. To Hitler, an ultra-nationalist convinced of inherent Germanic racial superiority over all, the idea of getting rid of Germany as an entity was anathema.
No. of Recommendations: 1
I already know that Trump is Hitler.
Realistically, probably closer to Mussolini.
More likely Putin.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Trump is HitlerMaoStalinBushEvilSatanHitlerKillImpoverishUsAll.
What is Bush doing in there? no need to answer
No. of Recommendations: 1
Trump is HitlerMaoStalinBushEvilSatanHitlerKillImpoverishUsAll.
****
Yep!
Next to each Holocaust Memorial Museum we need to have equal space and budget for people hurt by Trump.
What happened under Hitler - is no less severe than what happened to Americans 2016-2020.
Hey - works for me.
Who knows, one day people will roll their eyes at both - nobody really is concerned anymore about Presidents from decades ago so why should this be different.
Back to topic: When someone complains about what happened under Hitler to their ancestors or relatives. Where human beings were systematically "dealt with" in a certain way......remind them that you've walked in their shoes because from 2016-2020 Donald Trump was your President.
Let's keep watering down certain things.
It'll play wonderfully - into certain "trends" in world politics and culture these days.
No. of Recommendations: 3
After the war Mussolini determined that socialism had failed and what was needed instead was a strongman to run Italy. At this point the Mare Nostrum and spazio vitale stuff started.
Right. Mussolini started his personal political career in socialism. Fascism - the political ideology - arose in opposition to socialism.
