Hamburg warzone: 700 arrested as leftists clash with neo-Nazis

He means overtime PAY!

 

I have always said that the extreme right and the extreme left are actually pretty close to each other, as strange as this may sound. Both are based on the suppression of individual freedoms (as are other extremist factions, like Islamists). Remember, the "far right" Nazis called themselves "national socialists"...

 

modern anarchism.... lol. Anarchy is what its always been (no government).

 

That would make more sense, I guess you are right, that must be what he meant, but was unable to express correctly.

 

You don't understand what anarchism means with your simplistic terms and you also don't seem to understand what "modern" means. Lol.

 

The right isn't about individual freedom. That's a rebranding. You are combining libertarianism with the right which is a really twisted sort of logic. Contrary to the brainwashing you have been subjected to, the right isn't considered with freedom. It is concerned with nationalism. This is why you call yourself the tea party after all.

That is why the right is anti-immigrant, minority, and poor. The right is about a purity of values and class (anti abortion, looks down on the weak, fear the country is being run over by unpatriotic types). Demonize others. For the nazis it was Jews, for the right in the u.s. it's Islam, gays, Mexicans, and the poor. By the way, the Nazis also demonized these people.

The right in the u.s isnt about personal freedoms. Control whom can marry, have abortions, have rights. The right is about inequality.

Fascism is about taking inequality too far. Socialism is about taking equality too far. Fascism is about religious and ideal form of human beings. socialism is about the rejection of religion and the ideal form of society. But this isn't about freedom.

You are saying totalitarian equals socialism. Since fascism is totalitarian then fascists are socialists. Thats like saying stupidity is a mental state, and brilliance is a mental state, therefore stupidity is brilliance.

It's just nonsense you are spewing here. So much so that your are making yourself look like a brainwashed idiot. You are a fool for being manipulated so easily. You need to educate yourself not because of being a republican or a democrat, but because you don't want to end up some sort of crazy old man that everyone laughs at. I am serious.


Get it out of your head that liberals love freedom any less than you. I fact the ones I know love it much more than you and actually understand what freedom really means. It was the left whom embraced the Internet and social media. It's the left whom pushed for civil rights..INDVIDUAL rights for women, blacks, gays, immigrants, Muslims. It's the left that fights giving corporation more power than individual. It's the left that pushes most for fair and equal elections, whereas the right that wishes to discourage votes or minimize the influence of minorities.


So please, take your garbage elsewhere

 

Hmm, you may be on to something. Instead of a political line, perhaps we're dealing with a political circle. Mind blown.

 

Aside from suppressing freedom, fascism and socialism are quite different. Socialists seek to liberate the working man and tend to be internationalists. Fascism focuses on perpetual warfare and is rooted in nationalism (often rascism).

 

Any political party that gains too much power becomes authoritarian. Look at the feudal system...or even anarchy where you have oppressive gangs.

Democracy works by preventing any group from gaining too much power and over pushing their agenda. That's the value of a two party system

If you really want to see what Nazi Germany and Communist Russia had in common, it's that they each only had one party.

 

Strike 1

 

Fundamentalists are the same... Muslim, Jew, Christian, atheist, Nazi or anarchist..

 

I'd agree that they're all the same in that they all push a simplistic worldview and exploit people's natural fears (racial tension, colonization) and use already existing and popular ideas to achieve their goals.

 

Tallanor's understanding of politics seems to come from Glenn Beck, Ayn Rand & Robert A. Heinlein.

Right & left are artifacts from the French Revolution and most political definitions have been rendered meaningless in the last 100 years. In the the US most have taken on their own meaning, very different from the original.

A libertarian traditionally means someone like Proudhon, Stirner, or the anarchists in Catalonia. Most of what they have in common is a rejection of coercion and organizing things into voluntary cooperatives. It gets much of it's inspiration from Marx, but the early libertarians broke off when it was apparent that the movement was too authoritarian. It otherwise sounds a lot like what Communists are supposed to be. In the US it means people like the Koch brothers who want a corporate oligarchy.

