How The Left Views Black America

[BernardKingGOAT]

Negative there is nothing "conservastive" about racism. 1960's dems were racist. It was the Republican party that started the civil rights movement. Racism has always been a corner stone of the progressives. They are the same people who brought us eugenics and the worst racism the world ever saw during ww2, where they advocated genocide. Hitler's National Socialism literally got it's ideas on race theory from American Eugenics Democrats. To this day they advocate using abortion as a means of population control, and you don't seem to be bothered by which demographics abortion has targeted from the beginning, or that planned parenthood was founded by racists, and is still back by them. The slaughter of minorities in particular every year dwarves the numbers of the people who died in ww2.

Conservatism promotes traditional Judeao Christian values that teach we are all brothers and sisters in Christ, regardless of the color of our skin. Conservatives beleive in the inherent value of the individual, and individual rights. Conservatives beleive you have the right to protect yourself. Conservatives beleive in preventing tyrant states from abuse of it's citizens. Conservatives brought you abolishinism and an end to slavery......
Democrats and Republicans were both more conservative once upon a time because they understood the threat of International Marxism and it's war on western civilization. Todays parties have been so infested by forign intelligence groups, and world marxism as to be shadows of their former selves.

I think you may still be living in those 60's you saw. if you can't see that the Democrats and Republicans then have nothing to do with what is currently going on tofday. Both parties have sold out to forign interest, shipping jobs over seas, and the destruction of the American family. Democrats are running towards the destruction of America as a party and are basiocally just Marxists at this point. Most RINO's are just skipping towards the destruction, while padding their bank accounts with CCP money, because the non MAGA GOP are sell outs.

Am I outraged? your damn right I am, this country is being destroyed, and regardless of color all kids are having their birthright stolen from them by short sighted people who can't be Americans first and foremost, and put the country first. Our kids will never know our economic success, and our grandchildren will e3ither be third world improvrished....or maybe dead if the depopulation technocrats get their way.

Where all have you lived in your lifetime?

 

[EasternVol]

No Fascism is a form of collectivism. National Socialism, and International Socialism share 90% of their views on government and the police state. Their only real differece is a so called difference in geopolitics. That difference is in theory only, as the Soviets were in fact extremely nationalistic, and teh internationalism was only so much lip service. Both historically based their economies on marxist ideals. You have been lied to on what Fascism was. This is also easily proved by anyone willing to do even cursory reading of source material on the true history of the national socialist party in Germany. As opposed to propoganda text books.

The actual history......Hitler was a big time leftie, and Lefties have been trying to rewrite history ever since to blame others.

HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST

jonjayray.tripod.com

As for tying this admin to Nazis...yes Insane right?
View attachment 667340
How about opening your F***ing eyes. This is who your party is sending billions to.

I've been lied to? I feel so, disillusioned. I better ask the UT Economics Department for compensation since it was them what filled my poor trusting head full of lies. But why, why would they have done that?
Nah, you're off the rails with your analysis.

 

[EasternVol]

It's about the only difference between the two and in reality the state did control private industry during the NAZI reign, they just made the "owners" wealthy. The similarities are that the communist did the same in making the "owners" wealthy, the owners being the party chieftains.

Again it's a huge difference. Communists seized and nationalized private property in line with their revolutionary dogma, often killing the owners. Fascists worked with the owners as long as they were on board with the program. Communists were Marxists while Fascists strongly opposed Marxism.

 

[hog88]

Again it's a huge difference. Communists seized and nationalized private property in line with their revolutionary dogma, often killing the owners. Fascists worked with the owners as long as they were on board with the program. Communists were Marxists while Fascists strongly opposed Marxism.

Yes, the 1 degree of difference between communism and fascism. Fascist allowed individual ownership as long as the owners toed the party line.

 

[EasternVol]

Yes, the 1 degree of difference between communism and fascism. Fascist allowed individual ownership as long as the owners toed the party line.

The difference in question is the acceptance of private property and capitalism. One had it and one didn't.

 

[hog88]

The difference in question is the acceptance of private property and capitalism. One had it and one didn't.

Yes, the 1 difference between them.

