Way to teach your kids to respect our country tards....

Oldschool1964

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jun 27, 2009
8,449
7,371
113
116
Your mom's house
I hate to break it to you but we are very much a socialized nation in many ways. Hard to come to terms with I know but someday you will grasp it... and the truth will set you free.

Democratic Socialism describes a socialist economy where production and wealth are collectively owned, but the country has a democratic system of government. The goal of democratic Socialism is to achieve socialist goals of equality while opposing socialist ideologies. Democratic Socialism is opposed to the Soviet economic model, command economies, and authoritarian governance.

Under Democratic Socialism, the ownership of private property is limited. The government regulates the economy. Different programs offer assistance and pensions.

The Following are successful Socialized countries.
Other countries that have adopted and enacted socialist ideas and policies, and have seen success in improving their societies by doing so, are Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Great Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. All of which are highly educated, have advanced infrastructure, a wealth of resources through proxy or self, etc... Just wanted to state that before you start throwing out the failed ones.

But I got you.

The largest of the failed socialist countries is the Soviet Union, which fell in 1991. Following World War II, the United States helped rebuild Western European countries, all of whom were free marketing economies that rebuilt rapidly by establishing the European Union and trading with one another. On the other hand, the Soviet Union seized government control of Eastern European nations, all of which became socialist states. These included: Bulgaria, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Belarus, and Ukraine. While East Germany reunified with West Germany and joined the thriving EU economy, the rest of the Eastern European countries faced economic hardship after the Soviet Union fell. Many of these countries remain the poorest European countries today.

Additionally, both Cuba and Venezuela are currently socialist states facing their own economic crises deemed a result of Socialism.
I want half of all you own. We’ll start with a microcosm of your “Democratic socialist” utopia and we’ll go from there. Your property is now my property, and I’ll let you know what you can keep and what I must confiscate for the good of our micro-nation.
 

Oldschool1964

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jun 27, 2009
8,449
7,371
113
116
Your mom's house
What the kid did was disrespectful. But outside of breaking the law (trespassing and damage to property)... it is his first amendment right to display his pleasure or displeasure with the flag and the US. Do I agree with it? NO. But as an American who believes in our constitutional rights... Which last time I checked is a Republican calling card... He can do with the flag as he pleases.
This is dumb as ****, but typical of you Democrat dumbasses with your “mostly peaceful” stance on crime. “Outside of murdering Jews, Hitler wasn’t so bad of a guy” - Cavalot’s stance on wonderful people. “Bill Cosby was an icon to females, well, outside of all those he raped and those who disagree with his raping of women”.
 

steinek11

All-American
Gold Member
Dec 1, 2014
4,109
7,646
113
Learn to spell. It’s pacifist, not “pascifist.”

And again, you are wrong. Passage after passage in the Bible verify the truth that Christ was not a pacifist.
Are you speaking of the one Time he instructs Peter to buy a sword, which he immediately rebukes him after using?
 

Bobfather

Athletic Director
Gold Member
Oct 6, 2002
14,601
7,501
113
50
Also which one is this? Because I'd venture to guess America has killed a million or more in its time.

Shit how many Indians did we genocide?
Yes liberals have killed 65 million since 1973.
 

3andsomedust

Junior
Gold Member
Jul 5, 2001
1,749
1,072
113
Are you speaking of the one Time he instructs Peter to buy a sword, which he immediately rebukes him after using?

Indulge me.
Indulge you? Ok. To start with, in the example you reference above, many of Christ's disciples owned weapons, yet Christ did not rebuke this ownership. As you yourself acknowledge, here he instructs Peter to buy a sword, though he later rebukes how Peter uses it. It seems to me that a pacifist would not tolerate ownership of a sword, whereas a non-pacifist would tolerate it, even if he was later displeased with how the sword was used.

Anyway...How do you evaluate these 3 verses from Matthew 10:34-36?

Christ: “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. ‘For I came to Set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be members of his household.’”

Or the prophecy made about Christ in Revelation 19:15? “Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. ‘He will rule them with an iron scepter.’ He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.”

How much more indulging do you need @steinek11 ? You left-wingers who think you know something about Christ and the Gospels...amuse me.
 