A conservative was a post-enlightenment Tory who still believed that the monarchy and organized religion were good for perserving social order and perserving the status quo even if they were anachronistic. In the US it's a large tent mixed with the very wealthy and people with very strong pre-Enlightenment religious ideas.

Liberalism was born in the Enlightenment as well, as a rejection of absolutism. It's Adam Smith and Locke and the American and French Revolutions. It believed in laissez-faire economics and personal liberty. That's pretty much what most Americans think they are and what the Democratic, Republican and Libertarian Parties say they are. In the US it is used as a slur for a person who champions social equality.

A socialist is someone who believes in social equality. Most democratic political parties in the world today are socialist in nature and believe in a mixed economy with regulated private enterprise. It probably describes most people in the first world and most governments there, even if they are republics, parliamentary democracies or constitutional monarchies. It also probably describes most of the posters in D&D. In the US, they are called communists.

A Fascist is first and foremost a nationalist, and a nationalist that defines a nation by ethnicity and/or religion, sort of like where I live, where the only easy path of citizenship is to have a Jewish mother, because the bible says so. He seeks to purge the nation of foreign elements and to create an order ruled by cultured elites. Plato was a fascist as were most Latin American leaders, the Spartans, the Holy Roman Empire, the Phlangists in Lebanon, Mussolini, Franco, Tojo, Avigdor Lieberman and Vladimir Putin. They see themselves as neither left or right and simply believe in what they think is pragmatic direct action (a term anarchists use) to preserve this oder of elites (which is exactly what anarchists hate). Stalinists in the Soviet Union accused Maoists of being facists. Maoists in China accused the Stalinists in the USSR of being one. The Nazis are an un-orthodox model, as their ideology was mixed with so many odds and ends and seemed to change the rules as the game went on. Before the war they were quite popular in the English speaking world. In the US it means someone that doesn't agree with your politics, even though most fascist regimes after WW2 were/are valued US allies.

Communism is a hypothetical classless state that would exist after socialism, which according to Marx, requires an advanced capitalistic industrialized society to start with. Since every place that ever called itself "communist" were agrarian third world countries, they took some version of Lenninism, where a vanguard of the faithful would just have to seize power to make the necessary decisions for the uneducated to usher in that great and vaunted age. Which isn't very socialist or Marxist at all, and bears more in common with the Platonic ideal described above. They tend to be very socially conservative. In the US, a communist is someone that supports reproductive rights, same-sex marriages or questions American exceptionalism.

 

I agree. They are all linear charts - I don't think any political scientist actually thinks of the political spectrum linearly. It's just way oversimplified, as demonstrated by things like the religious right, drug policy, etc. There are just too many people who wouldn't fit anyone on the line - libertarians are not just more extreme conservatives; they are completely at odds with some aspects of the right. To just put them further out on the line is silly.

 

I just find it dishonest pretending like there is some sort correlation between any free market ideology and fascism or that fascism stems from some free market ideology. Fascism governance is total control of production just like communism. The two are so similar they constantly get mixed up.

ideologies cant be expressed with one dimensional charts, but my two dimensional chart is perfect............

of course the political spectrum is one dimensional thus the locations (left of center and right of center). You describe an object's location in a two dimensional plane using two coordinates (shocking I know). I've never heard of liberalism described as top left of center. If you claim something is 'right of center', which the article does using the words 'far-right', then you are referring to one dimension. I would argue that one dimension is size (scope) of government. What do you feel that one dimension is Major?

 

Damn...you found my picture. I'll have to hunt you down now.

 

Thanks, good post. I find it funny that the term "liberal" is used as an insult in American politics. I would consider myself a (conservative) "liberal" in terms of the original definition, closer to what you posted.

 

I had trouble following the French elections- the idea that a self-proclaimed socialist could not only be a real candidate, but win office under the socialist party is unheard of in the US (outside of Wisconsin).