 

[EasternVol]

Yes, the 1 difference between them.

Yes of course, the one difference is that they are completely different.

 

[hog88]

Yes of course, the one difference is that they are completely different.

Yes, that is the 1 degree of difference I mentioned. I'm glad that we agree that I was correct.

 

[Sgt_Nick_Fury]

I've been lied to? I feel so, disillusioned. I better ask the UT Economics Department for compensation since it was them what filled my poor trusting head full of lies. But why, why would they have done that?
Nah, you're off the rails with your analysis.

That completely makes sense. When I was at UT almost every professor in the dept was either an overt marxist, or socialist. All with careers pretty much in academia and never building anything. In general you can count on college NOT to teach the truth, and they have lied teh most about the true nature of fascism, because actual history hurts their socialist dreams.

 

[LouderVol]

Consider your points refuted. In socialism and communism (the left) the state controls the means of production. You'd have noticed a distinct lack of private enterprise in the USSR if you'd ever visited it. The Nazis and their ilk didn't nationalize their means of production and private enterprise thrived under them. The Fascists didn't go for that 'dictatorship of the proletariat' song and dance and associated theories of government since those are leftist and they were rightists.

lol wut? you just freaking declare things? freaking lol. try actually reading something beyond your high school world history book that had 3 sentences on the matter.

Volkswagen. "The Peoples Car", that sounds like a righties wet dream right?

have you looked into private business like Hugo Boss, BMW, Porsche, and several others, and tell me about their ownership during the Nazi era? The only ones who kept their jobs were the Nazis, the rest were replaced....with Nazis. Krupp and Farben were "private" civilians who were found guilty of war crimes in the Nuremberg trials because of their involvement with the nazis.

How Big Business Bailed Out the Nazis

A tragic tale of what can go wrong when profits are entangled with politics.

www.brennancenter.org

farming

How the Nazis Converted German Agriculture to Socialism | Mises Institute

In line with Nazi economic totalitarianism overall, the National Socialists took total control of German agricultural while leaving in place an ersatz form of

mises.org

"Although a comprehensive study of the Nazi economy demonstrating that the Nazis did, indeed, fit the characteristics of this pattern of socialism would require a book, the easiest place to look for historical examples is the Reichsnährstand (the Reich Food Estate or Reich Food Corporation, depending on the translation), which took control of the entire German agricultural industry – one fourth of the entire German economy during the Nazi reign."

the Nazis set production goals and quotas, determined who made what, where, and how. the Nazi party was directly involved in the decision making of pretty much every major German industry, even before 1939.

 

[LouderVol]

Again it's a huge difference. Communists seized and nationalized private property in line with their revolutionary dogma, often killing the owners. Fascists worked with the owners as long as they were on board with the program. Communists were Marxists while Fascists strongly opposed Marxism.

how is that different?

and do you know what the nazis did with owners who wouldn't work with them? They removed them, usually sticking them in jail or house arrest, and replaced them with a Nazi.

is that really the distinction that makes the Nazi's "far" right. they didn't outright kill ALL of the private businesses, just some of them. whats the threshold there? The Nazis killed 5% so that is far right, the communists killed 100% so they are far left. so that would mean the Nazis should have killed 50% to land in the middle?

what a ridiculous take.

 

[LouderVol]

The difference in question is the acceptance of private property and capitalism. One had it and one didn't.

the nazis didn't have capitalism. you must have been in Monty's freaking econ classes with takes like that.

hitler literally labeled capitalism a jewish enterprise.

Loading…

onlinelibrary.wiley.com

"Anti-capitalism played a more important role in Hitler's world view than is generally assumed. Hitler was sceptical about nationalising all means of production because, as a Social Darwinist, he feared that this would override natural selection in the economic sphere. From the mid-1930s, however, he became increasingly convinced that a planned economy was far superior to a market economy and, with time, came to increasingly admire the Soviet system."

 

[midnight orange]

Not even close. Krupp, Siemens, IG Farben, etc. were tight with the Nazis and made a ton of money with them in power. Compare that with how many private conglomerates there were in the USSR.