Last edited:

steinek11

All-American
Gold Member
Dec 1, 2014
4,109
7,646
113
Indulge you? Ok. To start with, in the example you reference above, many of Christ's disciples owned weapons, yet Christ did not rebuke this ownership. As you yourself acknowledge, here he instructs Peter to buy a sword, though he later rebukes how Peter uses it. It seems to me that a pacifist would not tolerate ownership of a sword, whereas a non-pacifist would tolerate it, even if he was later displeased with how the sword was used.

Anyway...How do you evaluate these 3 verses from Matthew 10:34-36?

Christ: “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. ‘For I came to Set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be members of his household.’”

Or the prophecy made about Christ in Revelation 19:15? “Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. ‘He will rule them with an iron scepter.’ He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.”

How much more indulging do you need @steinek11 ? You left-wingers who think you know something about Christ and the Gospels...amuse me.

Your are just like first century Jews, looking to a mighty war hero vs a humble servant as your savior.

Man. If only Jesus spoke metaphorically thru parables like 90% of the time. He’s not telling you to kill your father, he’s telling you to follow him at all cost, including the metaphorical murdering of your family relations.

And again, not a literal sword. Here he is establishing dominion over earthly kingdoms (nationalism).


Oh where to start, from the price of peace

For starters, his biggest sermon ever.

Matt 5:9
Matt 5:39
Matt 26:52
John 18:36
1 Peter 3:9-11
Romans 12

List is long. My savior rides a donkey, not a colt
 

3andsomedust

Junior
Gold Member
Jul 5, 2001
1,749
1,072
113
Your are just like first century Jews, looking to a mighty war hero vs a humble servant as your savior.

Man. If only Jesus spoke metaphorically thru parables like 90% of the time. He’s not telling you to kill your father, he’s telling you to follow him at all cost, including the metaphorical murdering of your family relations.

And again, not a literal sword. Here he is establishing dominion over earthly kingdoms (nationalism).


Oh where to start, from the price of peace

For starters, his biggest sermon ever.

Matt 5:9
Matt 5:39
Matt 26:52
John 18:36
1 Peter 3:9-11
Romans 12

List is long. My savior rides a donkey, not a colt
Ok, brother.

John 2:13-16
When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market!”

Luke 22:36
He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”

Again. Hard to define Jesus as a pacifist given Biblical passages such as these, and many others.
 

steinek11

All-American
Gold Member
Dec 1, 2014
4,109
7,646
113
Advocating for peace does not mean not being angry when the temple is being perverted.
In fact, any other anger would be sinful, completely destroying the basic concept of Jesus, that he was without sin.


And again you bring up the one favorite verse where he instructs Peter to buy a sword

And the entirety of Luke 22 is about prophecy fulfillment. And not surprisingly you don’t continue to verse 37-38

“It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.” The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.” “That’s enough!” he replied.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭22:37-38‬


Is two swords enough to wage some battle. Or, like the rest of Luke 22, is it prophetic.

Seeing as how Jesus immediately rebukes Peter when he uses that sword, telling him he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword, while healing the soldiers ear, isn’t it more
Likely Jesus continued in prophecy fulfillment?


And I have laid out half a dozen verses on peace, specifically and most important, essentially the entirety of the sermon on the mount.
 

steinek11

All-American
Gold Member
Dec 1, 2014
4,109
7,646
113
Ok, brother.

John 2:13-16
When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market!”

Luke 22:36
He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”

Again. Hard to define Jesus as a pacifist given Biblical passages such as these, and many others.
And I’ll await the “many others”.

Part of “liberal indoctrination” is studying ALL religious texts. The Hermeneutics are strong in this one.
 

EriktheRed

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2001
8,276
7,062
113
I'm talking free school, healthcare, and for those that need it food. No questions asked. Most people now call that "socialism"

Educating and keeping America healthy will pay nice dividends for society in time.
Free? It's not free stop saying that.

If you want countries with higher healthcare wait times and less chance of surviving cancers then those places are generally a great choice.
 
  • Love
Reactions: nelsonj22

nelsonj22

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2014
19,321
20,296
113
Free? It's not free stop saying that.

If you want countries with higher healthcare wait times and less chance of surviving cancers then those places are generally a great choice.
VS the millions with Healthcare that sucks ass and breaks them financially
 

kidofSN

Junior
Gold Member
Jul 4, 2007
1,777
2,224
113
Yet America is barely rated in the top 20 when it comes to countries and their health care!
 

