Re: "Liberal Fascism" -- Jonah Goldberg, Doubleday 2007

On Sat, 17 May 2008 14:50:21 -0400  'Keon'
wrote this on uk.politics.misc:

>aracari <spamtrap@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote: 
>> On Sat, 17 May 2008 08:54:46 -0400  'Keon'
>> wrote this on uk.politics.misc:
>> 
>> >aracari <spamtrap@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote: 
>> >> >Of course, Jonah Goldberg said that Liberals were Fascists because
some of 
>> >> >them are vegetarians, just like Hitler!
>> >> 
>> >> Nope. He doesn't say that, simply that liberalism is the legacy 
>> >> of fascism more than other ideologies.
>> 
>> >bull ****! he does say that!
>> 
>> Where?
>
>
>Oh!  I see.  Another "Patriot" who parrots Goldberg and hasn't read his
book.

You seem to think that I'm American. 

 
>> >And (incidentally) Hitler was a vegetarian 
>> >because he suffered chronic flatulence (the farts) and was on a diet.
>> 
>> I should have thought that more vegetables would increase
>> flatulence.
>> 
>> >Look.  Know your history or go away.  
>> >
>> >Don't trust idiots like Goldberg to articulate history, because he's a

>> >discredited idiot and not a historian.
>> > 
>> >> >Can't debate that logic.
>> >> >
>> >> >The man's a genius.
>> >> 
>> >> The point about fascism is that those who adopt it overwhelmingly
>> >> come up through the ranks of the Left (liberalism in the US) as I
>> >> pointed out. That cannot be disputed. 
>> >
>> >But it has been througly debunked.   It cannot be disputed because
it's 
>> >fundamenally incorrect!
>> 
>> I refer you to my previous post:
>> "Yeah sure... Mussolini and Hitler were right wing."
>
>
>Yes, and North Korea calls itself "Democratic People's Republic of Korea"

>whist glorious former East Germany referred to itself as "The German 
>Democratic Republic" as well.

That's right. Labels can be very misleading.

Note that both of your examples are of fascist govts, which
claim/claimed to be socialists.

>If they say so in the name, it must be true!

Usually not.

 
>> That appears to debunk you pretty well.
>
>
>I suppose that your opinion validates your own claims.   I see.
>
>That's a difficut positon that you've taken.
>
>
>Stop being a stooge.

lol. You may be interested in this. I've believed in it for a
while and it goes some way to explaining where fascism sits
on the political spectrum:
http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2

Fascism sits right at the top of the vertical axis (authoritarian)
which makes it anti-liberty, and IMVHO it straddles an area on
both sides at the top, except it's more pronounced on the Left
side than Right, given that most fascists have been socialists.

But it's true to say that people from both sides can become
fascists, although the specific model of fascism they practiced
would be different (eg: state fascism -vs- cor****ate fascism).

 
>> I didn't mention Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot etc.
>> All socialists who quickly became fascists when they gained power.
>
>Oh!  I see.  So you don't know what the definition of socialism is,
versus 
>Communism and the totalitarian variant!

Communism is extreme socialism. Since most fascists are
totalitarian in nature it's an alternative name for fascism.


>That explains your ignornace.
>
>
>I forgive your stupidity.
>
>
>You are excused.

Lots more hot air...
 
>>    <quote>
>> http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_nazis_were_maxists.html
>> "The Nazis were Marxists, no matter what our tainted academia 
>> and corrupt media wishes us to believe. Nazis, Bolsheviks, the 
>> Ku Klux Klan, Maoists, radical Islam and Facists -- all are on the
>> Left, something that should be increasingly apparent to decent,
>> honorable people in our times."


-- 
socialism is like chronic heart disease ...
you may not know you suffer from it, but it'll kill you in the end.