The USSR had Ford, GE, Newport News shipbuilding, etc and also made a ton of money. The USSR had to import expertise to industrialize.

 

[volinsd]

The joke is going to be on the Latinos (and Asians, and dot Indians) one day when they wake up and realize they’re now paying reparations to ancestors of a country that is an ocean away.

Do you think it gets to the point of reparations passing without citizen violence?

I keep trying to figure out where the line is before people rise up against the government, but I think it's before that getting passed honestly

 

[EasternVol]

That completely makes sense. When I was at UT almost every professor in the dept was either an overt marxist, or socialist. All with careers pretty much in academia and never building anything. In general you can count on college NOT to teach the truth, and they have lied teh most about the true nature of fascism, because actual history hurts their socialist dreams.

That's pretty amusing really.

 

[EasternVol]

the nazis didn't have capitalism. you must have been in Monty's freaking econ classes with takes like that.

hitler literally labeled capitalism a jewish enterprise.

Loading…

onlinelibrary.wiley.com

"Anti-capitalism played a more important role in Hitler's world view than is generally assumed. Hitler was sceptical about nationalising all means of production because, as a Social Darwinist, he feared that this would override natural selection in the economic sphere. From the mid-1930s, however, he became increasingly convinced that a planned economy was far superior to a market economy and, with time, came to increasingly admire the Soviet system."

Yet they persecuted Communists from the early 30's, didn't make any moves toward adoption of a Soviet styled system, and kept their private enterprise system.
You've made up your mind and shall not be swayed. Have fun with it.

 

[LouderVol]

Yet they persecuted Communists from the early 30's, didn't make any moves toward adoption of a Soviet styled system, and kept their private enterprise system.
You've made up your mind and shall not be swayed. Have fun with it.

I read the one link you had which was a click bait title, and when I pointed it out to you you didn't even acknowledge it. you are the one with a made up mind that is unwilling to be swayed. I have presented several research papers from experts on the matter and you have no response but "google it" and you will not actually read or respond to any of the papers or links I have presented.

no one said they were communist. that is a straw man you are making up. one doesn't have to go full communist to be socialist. and being right of communism doesn't make one "far right".

 

[Sgt_Nick_Fury]

Economic choice in election is stark, bigger opportunity or a bigger state

Kamala Harris believes she knows the choice before the public in November.

nypost.com

Kamala Harris may enjoy talking about minority communities and how much the state needs to help them.

But when Trump was in the White House, he helped African Americans and others to help themselves.

During the first three years of Trump’s presidency median household incomes rose by 15.4% for black Americans and 11.5% for white Americans.

 

[EasternVol]

I read the one link you had which was a click bait title, and when I pointed it out to you you didn't even acknowledge it. you are the one with a made up mind that is unwilling to be swayed. I have presented several research papers from experts on the matter and you have no response but "google it" and you will not actually read or respond to any of the papers or links I have presented.

no one said they were communist. that is a straw man you are making up. one doesn't have to go full communist to be socialist. and being right of communism doesn't make one "far right".

Which link do you mean?
The articles you linked don't support your argument ( How Big Business Bailed Out the Nazis and How the Nazis Converted German Agriculture to Socialism | Mises Institute ) or the author's thesis was disputed ( https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ecaf.12551 ). Industrialists aiding the Nazis didn't make either socialist or left wing. The article on agriculture is more persuasive but the farms were still operated by private owners who took profit or loss (look, capitalism) and doesn't touch on the rest of the economy. It seems that thesis by Rainer Zitelmann was not widely accepted and was pretty heavily criticized.

