Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

I've came to the conclusion that Liberal Democrats are more close minded, uneducated on politics and intolerant

Than the majority of Conservative Republicans.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
That has been well know for years. They call themselves 'progressive' Other notable progressives were Stalin, Hitler, Mao.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@hippyjoe1955 Jane Addams, social reformer.
Susan B. Anthony, suffragist.
Andrew Carnegie, steel magnate, philanthropist.
Winston Churchill, author (not the British politician)
Clarence Darrow, lawyer
Henry Ford, automaker
Thomas Edison, inventor
John D. Rockefeller, Jr., philanthropist
Margaret Sanger, birth control activist

All progressives.
It's infantile to play the semantics game.
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
@Graylight And many of those on you list supported Hitler.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@hippyjoe1955 Yes, you win. You will always win. If a circle has to be a square and wrong has to be right, you will win your argument.

You don't want debate. You want confirmation. It's the difference between making love and jerking off.
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
@Graylight Read some history. Hitler was a progressive that many other progressives loved and adored. Only after the discovery of the death camps did Hitler get accused of being right wing. His own party was the Workers Socialist Party. Grab a brain and a few good books.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@hippyjoe1955 If I cared about who's a progressive and who's not, I suppose I could. Myself, I judge candidates and other people on an individual basis.

But for the record, label meanings, times, contexts and history changes. That's why your little semantics game is so pointless.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@hippyjoe1955 Hitler got his ideas from many things. He also distorted the Swastika, would you say the religion that had it before him was to blame?

Also one can't say that Hitler was "fully" progressive, liberal, or anything on the left as he was a nationalist that used far right wing authoritarian views.

If Hitler wasn't right wing, then why is it mostly white nationalists that let's say deny the Holocaust?

http://factmyth.com/factoids/hitler-was-a-left-wing-socialist-liberal/

BOTTOMLINE ON HITLER AND “NATIONAL” “SOCIALISM”: Understood correctly, the term “National Socialism” tells you everything you need to know about the political ideology of Hitler and the NAZIs. That is, it was a mix of left-wing, right-wing, socialism, and nationalism that often gets branded as “extreme right” (meaning “extreme right-wing social conservative populism“) due to its anti-Marxist and nativist nationalist qualities. Consider, Hitler and the NAZIs were ultranationalist and nativist right wingers who opposed liberals, left-wing socialists, and Marxist Communists (right wing), but otherwise had a populist pro-labour, collectivist, and anti-capitalist message focused on “small group” socialism (left-wing; minus the “small group” part). While the socialist and left-wing aspects are notable and merit discussion, ultimately when you look at the NAZI’s platform and actions (as described below) you can see that their otherwise left-wing and socialist planks were all colored by a militant, nativist, nationalist, socially conservative, and populist right-wing spirit. For example, socialism was only offered to nationals and it was only offered in a structured form in the way a military might offer it. Their public education program focused on indoctrinating the youth, their public healthcare was for German Nationals only, and guns were taken away from non-nationals only.

Graylight · 51-55, F
@SatanBurger Oh, you're so cool.
katielass · F
@hippyjoe1955 Actually, I saw a documentary on History channel and it was reported that it was the media who decided to label hitler's socialist party right wing. Basically, they didn't think the American people could differentiate between two left wing enemies so Soviet Union was declared to be left and hitler was declared to be right. It was nothing more than an effort to differentiate. But as anyone who knows the story can see, they were both very definitely left wing. I think it's interesting how the left tries to disclaim their own. Kind of tells me they know better and are far from being dupes.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@katielass That counts as anecdotal evidence which is falsifiable unless you can find the link because I tried looking that up with no such thing. If you just take a look at right wing nationalism, a lot of them are also supporters of Hitler and you'll hear a lot of his rhetoric by numerous right wing nationalist factions.

I've never heard any liberal say for instance "the struggle for Aryan survival." Do let me know when you hear that 😂 otherwise what's your point? I don't think you really have one.

"The Nazis opposed all traditional socialism, wanting to substitute something they called ‘German socialism’ or ‘Aryan socialism,’” Bryn Mawr College professor Barbara Miller Lane told PolitiFact in October 2015. “This meant citizenship and privileges only for ‘Aryans’ (meaning non-Jews), concentration camps for others."

Indeed, the American Nazi Party, first named the World Union of Free Enterprise National Socialists by its founder George Lincoln Rockwell in 1959 before he changed the name a year later, specifically states that “National Socialism” applies to whites. The party’s official website describes the two main tenets of the term are “the Struggle for Aryan Racial survival, and Social Justice for White Working Class people throughout our land.

http://www.newsweek.com/nazis-democrats-socialists-alt-right-650572
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
@SatanBurger Keep digging. You are on the wrong side of the debate and sinking fast. The FACT is that Hitler and Stalin agreed on most things and like Democratic Socialists, National Socialists, or Socialists International they are all the same poisonous fruit from the same poisonous tree. The end is always mass murder and increased poverty.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@hippyjoe1955 Do you have any idea how many ideologies of socialism there are? And they are not all equal common nor do they all advocate the same things.
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
But they all have the same effect.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@hippyjoe1955 Unsubstantiated blanket statement.
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
@Graylight Point out an exception.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@hippyjoe1955 Nope. There are plenty of well-functioning socialist nations in the world right now, many of them routinely ranked higher than we are for quality of living. You, however, will find something to detract from their success. Remember, confirmation over debate. The information is out there if you are really looking for it.
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
@Graylight Name one that is better off for having become socialist.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@hippyjoe1955 I'll tell you what, I'll grovel and even send you a video of me groveling if you can find me proof of a liberal saying that their for the Aryan racial survival, white working class people, or citizenship and privileges only for Aryans. I'm about 90% sure you can't because most of them are far right wing groups who are heavily anti immigrant with a focus on the white race. I dare you to prove it though for what it's worth 🤷

Yeah about socialism killing millions, all systems can have the ability to be screwed because humans themselves are prone to fallacies, it just depends on who leads them that makes the system good or bad.

To say that our system in America hasn't had an issue with income inequality leading to extreme poverty in children or killing in the name of imperialism in other countries would be a lie.
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
@SatanBurger You have never heard of the 'white privilege' campain? Same crap as the Aryan nonsense Hitler spewed just different colour. The 1% campaign a few years ago reminded me that Hitler hated 1% too. His hatred was toward rich Jews but it was 1% just the same. Amazing how things never change.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@hippyjoe1955 That's a lie and it's not even close to what people talk about when referencing the 1%. The 1% is talk about actual income inequality and the fact that a tiny fraction of people now holds 80% of the worlds wealth. This number has actually risen a bit in recent years making poverty worse.

Before the Jewish people became "wealthy" they were already facing backlash from emancipation. Then when they became wealthy that just led to more anger and racism which Hitler fed off of.

That's a far cry from the already income inequality that we have going on right now.

During the second half of the 19th century, as the Jews emancipation throughout most of Europe led to their increasing integration into society and into the modern economy, it elicited a backlash. Anti-Semitism, some of it murderous, rose across the continent, including in Germany. When the Jews were kept apart in the ghetto, and limited to certain professions, it was possible to accuse them of clannishness, and resent the interest they charged on loans. But when they emerged from the ghetto, and became captains of industry and finance, and socially and intellectually prominent, there was a whole new set of reasons to hate them. The success of the emancipated Jews was perhaps even more galling than the poverty and degradation of disenfranchised Jews – and it gave rise to racial theories that posited an essential biological difference in them.

https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/holocaust-remembrance-day/why-did-adolf-hitler-hate-the-jews-1.5088390