Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

corpsesarefun wrote:Then why are you surprised that people hate the Nazi party?

This is why I never really talk about my political beleifs. Haters gon' hate.

Because of what they did for Germany. By separating the Mark from other currencies by linking it to "units of work" and not to market speculation, they had the most stable currency in history, because the currency cannot fluctuate. One unit of work will always be the same. Because of this, they managed to drag themselves out of a terrible state. It helped the economy so much. That form of currency is one of only two that can ever properly work (the other being trading in actual gold). Most people just say "They killed Jews, they were bad." Under Stalin, nearly twice as many were killed... And yet Communism is far more acceptable despite being the worst form of government imaginable.

The difference is the hatred of jews and non-aryan races was/is part of Nazism, killing millions of your own citizens isn't a normal part of communism unless something goes horribly wrong.

corpsesarefun wrote:The difference is the hatred of jews and non-aryan races was/is part of Nazism, killing millions of your own citizens isn't a normal part of communism unless something goes horribly wrong.

Less than 2% of Russia was made of European Jews, and 50% of ALL revolutionaries were European Jews. They were killing there own people....

For myself, using the defniitions of the political compass site:

Moderate right economic (IE regulated free trade, regulated free markets, progressive taxation, but I don't support government ownership of businesses, etc).

Definitely left social policies using the traditional definition of liberal (IE pro-choice, for regulated gun rights and ownership, pro gay marriage, for the separation of church and state, etc)

I think you misunderstood my point.

The Holocaust was a natural extension of the militant racism inherent in Nazism whereas communism doesn't inherently mean killing millions of your own people as Stalin did.

DeadlySquirrel wrote:That form of currency is one of only two that can ever properly work (the other being trading in actual gold)

If you think the gold standard actually works you really need to read up more on history.

Having a country's monetary units dependant on the fluctuating value of gold would be disastrous in this day and age, especially with all of the gold speculators on the market.

corpsesarefun wrote:I think you misunderstood my point.

The Holocaust was a natural extension of the militant racism inherent in Nazism whereas communism doesn't inherently mean killing millions of your own people as Stalin did.

Ever thought they had a reason to kill the Jews?

Perhaps it was because the Jewish banks supported the German War effort in WW1, until Britain made a deal with the banks to bring America into the war and in return the Jews would get Palestine. Or that Communism, the biggest threat to Europe was a Jewish movement? It's all documented. And even if it wasn't true, it is what the Germany people thought. See "Stab-in-the-back" theory put forward by a German General after their surrender.

I in no way condone their actions, but it wasn't just racism. They had a reason.

If you want to talk about certain ideas which are fine independent of nazism, fine, go ahead, but trying to defend nazism itself is morally abhorrent-- it was created for and by racist, mysoginistic, and homophobic pieces of violent amoral trash, and it is perpetuated by the same in the modern era.

It is an ideology steeped in racism to its very core, believing in eugenics and that some mythical "master race" deserves to rule over everyone else, an ideology that would punish women for not wanting to breed this master race, an ideology taht would punish homosexuals as deviants and send them to die in torture camps along with those of the wrong race or political ideology. All of this was perfectly sanctioned by the ideology, not just by the political party-- because the one master race was perfect and could do no wrong and everyone else was an inferior sub-human that did not need to be treated with equality.

Trying to defend nazism by ignoring all of this is wrong on so many levels...

Melissia wrote:ITrying to defend nazism by ignoring all of this is wrong on so many levels...

As is attacking it by ignoring all the good they did. And eugenics was a popular idea in Britain as well at the time...

Melissia wrote:For myself, using the defniitions of the political compass site:

Moderate right economic (IE regulated free trade, regulated free markets, progressive taxation, but I don't support government ownership of businesses, etc).

Definitely left social policies using the traditional definition of liberal (IE pro-choice, for regulated gun rights and ownership, pro gay marriage, for the separation of church and state, etc)

Here in Germany thats all part of the conservatives (so called ,,right") too.

DeadlySquirrel wrote:As is attacking it by ignoring all the good they did.

Claiming that their racial hatred put in to law was "good" is not exactly my idea of an argument I want to participate in.

Dark Scipio wrote:

Melissia wrote:For myself, using the defniitions of the political compass site:

Moderate right economic (IE regulated free trade, regulated free markets, progressive taxation, but I don't support government ownership of businesses, etc).

Definitely left social policies using the traditional definition of liberal (IE pro-choice, for regulated gun rights and ownership, pro gay marriage, for the separation of church and state, etc)

Here in Germany thats all part of the conservatives (so called ,,right") too.

Edit: Now.

Melissia wrote:If you want to talk about certain ideas which are fine independent of nazism, fine, go ahead, but trying to defend nazism itself is morally abhorrent-- it was created for and by racist, mysoginistic, and homophobic pieces of violent amoral trash, and it is perpetuated by the same in the modern era.

It is an ideology steeped in racism to its very core, believing in eugenics and that some mythical "master race" deserves to rule over everyone else, an ideology that would punish women for not wanting to breed this master race, an ideology taht would punish homosexuals as deviants and send them to die in torture camps along with those of the wrong race or political ideology. All of this was perfectly sanctioned by the ideology, not just by the political party-- because the one master race was perfect and could do no wrong and everyone else was an inferior sub-human that did not need to be treated with equality.