 

[LouderVol]

Which link do you mean?
The articles you linked don't support your argument ( How Big Business Bailed Out the Nazis and How the Nazis Converted German Agriculture to Socialism | Mises Institute ) or the author's thesis was disputed ( https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ecaf.12551 ). Industrialists aiding the Nazis didn't make either socialist or left wing. The article on agriculture is more persuasive but the farms were still operated by private owners who took profit or loss (look, capitalism) and doesn't touch on the rest of the economy. It seems that thesis by Rainer Zitelmann was not widely accepted and was pretty heavily criticized.

sorry. it was Nash's link, not yours. you haven't posted any links. you have only brought your own opinion.

of course it is disputed, that is how peer reviewing works. it is still published because it hasn't been refuted.

you mean "aiding" when the Nazis were getting their start? Or do you mean the aiding that got some of those "private" individuals in the Nuremberg trials? that pretty well states that the world found them guilty of far more than just doing business with the Nazis. The Nazis did far more than just buy from those companies, which would be the limit of capitalism. They told those companies how they should run, that's not capitalism. the Nazis provided slave labor, I think to all of them. thats certainly not capitalism. The Nazis replaced leadership, thats certainly not capitalism. The Nazi's dictated who took profit, and how much, that is certainly not capitalism.

your argument is that because the Nazis weren't full blown communists they are far right on the economic front. you didn't address Volkswagen either. you have yet to establish them as "far" right, or even very "right" at all.

compare what the Nazis were doing to what the US was doing, and you will find a much better example of actual capitalism in the era.

 

[EasternVol]

sorry. it was Nash's link, not yours. you haven't posted any links. you have only brought your own opinion.

of course it is disputed, that is how peer reviewing works. it is still published because it hasn't been refuted.

you mean "aiding" when the Nazis were getting their start? Or do you mean the aiding that got some of those "private" individuals in the Nuremberg trials? that pretty well states that the world found them guilty of far more than just doing business with the Nazis. The Nazis did far more than just buy from those companies, which would be the limit of capitalism. They told those companies how they should run, that's not capitalism. the Nazis provided slave labor, I think to all of them. thats certainly not capitalism. The Nazis replaced leadership, thats certainly not capitalism. The Nazi's dictated who took profit, and how much, that is certainly not capitalism.

your argument is that because the Nazis weren't full blown communists they are far right on the economic front. you didn't address Volkswagen either. you have yet to establish them as "far" right, or even very "right" at all.

compare what the Nazis were doing to what the US was doing, and you will find a much better example of actual capitalism in the era.

Do you realize that you linked an article about a specific point in time when capitalists aided the Nazis, I replied to that, and you just asked me what point in time I mean?
The use of slaves doesn't mean that capitalism wasn't being practiced. The company owners still had their capital at work producing good. How did the Nazis dictate who took profit and now much?
My argument is that the Nazis were fascists and thus by definition far right.
Volkswagen started as a socialist venture, true. That's one out of how many thousand though? Too bad they didn't get to produce any cars for the people.

 

[LouderVol]

Do you realize that you linked an article about a specific point in time when capitalists aided the Nazis, I replied to that, and you just asked me what point in time I mean?
The use of slaves doesn't mean that capitalism wasn't being practiced. The company owners still had their capital at work producing good. How did the Nazis dictate who took profit and now much?
My argument is that the Nazis were fascists and thus by definition far right.
Volkswagen started as a socialist venture, true. That's one out of how many thousand though? Too bad they didn't get to produce any cars for the people.

yeah too bad the Nazis took a private enterprise like Volkswagen, and used it to fleece the citizens of their wealth. again doesn't sound very capitalistic to me.

The nazis set production goals, and as the sole entity buying that production I don't see how that isn't setting profits. the Nazis chose which companies to work with. if you didn't work with the Nazis you were replaced. if your company didn't work for the Nazis it was folded into one that would. further picking winners and losers. particularly in regards to jewish owned entities, or other non-desirables. again I don't see how you can ignore the extremely traumatic examples of Nazis socialism, and say that stuff doesn't matter, there were a few oligarchs still making money so that means the whole thing is far right.

where does capitalism sit on your continuum? Most people have it on the right. With a libertarian paradise of no regulation, no government involvement, no taxes, no centralized planning, no outside interference, being the extreme example of it. The Nazis represent pretty much NONE of that. making them "far" right as compared to our current political model is just a lazy way down play the modern right.

pretty much any actual model that looks at the actions and policies is going to have the Nazis to the left. if you just want to slap an unsubstantiated label that has no reference, on the Nazis, far right works as well as anything.


Communists......Nazis.................................Center...American Capitalism..............Libertarianism
<in the 40s, we have strayed far more left over the intervening period.