EriktheRed

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2001
8,276
7,062
113
VS the millions with Healthcare that sucks ass and breaks them financially
Some of those people gamble and lose (They assume they won't need healthcare).

For the vast majority of people in this country our healthcare system is excellent.

The main reasons our country generally gets lower ratings than others is very unfair. Other nations are given extra marks for "free healthcare', which we all know isn't free. Most nations also on infant mortality don't count low birth weight or premature babies into the metrics, while the United States does. They also love the evil term equity.
 

3andsomedust

Junior
Gold Member
Jul 5, 2001
1,749
1,072
113
And I’ll await the “many others”.

Part of “liberal indoctrination” is studying ALL religious texts. The Hermeneutics are strong in this one.
Yes, many others. Why are you putting my words there in quotations?

1. You say you've laid out a "half dozen" verses on peace, yet most of what you cite comes from the Sermon on the Mount. Hate to break it to you, man, but Christ's instructions to "turn the other cheek" apply to simple instances in which the offense is, on the whole, small. Instances in which one's personal dignity or pride had been offended. Christ certainly wasn't referring to cases that might justifiably involve war. War on a tribal, national, or civilizational level.

Answer this: Did Christ believe in the God of the Old Testament? And didn't the God of the Old Testament sometimes command the Israelites to engage in acts of war? And didn't the God of the Old Testament claim that his nature was unchanging? Indeed he did, in Malachi 3:6: "I the Lord do not change."

So how again was Jesus a pacifist?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bobfather

steinek11

All-American
Gold Member
Dec 1, 2014
4,109
7,646
113
Yes, many others. Why are you putting my words there in quotations?

1. You say you've laid out a "half dozen" verses on peace, yet most of what you cite comes from the Sermon on the Mount. Hate to break it to you, man, but Christ's instructions to "turn the other cheek" apply to simple instances in which the offense is, on the whole, small. Instances in which one's personal dignity or pride had been offended. Christ certainly wasn't referring to cases that might justifiably involve war. War on a tribal, national, or civilizational level.

Answer this: Did Christ believe in the God of the Old Testament? And didn't the God of the Old Testament sometimes command the Israelites to engage in acts of war? And didn't the God of the Old Testament claim that his nature was unchanging? Indeed he did, in Malachi 3:6: "I the Lord do not change."

So how again was Jesus a pacifist?
Whatever you gotta tell yourself to Justify your blood lust. I’ll choose forgiveness and peace and err on the side of caution.
 

3andsomedust

Junior
Gold Member
Jul 5, 2001
1,749
1,072
113
Whatever you gotta tell yourself to Justify your blood lust. I’ll choose forgiveness and peace and err on the side of caution.
LOL. This conversation wasn't about blood lust. Mine, nor yours. It was about historical accuracy. To call Jesus Christ a pacifist is historically inaccurate, and because it is, I called it out.
 

Huskermatt23

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
Jan 11, 2017
5,513
11,253
113
Seattle
More disgraceful behavior by libs. You people are pathetic.

Video of child ripping flag from yard and tossing it as adult looks on goes viral

I would say the Trumptards laid the foundation for disrespecting America by trying to overthrow the government and attack police... Guess America and Blue lives don't matter. So why would you expect kids to show any respect with the crappy example you dummies set?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lar Gand

nelsonj22

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2014
19,321
20,296
113
Some of those people gamble and lose (They assume they won't need healthcare).
No some can only afford the high deductible insurance premiums and for a family that's a big ass chunk
For the vast majority of people in this country our healthcare system is excellent.
Not the vast majority, but those in the middle class and above. There's a below middle but above welfare group that is quite large and gets fvcked.
 

1160

Athletic Director
Gold Member
Oct 18, 2001
13,276
10,210
113
I would say the Trumptards laid the foundation for disrespecting America by trying to overthrow the government and attack police... Guess America and Blue lives don't matter. So why would you expect kids to show any respect with the crappy example you dummies set?

O/10 doorMatt. Dumb ass.
 

1160

Athletic Director
Gold Member
Oct 18, 2001
13,276
10,210
113
I do, I feel sorry for you, think you are mentally incapable, and generally a piece of shit, but like all others I pray for your well being over my own.

