OH YAH, HENRY FORD WAS A HIGH LEVEL FREEMASON AND SUPPORTED IT. HE WAS A
FREEMASON EVEN WHEN HE WAS PUBLISHING THE PHONEY PROTOCOLS. HE ADMIT THAT
THEY WERE FAKE AND THAT HE ONLY DID IT TO SELL HIS CARS. OH ANOTHER FACT,
HE BUILT THE GORKY CAR PLANT IN THE SOVIET UNION AND HAD CLOSE ECONOMIC
TIES WITH THE COMMUNIST STATE.
Socializing with Socialists: Inside a Bernie Sanders Party
Bernie Sanders supporters gathered across the country Wednesday to show support for his presidential campaign. In a first-of-its-kind 'nationwide houseparty', ...
Let's be real clear here. Bernie Sanders is not a socialist. He's a
Democratic Socialist. There's a huge difference.
When you think of socialism, you think of Marx, Stalin, USSR, Venezuela and
the like.
Democratic Socialism was a huge part of American history before Reagan's
trickle down. We had it for our most prosperous 40 years. Think FDR, JFK
and MLK. Those men would be Democratic Socialists in today's world.
When this stupid trickle down thing was discussed. I was upset. I knew the
results that would come. I was only 13. It waa the first time I had ever
heard of the Heritage Foundation. That's the Koch brothers in case you
didn't know.
Did you know Reagan was upset about, too? He tried to change it back. His
Congresa by that time was too corrupted.
Watch Inequality For All on YouTube if you want to know more about our
history with Democratic Socialism.
Search for Reagan: Rich Should Pay Taxes.
#FeelTheBern
#Bernie2016
From your comment, I'd recommend reading The Communist Manifesto to clear up some of your confusion. Bernie is socialist, socialism by nature is a democratic economic system; to add democratic as a modifier is redundant. Marx was a democratic socialist -- that's precisely what Marxism is. Your concern of Stalinism is an authoritarian socialism, not true socialism and the most uncommon form of socialist theory or belief. Also, I will add, the rise of Stalinism was a rise of the Russian people over Lenin, only corruption took what was beautiful Marxism and created Stalinism, or authoritarian socialism. In short, don't be afraid of socialism without the democratic prefix. Socialism and democratic socialism -- mean the exact same thing. I'd also really recommend reading up on Marx. To list him among Lenin is ignorance, and it's not your fault. The U.S. has demonized all communism for the sake of interfering with capitalism. Marx is one of the most greatestpeople in recorded history.
Do You Like Nationalist Socialist Policies? Question
Audience Question: Which policies of the National Socialist Party would you adopt? –On the Bonus Show: A brewery buys up all the Count Chocula, 28% of ...
NSDAP was a populist party first and foremost. This is something people
seem to forget.
That said, populist parties function in the political contexts of their own
countries. Populists always cater to what the people "know" as good. In
this case, NSDAP had welfare state points in their platform because Germany
has had that economic and political legacy since Bismarck.
If there'd ever be a "serious" American nazi party, it would use
conservative or populist values particular to American society.
The honest answer is that for a lot of liberal policies to work you do need
a homogeneous population. In order to do that you need indoctrination,
people making roughly the same, having access to the same quality of goods
and services, all thinking the same and so on. I do see a lot of this from
the left in wanting to push for more public education with now wanting more
pre-school. In wanting to bring the rich down so everyone has the same low
quality of goods. With socialized healthcare and other policies they are
trying to force with the federal government.
To be fair, republicans do it as well. The only good part about
republicans is that when democrats are in power than they oppose them, but
when republicans are in power they have no problem increasing the size of
the federal government as well.
You're playing pretty fast and loose with the word "indoctrination", the way it's commonly used is an intentional method of education that either explicitly suppresses critical discourse and intellectually opposing argumentation or is embedded in a larger worldview that does this. If "indoctrination" just means implicit osmotic learning via exposure to a culture or peers then it's rather a useless and meaningless word because that type of "indoctrination" is indeed inescapable.If we instead accept the more traditional version of indoctrination which includes a substantial intent to suppress criticism, then your zero sum game argument seems a bit inconsistent. If I teach someone how to think and reason critically about ideas, specially including ideas they/I place great value in, how can this possibly be indoctrination? How can this have anything to do with some sort of intentional pressure to intellectually homogenize?There's something else subtle in your argument, it seems to presuppose that homogeneity is "wrong" or at least undesirable. I would certainly agree that in many cultures it's unrealistic or that attempts to impose artificial homogeneity via totalitarian, subversive or coercive means is somewhere between morally alarming and obscene but none of that makes homogeneity somehow inferior to heterogeneity by default.Imagine some sort of alternate reality where we are all the absolute best versions of ourselves we will be ever be. A world where nobody intentionally hurts others without sufficient and inescapable reasoning that is obvious to everyone. A world where everyone believes only true propositions. In such a world, it's hard to see how people would be anything but homogenous at least with respect to intellectual pursuits. So then, would it be better in such a world for some people to try to change so they can hold false beliefs or make serious and obvious mistakes purely for the purpose of creating a more heterogenous culture? Is homogeneity the real problem or is it the imposition of homogeneity when such seems to conflict with the current natural cultural state that is the issue?
