re: Why is fascism connected to "RIGHT WING?"

quote:

---

Oh yay. This topic again.

---

you're such a puss...

quote:

---

I understand the lie but it's still a lie

---

It's not a "lie", it's an "ideal". Just like the right's ideal of Anarchy, and ideals in general, it's practically speaking, unachievable.

quote:

---

Yeah its a simple thought that goes through my mind. Would Gates and Bezos really give up their fortune in the name of equity? Or any of the uber wealthy?

---

That's what "purges" are for.

If the concentrations of wealth aren't willingly distributed, the holder of such is simply "purged" and the wealth distributed according to need.

quote:

---

It doesn't, there is no state. And no ownership as we know it. It was summed up by Marx as, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs

---

Oh frickin pahleez.

Who administers this? Unicorn's?? Just stop it you're making a fool of yourself

I had wondered the very same thing years ago. One of the things I came to realize that seems to be lost by some people, is that conservative values tend to be traditional values. What that means is also one of the reasons the word neocon developed due to every changing "values". One of the things that separated national socialism versus a global version of communism was that one aspect tied it with the values of their sovereign nation over a worldly rule. Germany was for Germany which is at odds of a global form of communism even though both forms of government were socialist-like in nature.

One of things you might ask yourself is what values are generally viewed as conservative? That may very from place to place. A person who holds traditionally values in the United States may see things from a perspective from generations that grew out of constitutional republic of the United States versus another region of the world that stemmed from corruption and wars and all kinds of entities attempts to rise to power. In one regard, the United States is sovereign country from it's beginnings, but in way that didn't arise from the same circumstances as Nazi Germany. So, when I see this in particular it seems to be either mud slinging politics or influence from foreign politics who don't understand the origins of the United States (which was far from perfect but was not Nazi Germany).

The other thing that muddies up the water is that fact that the values and social norms of society seems to always be changing. The United States was for the most part, founded by people of Christian faith. Whether or not you are Christian or read the bible or not, one of things that seems to occur (moving the goal post of society) is people that "do what is right in their own eyes", a good lesson from the Book of Judges. The problem with doing what is right in your own eyes versus having an absolute moral authority is that the next person/ or group in power sees things differently than you, and society is always adapting to new and changing social norms, which can (sometimes dangerously) become the traditional values for some that are raised in it can create more and more complicated social problems through time.

quote:

---

Also your invocation of the supposed right ideal of anarchy Exposes you for the liberal you are. Because the right has no such ideal. The fact you make such a claim exposes you as a daily kos Democrat underground flunky..

---

Jesus, fricking Christ, dude, don't ever ever think in a different direction?

To be honest, I was contrasting the Worker's Utopia with Anarcho-capitalism. And I'm not sure on what side of the spectrum Anarcho-capitalism exists, I was assuming the right since it advocates private ownership of the means of production, and espouses individual liberties over community rights.

I don't really believe in the simple political dichotomies that so many promote, and further, I don't believe any single ideology should be a goal of a society. Societies should embrace aspects of many ideologies in a mix that suits the needs of the society in terms of the greatest good for the greatest number.

quote:

---

be honest, I was contrasting the Worker's Utopia with Anarcho-capitalism. And I'm not sure on what side of the spectrum Anarcho-capitalism exists, I was assuming the right since it advocates private ownership of the means of production, and espouses individual liberties over community rights.

---

Is given that in both the workers utopia and anarcho-capitalism You basically have a free-for-all there's really no distinction Other than the fantasies of the people that write them.

Any attempt to draw parallels between it's between today's left and they're embracing of marxism and today's right to yet to unarco capitalism is silly given that today's lef that today's left is far far far more prone to embrace marxism.

You can count on one hand with at least 4 fingers left over the number of prominent anarcho capitalists Anywhere near mainstream right wing thinkers. You would need thousands of fingers to do the same for marxist and the left wing

quote:

---

High Communism, aka worker's Utopia, does propose that in such system nor poverty nor hunger exist.

---

I am amused that marxists even try to claim this would be anything but a free-for-all. If there is a reason that you will never hear a marxist even try to explain how that bullshite would work

quote:

---

Oh frickin pahleez.

Who administers this? Unicorn's?? Just stop it you're making a fool of yourself

---

Are you a child, or just senile?

It's an IDEAL. There's nothing realistic about it.

The Existentialists disposed of platonic ideals. Unfortunately, Marx didn't live long enough to learn that.

I'm just telling what Marx's theory was. I'm not saying it will come to pass. That's the problem you have with making assumptions, they lead you to invalid conclusions.

Just fricking stop it already.

quote:

---

It's an IDEAL. There's nothing realistic about it.

---

It's not an ideal because they can't even explain how it might work even in a perfect world . It's nothing more than unicorn farts.

And don't think that marx inserted it there For no reason. He understood that people would recognize what communism was. Totalitarian at its core. So you basically threw in unicorn farts And a lot of moron's bought into it as something that could actually happen.

Regardless your attempt to play the both sides game by comparing it to right wing thought was Stupid and you know it