God's will be done

You're such an angry little toad John. Sorry you were raised so poorly.
 

nelsonj22

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2014
19,321
20,296
113
You're such an angry little toad John. Sorry you were raised so poorly.
Angry?

You: Do you love me?

Me: Yes

You: Why you soo Angry?

🤷‍♂️

Now before AA and the whole "gods will not mine" deal, I was a very very angry 25yo child
 

1160

Athletic Director
Gold Member
Oct 18, 2001
13,276
10,210
113
Angry?

You: Do you love me?

Me: Yes

You: Why you soo Angry?

🤷‍♂️

Now before AA and the whole "gods will not mine" deal, I was a very very angry 25yo child

You've learned well from the media John. You conveniently left out this part below

feel sorry for you, think you are mentally incapable, and generally a piece of shit,
 

nelsonj22

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2014
19,321
20,296
113
You've learned well from the media John. You conveniently left out this part below

feel sorry for you, think you are mentally incapable, and generally a piece of shit,
That's just honesty 11, doesn't mean i don't love ya 🤷‍♂️

Also doesn't mean I'm a "better" person than you
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,643
9,320
113
This is dumb as ****, but typical of you Democrat dumbasses with your “mostly peaceful” stance on crime. “Outside of murdering Jews, Hitler wasn’t so bad of a guy” - Cavalot’s stance on wonderful people. “Bill Cosby was an icon to females, well, outside of all those he raped and those who disagree with his raping of women”.
talk about dumb as ****. You've got me pegged very wrong. I support the death penalty. Hitler was a POS and not a socialist. Any historian knows that. LOL Im part Jewish. I loved Fat Albert and the Cosby show but Bill belonged in jail for what he did.

But your biggest failure was this weak ass comeback to my original post....as usual.
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,643
9,320
113
I want half of all you own. We’ll start with a microcosm of your “Democratic socialist” utopia and we’ll go from there. Your property is now my property, and I’ll let you know what you can keep and what I must confiscate for the good of our micro-nation.
LOL that's not socialism. Im not a proponent for total socialism anyhow. Just parts. Many of which we already enjoy as Americans. I'm much more about standing against hypocrisy and ignorance. Much of which you show on the daily.

Please cite any responsible articles or information that proves that... even the staunchest supporters of socialism want your property, and want to tell you what you can keep and can't keep.

Ill hang up and listen. Good Luck.
 

scopeandtime

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
Jul 3, 2016
18,552
32,758
113
John 2:13-16
When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market!”
What an asshole...dude just lost his cool.
 

Oldschool1964

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jun 27, 2009
8,449
7,371
113
116
Your mom's house
talk about dumb as ****. You've got me pegged very wrong. I support the death penalty. Hitler was a POS and not a socialist. Any historian knows that. LOL Im part Jewish. I loved Fat Albert and the Cosby show but Bill belonged in jail for what he did.

But your biggest failure was this weak ass comeback to my original post....as usual.
yeah, Nazis aren’t socialist, they’re only named the “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei” NSDAP, or National Socialist German Workers' Party. But in order to believe what you believe, then you have to completely ignore the actual name of the party.
 

daddy mack

Junior
Gold Member
Jan 19, 2002
1,924
1,127
113
58
Omaha, NE
More disgraceful behavior by libs. You people are pathetic.

Video of child ripping flag from yard and tossing it as adult looks on goes viral

More disgraceful behavior by libs. You people are pathetic.

Video of child ripping flag from yard and tossing it as adult looks on goes viral

Send the Antifa BA to Cuba. The Republicans Need to start the 1861 project in our Schools to Tell the truth about the rat ass Democrats Attack on Fort Sumter and It’s treasonous response to Lincoln’s EO to End Slavery. The real reason they won’t Stand is they want to serve for the confederate states Flag or George Soros Version of the KKK flag
You are a fvck idiot

This is just dumb, the people of those countries have better health care than the average American.
BC you Need fact checked. Bye the way so you’re saying the Flag burning is over Grams and gramps Health Care?
 