Hitler was not a real socialist. His greatest objections, aside to those on
Jews, were to Marxists. And, in my book, if it ain't Marxist to some
degree, it ain't Socialist either - not that they are identical.
Hitler wasn't any kind of "Socialist".Hitler was in the Nazionalsozialist party. The is commonly translated into English is as "National Socialist", but the word for the political ideology commonly known in English as Socialism in German is "Sozialismus". Nazionalsozialismus is a separate unique compound word and, as in English, compound words frequently have different meanings than either of their separate roots -- it happens much more frequently in German because compounding is much more frequent in German.For example, the English word "Schoolhouse" is a compound. If you had to quickly and rather literally translate that into another language which lacked its own compound (or similar) with the same meaning you might end up with something like "Educational Residence" but this would obviously not mean that a Schoolhouse has the specific characteristics of a residence that differentiates it from being a generic building. In the same way, the commonality between Sozialismus and Nazionalsozialismus is that they are both ideologies which focus heavily on the social behavior of all people in a given culture.The whole memetic linkage between "National Socialism" and "Socialism" is just incredibly foolish and really rather ignorant as its based on nothing more than lazy translation (probably because "Nazional" looks very much like "National" and "Sozialist" looks very much like "Socialist").
Don't think that the relocation of the Native Americans had much to do with his hate for the jews. Read his book, Mein Kampf, and it gives you an idea of what he was thinking and why he felt the way he did.I decided to read it whilst recovering from a car accident. It's an interesting look into the mind of a neurotic psychopath
When I heard that Hitler loved dogs, I went over and kicked my dog
screaming "I'm not like Hitler! I'm not like Hitler!" The message was lost
on my dog who in response to my ardent anti-nazism took a dump on the
carpet and marked his territory on the sofa leg.
A video I created about some of the most famous bigots in modern history. Watch the video to learn more :-) It includes: Henry Ford (American anti-Semitism, The ...
I guess this video was made by a jew, because seemingly only "anti-semites"
can be insane extremists... Modern jews are nowhere close to semites
anyway... filthy khazars. Fuck zionism and fuck you!
+Carlos Spicyweiner Yes this does prove something wrong. Humanity got to its technological place now mainly due to capitalism. If you believe we shouldn't have it then you clearly do not understand history. Look at Europe now, and even the USA as it transitions somewhat. It's quite a shame the rights and liberties that we once worked to hard to achieve will be stripped or altered because people feel as if we are not capable in running our own lives. Humans would have no purpose.
Milton Friedman is a dildo, and history is already, and will continue to
prove him wrong. Saying that there is no alternative way to capitalism is
just a mother lode of bullshit.
+Carlos Spicyweiner Yes this does prove something wrong. Humanity got to its technological place now mainly due to capitalism. If you believe we shouldn't have it then you clearly do not understand history. Look at Europe now, and even the USA as it transitions somewhat. It's quite a shame the rights and liberties that we once worked to hard to achieve will be stripped or altered because people feel as if we are not capable in running our own lives.
+shaqpopcorn34 Ok, its not only dicks you fancy, but also sweaty Mexicans too! LMAO! About time you start working it out for yourself :)Ah Conservatards ... full of such intellect, just like ol' shaq here. DONE.
+shaqpopcorn34 hee hee I love pissing off Conservatards! BAHHAHAHahhahaaSo did you finish off that fantasy of yours? ... or still posting on Craigslist?
+shaqpopcorn34 And Im always amazed how quick the right like to bring up something about being gay ... must be that repressive religion that makes you like the taboo of fantasing about another man to want to bring it up all the time.
I wonder where this is happening...oh right! No where!
Socialists quit coalition government over Goldman Sachs deal
In Denmark, the socialist party has quit the government in anger over a deal with investment bank... euronews, the most watched news channel in Europe ...