If I’ve learned anything from this thread, it’s that Rush Limbaugh is broadcasting some sort of brainwashing signal. The tu quoque stuff about Pelosi and the anti-Bush protestors is reasonable, in a way. Defending what Rush said is simply insane.
Fascism and its especially evil stepchild, Naziism were dictatorial movements of the right, regardless of whether they marketed themselves as socialist in order to seize power. Limbaugh would have been very much at home in Nazi Germany, much like Adolf Hitler and Herman Goering, except that Goering and Hitler weren’t coward, having served bravely in the first world war rather than ducking out with an anal cyst.
Well, yes and no.
Certainly it is hard to pigeon hole all political philosophies into left or right (indeed I see a lot of issues in the US that one would think are “conservative” or “liberal” yet seemed staked out by the opposite side).
That said Limbaugh is painting Obama/liberals as akin to Hitler and Stalin. Their two political philosophies, beyond being dictatorial, were very different and almost diametrically opposed.
In the context of the OP Limbaugh is trying to hang the creepiness of two of the most colossal creeps ever around liberals’ necks. Liberals aren’t just socialist, they’re fascists too! Neat trick that.
And as has been noted repeatedly it was Nazi marketing that said they were “socialist”. But it was just that…marketing. Once the Nazis gained enough power they killed many liberal minded people who wanted something akin to socialism and could be a problem (Night of the Long Knives for starters but continued from there). I do not think providing nationalized health care can be said to make a Nazi fascist a socialist at the same time.
Seriously, can you be a socialist AND a fascist simultaneously? Limbaugh thinks you can it would seem.
What is it with the idiotic notion that [my side] is less prone to abuses of power? There are fundamental framework considerations (e.g., a free press, representative government) that are not directly tied to conservative or liberal mindsets. But those–and all freedoms–are subject to curtailment via a malignant political body of any political persuasion.
Have fun sticking your dick into pigeon holes all day long. Declaring that [their side] is the path to [evil] makes you come across just like, well, just like you’d expect a mental picture of some shmuck sticking his dick into pigeon holes to be.
“Hitler had more in common with your side (when I take pains to describe it like this), so therefore your side must be on the path towards Hitlerism!” What the hell is that?
Hey, by the way, I just thought I’d pop in to remind all the lefties in this thread that Salvador Allende was also a leftist. Yup. Totally left-wing.
And the Ku Klux Klan? They were like totally leftist too, dude. Sweet.
Timothy McVey? Left-wing liberal weenie.
And you know all those neo-nazi skinheads we got these days? Commies. Commie bastards, man.
While I’m at it, I just want to highlight something Skylla wrote earlier:
This is so totally true. Like, when I moved to Sweden, I was just yer ordinary freedom-luvin Merican. But after living for a couple of years under the terrible burden of their authoritarian health system, strange things began to happen to me. Fer example, I used to help little old ladies cross the street. But then, after a while, I started gettin this urge to RUN 'EM OVER with my car instead! And after that it started to get worse, and I started gettin all these fantasies about KILLIN GRANDMA! These days all I want to do is round up all the old people, stick 'em on a train, and send em to the ovens. So there you go: irrefutable evidence that universal health care leads to the HOLOCAUST.
Finally, today’s quote of the day, from IBD:
Republicans: too stupid for words.
Allende pretty much was a communist in all but name, though he was notoriously light on the mass disappearances. For that, they had to turn to Augusto Pinochet.
:smack:
Epic facesmack.
I meant Pinochet, dammit. Pinochet was the commie. Not Allende.
:smack:
:smack:
:smack:
I hate it when I do that.
Is this what you were taught in school? If yes, I really weep for the children who are taught this kind of crap. This is just completely wrong and makes me think Scylla might actually be living in some alternate universe with a different history.
Hitler never hijacked any leftish platform. From the very beginning the Nazi’s were a right-wing party who spent their early years in street brawls with the SPD (social democrats) and KPD (communists).
Universal health care was not something the Nazis promised or wanted to establish in Germany. It was already established by that other raving left-wing loony Otto von Bismarck (Health Insurance Act of 1883).
And even hinting that the establishment of universal health care could possibly lead to a totalitarian regime taking over is just plain crazy. There are about 2 million other more relevant causes of totalitarianism taking over large parts of Europe in the first half of the 20th century.
All three were totalitarian systems with more in common with each other than points apart. Only somebody with incurable stupidity or mendaciously fostering an agenda could say that fascism is a left wing ideology. Communism in its (inevitably) totalitarian guise grew out of left-wing movements but in no way embodied the ideals.
Witness the way both Soviet communism and the Nazi Party liquidated the ‘idealists’ ASAP (if in the case of Rohm you can call his quasi-socialistic, steal the Left’s thunder, by attacking strike-breakers, idealistic.)
As any good anarchist will tell you by seeing the State as nothing more than the ‘committee of the bougeoisie’ Marxism ignores the problem of power and the State itself.
Totalitarianism has nothing to do with ideology, only power and it’ll adopt whatever flavour suits the conditions best. Left for communist versions, right for fascism. Neither say anything about liberals or conservatives, labour or tory etc today.
This whole line of manufactured concern is crap. Whether these historical figures were left or right is irrelevant to what is happening in the US right now. We have long been a mix of some socialistic policies and individual freedoms. We are still working at finding the proper balance. when Bush used our shock and grief to claim power for himself to declare war circumventing traditional Constitutional procedure there was no outrage. When he continuously eroding civil rights in the name of security, no outrage. Now when it comes to trying to establish better health care there’s all this concern about the government having too much power and where this might lead? I don’t get it. Isn’t that some screwed up priorities?
Yes, of course it’s pretty transparent but conservatives have been saying that for years, I guess it’s just caught on just now.
Actually no, Naziism was socialist through and through, in that socialism means the state controls the means of production and nothing more than that.
Yes absolutely as Fascism is a form of socialism.
So, then, if business and finance completely dominated the government to serve thier own interests, that would be socialism as well?
mswas:
Do you think it would be too much to ask for you, and others who are arguing for your interpretation of fascism, to actually link to some sort of evidence, or scholarly study, etc., that supports your point of view, rather than simply making categorical statements with no other references whatsoever?
It’s kinda hard to argue with someone who just says, “No, you’re wrong” and doesn’t provide any kind of evidence or argument to support their assertions.
Perhaps I use “socialist” too broadly when (in line with the OP and comparing Hitler to Stalin) I should be saying Marxist. So, I guess you have fascist-socialist versus Marxist-socialist. Clearly different and clearly did not like each other at all.
I also suspect that nuance is lost on the vast majority of Americans who equate fascism with Hitler/Nazis and socialism with Stalin/Soviet Union (maybe Mao if they paid a little attention in history class).
The Nazi state never controlled the means of production. The Krupps, Thyssens, Bosch’s, Piëch’s, Porsches, and others controlled the means of production, and not few of them got very rich in the process.
Who?
Well, they paid the price, didn’t they? Many of them were publicly scolded rather harshly.
Yes of course, and Obama-socialist is more like the modern European Socialist than it is like either of those.
Well that’s the point, that’s why Limbaugh makes the distinction. He’s speaking to an audience of morons and is trying to elicit a fear response.
No need I’ll just post the definition:
Then I guess the Nazis weren’t fascist either then eh?
I’m imagining that none of those people you mentioned were members of the party right?