  • Love
Reactions: nelsonj22

daddy mack

Junior
Gold Member
Jan 19, 2002
1,924
1,127
113
58
Omaha, NE
yeah, Nazis aren’t socialist, they’re only named the “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei” NSDAP, or National Socialist German Workers' Party. But in order to believe what you believe, then you have to completely ignore the actual name of the party.
Thank you for Fact Checking this guy. Eric July( he had a huge PC on the subject) is a good source for this BC lie.
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,643
9,320
113
yeah, Nazis aren’t socialist, they’re only named the “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei” NSDAP, or National Socialist German Workers' Party. But in order to believe what you believe, then you have to completely ignore the actual name of the party.
Educate yourself. And there are thousands more articles articulating the same thing. NAZI's were not Socialist.


But despite joining what would be called theNational Socialist” German workers party, Adolf Hitler was not a socialist. Far from it. In fact, in July 1921, Hitler briefly left the NSDAP because an affiliate of the party in Augsburg signed an agreement with the German Socialist Party in that city, only returning when he had been largely given control of the party itself.
Whatever interest Hitler had in socialism was not based on an understanding of socialism that we might have today — a movement that would supplant capitalism in which the working class would seize power over the state and the means of production. He repeatedly pushed back efforts by economically left-leaning elements of the party to enact socialist reforms, saying in a 1926 conference in Bamberg (organized by Nazi Party leaders over the very question of the party’s ideological underpinnings) that any effort to take the homes and estates of German princes would move the party toward communism and that he would never do anything to assist “communist-inspired movements.” He prohibited the formation of Nazi trade unions, and by 1929 he outright rejected any efforts by Nazis who argued in favor of socialistic ideas or projects in their entirety.
Joseph Goebbels, who would eventually become Reich Minister of Propaganda once the Nazi Party seized control of Germany, wrote in his diary about Hitler’s rejection of socialism at that 1926 meeting, “I feel as if someone had knocked me on the head ... my heart aches so much. ... A horrible night! Surely one of the greatest disappointments of my life.”
Rather, Hitler viewed socialism as a political organizing mechanism for the German people more broadly: a way of creating a “people’s community” — the volksgemeinschaftthat would bring everyday Germans (and businesspeople) together not based on their class but on their race and ethnicity. Thus, he would use the unifying aspects of “National Socialism” to get everyday Germans on board with the Nazi program while simultaneously negotiating with powerful businesses and the Junkers, industrialists and nobility, who would ultimately help Hitler gain total power over the German state.

What Hitler actually thought about “socialism”​

The best example of Hitler’s own views on socialism are evident in a debate he had over two days in May 1930 with then-party member Otto Strasser. Strasser and his brother Gregor, who was an avowed socialist of sorts, were a part of the Nazi Party’s left wing, arguing in favor of political socialism as an essential ingredient in Nazism.
But Hitler did not agree. When Strasser argues for “revolutionary socialism,” Hitler dismisses the idea, arguing that workers are too simple to ever understand socialism: "He was referring to dolts like yourself"
“Your socialism is Marxism pure and simple. You see, the great mass of workers only wants bread and circuses. Ideas are not accessible to them and we cannot hope to win them over. We attach ourselves to the fringe, the race of lords, which did not grow through a miserabilist doctrine and knows by the virtue of its own character that it is called to rule, and rule without weakness over the masses of beings.”
And when Strasser calls for the return of 41 percent of private property to the state and dismisses the role of private property in an industrialized economy, Hitler tells him that will not only ruin “the entire nation” but also “end all progress of humanity.”
In fact, Hitler dismisses even the idea of challenging the status of capitalism, telling Strasser that his socialism is actually Marxism and making the argument that powerful businessmen were powerful because they were evolutionarily superior to their employees. Thus, Hitler argues, a “workers council” taking charge of a company would only get in the way.
“Our great heads of industry are not concerned with the accumulation of wealth and the good life, rather they are concerned with responsibility and power. They have acquired this right by natural selection: they are members of the higher race. But you would surround them with a council of incompetents, who have no notion of anything. No economic leader can accept that.”
Strasser then asks him directly what he would do with powerful steel and arms manufacturer Krupp, known today as ThyssenKrupp. Would Hitler permit the company to stay as big and powerful as it was in 1930?
“Of course. Do you think I’m stupid enough to destroy the economy? The state will only intervene if people do not act in the interest of the nation. There is no need for dispossession or participation in all the decisions. The state will intervene strongly when it must, pushed by superior motives, without regards to particular interests.”
In this debate, Hitler isn’t making the case for socialism, much to Strasser’s dismay. He is making the case for fascism — in his view, not just an ideal system to organize government, but the only real option. “A system that rests on anything other than authority downwards and responsibility upwards cannot really make decisions,” he tells Strasser.
“Fascism offers us a model that we can absolutely replicate! As it is in the case of Fascism, the entrepreneurs and the workers of our National Socialist state sit side by side, equal in rights, the state strongly intervenes in the case of conflict to impose its decision and end economic disputes that put the life of the nation in danger.”
The concept of the “people’s community” undergirded much of the National Socialist project. Much like the basic idea of fascism, a word that stems from the Italian word for a bundle of rods tied together tightly, National Socialism was intended to tie Germany together under one leader — Hitler, the führer — with “subversive elements” like Jews, LGBT people, Roma, and, yes, socialists and Communists, removed by force.
In a 1923 interview with pro-Nazi writer George Sylvester Viereck, Hitler said, “In my scheme of the German state, there will be no room for the alien, no use for the wastrel, for the usurer or speculator, or anyone incapable of productive work.”
In Hitler’s version of National Socialism, socialism was “Aryan” and focused on the “commonwealth” of everyday Germans — a group of people he unites as one based entirely on their race. In that same interview with Viereck, Hitler added:

“Socialism is the science of dealing with the common wealth. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.
Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic... We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfillment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one.”
Both Otto Strasser and his brother Gregor paid the price for challenging Hitler and advocating for socialism within the Nazi party. Gregor was murdered during the Night of Long Knives in 1934, a mass purge of the left wing of the Nazi Party in which between 85 and 200 people were killed as part of an effort, in Hitler’s words, to prevent a “socialist revolution.” Otto Strasser fled Germany, ultimately seeking refuge in Canada.

Nazism wasn’t a socialist project. Nazism was a rejection of the basic tenets of socialism entirely, in favor of a state built on race and racial classifications.

Nazism was a real political entity, not a political cudgel

No American political party can be compared to the Nazi Party that controlled Germany for 12 years. Nazism has no American corollary. American liberalism is not at all like Nazism, and neither, for that matter, is American conservatism. Nazism arose in Germany, gained power in Germany, held power in Germany, and would ultimately fall at the end of the Second World War in Germany.
Nazism aligned itself with industrialists and corporations that would ultimately utilize Nazi slave laborers and patent the chemicals used in Nazi death camps to kill millions of men, women, and children. The word “socialist” doesn’t change that, just as the word “Democratic” does not make the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea — North Korea — a democracy.
So no, Hitler wasn’t a socialist. Nazism wasn’t a socialist project. And comparing American Democrats to Nazis is not just incorrect, but wrong, just as it is when American Democrats and liberals directly compare Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler. Nazism was a political project built on anti-Semitism, racism, and dictatorial verve, one that took place in a specific country and at a specific moment in history. We forget that fact at our own risk.


Were the Nazis Socialists?​

SHARE:
WRITTEN BY
Michael Ray
Michael Ray oversees coverage of European history and military affairs for Britannica. He earned a B.A. in history from Michigan State University in 1995. He was a teacher in the Chicago suburbs and Seoul,...

pg 229Nazi parade features a banner proclaiming, "Death to Marxism."The possibility of a peaceful Germany after World War I was precluded entirely by the terms of the Versailles Treaty and theintransigent hostility of France and England. Stripped of indu
Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.
Were the Nazis socialists? No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934. But to address this canard fully, one must begin with the birth of the party.

 

Oldschool1964

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jun 27, 2009
8,449
7,371
113
116
Your mom's house
LOL that's not socialism. Im not a proponent for total socialism anyhow. Just parts. Many of which we already enjoy as Americans. I'm much more about standing against hypocrisy and ignorance. Much of which you show on the daily.

Please cite any responsible articles or information that proves that... even the staunchest supporters of socialism want your property, and want to tell you what you can keep and can't keep.

Ill hang up and listen. Good Luck.
WTF? You don't understand your own ideology?