Trying to defend nazism by ignoring all of this is wrong on so many levels...

Hear, hear!

Dark Scipio wrote:Here in Germany thats all part of the conservatives (so called ,,right") too.

Here in the US I'd be called left wing and liberal and probably labeled a socialist (which I'm not).

Melissia wrote:

DeadlySquirrel wrote:As is attacking it by ignoring all the good they did.

Claiming that their racial hatred put in to law was "good" is not exactly my idea of an argument I want to participate in.

Not once did I say it was good. I said they had their reasons. If you don't want to participate in this argument then don't. I'm not forcing you.

This poll has popped up before...

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/412388.page

The choices are misleading. A better set would be:
Conservative
Liberal
Statist
Libertarian
Centrist

This is a really good site that exemplifies the political spectrum.
http://www.nolanchart.com/index.php
http://www.nolanchart.com/survey.php

For the record I'm libertarian.

Center Left. I agree with numerous conservative view points, although not nearly enough to be called a centrist.

Pro-War (a 'hawk'), pro-abortion, pro-death penalty. I have strong views on natural conservation and animal rights though. I'm fiercely anti-communist too. I agree that the rich should be taxed proportionately to the rest of us. I believe in natural selection, and that most people are totally incapable of doing certain things. I'm a bit racist against africans (not african americans ), and I'm not sure why. I'm leaning towards being pro-torture, although I don't think they use it for things that are actually important.



I'm sure my viewpoints will mature after being in the real world for a while.

Communism and Fascism do the same thing; they put absolute power of the state into the hands of a self selecting elite.

Communism and Fascism are the same thing with a different cover story.

I believe politics should oversee a balance of rights and freedoms because for every right you gain or give you loose a freedom.

My personal political leaning is towards liberal socialism.

corpsesarefun wrote:whereas communism doesn't inherently mean killing millions of your own people as Stalin did.

Yes, actually it does. In fact, mass murder is far more central to Communism than it is to Nazism.

DeadlySquirrel wrote:Ever thought they had a reason to kill the Jews?

Someone once raised an interesting question. Is the following statement antisemetic: "If what Hitler said about the Jews was correct, then the Holocaust was justified."

DeadlySquirrel wrote:It's surprising how many people dislike Nazism

It's not that people dislike Nazism, lots of people like Nazism. They just don't like the label Nazism.

DeadlySquirrel wrote:According to family history, a family member died at Auschwitz.

Fell out of a guard tower?

Biccat wrote:

DeadlySquirrel wrote:Ever thought they had a reason to kill the Jews?

Someone once raised an interesting question. Is the following statement antisemetic: "If what Hitler said about the Jews was correct, then the Holocaust was justified."

somehow I missed that gem thanks Biccat.
For your part the statement itself is not antisemitic, nor is any and all criticism leveled at the Jews. However I think we can all agree that the persecution and mass murder of the Jews during the Holocaust was antisemitic.

For the Squirrel, nobody can produce a good reason to kill millions of people, not in war and certainly not by planned genocide. Otherwise the Jews in Israel would have found a final solution to the Palestinian problem by now.

An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

I expected anarchism and all kinds of other dumbassery when I clicked this thread, but I never, in a million years, expected someone to be in here defending Nazism.

It's little surprises like this that keep me coming back to the OT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and Center Right I suppose.

Godwins law came quickly to this thread.

Bleak_Fantasy wrote:

warpcrafter wrote:

dogma wrote:So you're against accruing personal power, and securing yourself?

Government has nothing to do with personal power or security. It's about corruption and greed.

Damn bureaucratic governments paving our roads and indoctrinating our children with math and science.

You've obviously never been to Kansas, the land of potholes and creationism.

When it boils down to it, the majority of Dakka doesn't matter on the political spectrum.

Only a few (not a handful, but small in comparison to the rest of Dakka) Dakka-ites post significantly to have their political opinions matter and therefore have others form opinions on where Dakka lies.

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"

Well, I was ALWAYS gonna bring it up. But nothing has been compared to Nazis or Hitler...

Whatever seems like the best option at the time.

Oh, and I'm a Unionist. The SNP want to stop living in the past. Scotland will not be better on its own.

Castiel wrote: Scotland will not be better on its own.

What would you say if Hitler arose from the grave and said that Scotland staying with England was a good thing?

biccat wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:whereas communism doesn't inherently mean killing millions of your own people as Stalin did.

Yes, actually it does. In fact, mass murder is far more central to Communism than it is to Nazism.

Care to explain that?

corpsesarefun wrote:

biccat wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:whereas communism doesn't inherently mean killing millions of your own people as Stalin did.

Yes, actually it does. In fact, mass murder is far more central to Communism than it is to Nazism.

Care to explain that?

Far more people have died under Communism... The mass cullings and purges performed by many Communist dictators.

Stalin was as racist than Hitler, if not more.

Yes but communist ideology itself doesn't generally feature race or institutionalised mass homicide, it tends to be much more about "the workers uniting" and "all men being equal" and such airy crap.

Nazism is by default racist though.