Confiscating "wealth" = taking rich people's "property" and giving it to someone else. Taxation is literally the principle of confiscating wealth.
Our Democratic system was designed so that those in communities can agree on certain items to be funded for the "collective good" (which sounds Socialist, but really isn't, and I'll explain why). The difference is that socialism/communism enacts a "central planner" which takes away that grass roots agreement and puts the power in the hands of the socialist elite. Now, you're going to say "that's not real socialism", but in practice, that's how EVERY socialist government turns out. The elite make decisions for the rubes, and that elite then prospers off of the backs of the "worker's party". The biggest difference is that in our Constitutional Republic, we elect those who represent us and make those decisions for us, socialism has no mechanism to appoint those overlords. And furthermore, in a capitalist society, people vote with their own decisions on which "elite" they support through a VOLUNTARY transaction of wealth. Individuals decide whether they want to purchase a good or service in exchange for their hard earned dollars. Once you understand these principles, you'll see your socialist ideology is really a form of totalitarianism vs. a system of merit through economic competition. As far as our "socialist" elements of our government we setup, yes, there's certain things that the majority agrees is for the "public good", but that doesn't mean that we've become a socialist nation. Understand that there are NO checks and balances built into your socialist structure, whereas our wise founding fathers made it a key feature of our nation and it's government.
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,643
9,320
113
WTF? You don't understand your own ideology?


Confiscating "wealth" = taking rich people's "property" and giving it to someone else. Taxation is literally the principle of confiscating wealth.
Our Democratic system was designed so that those in communities can agree on certain items to be funded for the "collective good" (which sounds Socialist, but really isn't, and I'll explain why). The difference is that socialism/communism enacts a "central planner" which takes away that grass roots agreement and puts the power in the hands of the socialist elite. Now, you're going to say "that's not real socialism", but in practice, that's how EVERY socialist government turns out. The elite make decisions for the rubes, and that elite then prospers off of the backs of the "worker's party". The biggest difference is that in our Constitutional Republic, we elect those who represent us and make those decisions for us, socialism has no mechanism to appoint those overlords. And furthermore, in a capitalist society, people vote with their own decisions on which "elite" they support through a VOLUNTARY transaction of wealth. Individuals decide whether they want to purchase a good or service in exchange for their hard earned dollars. Once you understand these principles, you'll see your socialist ideology is really a form of totalitarianism vs. a system of merit through economic competition. As far as our "socialist" elements of our government we setup, yes, there's certain things that the majority agrees is for the "public good", but that doesn't mean that we've become a socialist nation. Understand that there are NO checks and balances built into your socialist structure, whereas our wise founding fathers made it a key feature of our nation and it's government.
I don't support bernie. Never have. The only real socialist ideal that i believe in is health and education for the masses.
 

Oldschool1964

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jun 27, 2009
8,449
7,371
113
116
Your mom's house
Educate yourself. And there are thousands more articles articulating the same thing. NAZI's were not Socialist.



iu


"I am a socialist, and a very different kind of socialist from your rich friend Reventlow. I was once an ordinary workingman… But your kind of socialism is nothing but Marxism.“ Add translation — Adolf Hitler

Źródło: https://quotepark.com/pl/cytaty/177...a-socialist-and-a-very-different-kind-of-soc/

Yeah, let's not take his own word for it. Let's take a socialist's word that wants to distance himself from Hitler. THAT's who should be the authority on Hitler, not Hitler himself.
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,643
9,320
113
iu


"I am a socialist, and a very different kind of socialist from your rich friend Reventlow. I was once an ordinary workingman… But your kind of socialism is nothing but Marxism.“ Add translation — Adolf Hitler

Źródło: https://quotepark.com/pl/cytaty/177...a-socialist-and-a-very-different-kind-of-soc/

Yeah, let's not take his own word for it. Let's take a socialist's word that wants to distance himself from Hitler. THAT's who should be the authority on Hitler, not Hitler himself.
He said what he needed to say to take power. kind of like your boy Trump. Historians disagree with your take.

And his own words... "A very different kind of socialist." ie... Totalitarian Dictator, Fascist, Far right conservative, and profound racist.
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,643
9,320
113
So why do you keep defending socialism?
Like I said. I defend parts and acknowledge that the US, in fact has many socialist programs and ideals that benefit all of the masses....even people, like yourself, who in fact benefit from those very programs.

I call out hypocrisy when I see it. My favorite is the staunch anti health care guy..who can't wait to turn 65 so he can go on medicare. I gotta get me some new knees when I turn 65. lol
 

Latest posts