Hitler, Saddam, Hillary...

[dawg80]

A trio of socialists. No difference.

I expect Champ to weigh in with his take on this, that's fine. But the truth is Hitler was a socialist, and there is NO difference between him and other socialists.

It is hard to separate a country's political system from its economic system since the two go hand-in-hand and are so closely related. Indeed, one can NOT exist without the other!

For Hitler and Saddam it was a socialist economic system and a facist political system. Even the Soviet Union was "socialist" insomuch as socialism is really commie-lite! The USSR stood for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Their political system varied only because it was a group, the politburo (sp?) in power, not one individual. The Soviet economy struggled mightedly because those same political leaders attempted to micromanage industry, business, the economy as a whole, and failed miserably at it.

In Nazi Germany Hitler was smart enough to realize that the old guard industrialists knew best how to run the nation's economy. So, as long as they swore allegiance to him, they were left more or less unmolested by Hitler's regime. This then, is the key to the socialist tie for Nazi Germany. When the government holds final and absolute sway over whether some industry or particular company will be "allowed"to operate, and how, that is not free enterprise or capitalism. That is socialism.

Today, in this country, we have moved dangerously close to a true socialist system. Hillary and socialist creeps like her have attempted to usurp economic power from those who truly own that right. One has only to look at that debacle (thank God!) when the public sent a clear message to Hillary we did not want socialized medicine, which represents 1/7 of the economy. Then Hillary attempted to raid private pension funds, saying it was unfair that some people have skimpt and saved over the years, while others have not. Yes, in her twisted, demented world, people who actually do for themselves are evil. One should be 100% dependent on the almighty federal government!

And good ole Saddam! He is hiding in some cave in Syria, next to Bin Laden, entertaining themselves by having their way with sheep, and wondering how come other socialists are allowed to continue: Hillary, Castro, etc... and he was singled out.

Because, when you get right down to it, there is no difference between Hitler, Saddam, and Hillary......

[Champ967]

This then, is the key to the socialist tie for Nazi Germany. When the government holds final and absolute sway over whether some industry or particular company will be "allowed"to operate, and how, that is not free enterprise or capitalism.

Sure, D80. If you're going to expand the definition of socialism to include everything that's not your ideal of a raw, untouched free market, then yeah ... I can see how everything must be socialism to you.

"National Socialism" (Naziism) is still generally understood by all political theorists not called Dawg80 to have been "socialism" in name only. It was not based on the teachings of Marx, Lenin, or any other socialist thinkers.

Socialism (and it's cousin, communism) is based on the postulate that all persons are inherently equal, and that society should strive to maintain that equality.

The foundation of Naziism is the polar opposite: That some persons and races are by nature superior to others and that the strong have a natural right to dominate the weak.

But, hey, if you wanna tie them together with the coincidental detail that the practioners of both theories utilized some varying degree of government intervention in the economy, then yeah ... I can see how they all look the same to you.

Heck. Hitler begins with H. So do Hussein and Hillary. That's just as strong a link as the one you draw D80. Why not just use that?

[american]

Does this 80 Dog know that the primitive Christian church was communist? Cf. Acts 4: 32-37, 5:1-6. I wonder if he would associate the twelve apostles with dastardly tyrants.

[PawDawg]

Wow! Talk about taking a group of verses out of context. Obviously you don't know anything about communism.

Acts 4:33 - With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all.

Communist don't believe. You may have been referring to socialism, but even that line of thinking is up for debate.

[dawg80]

Champ, Hitler was a socialist, and so too was his political/economic theories. True, he saw only this "equality" for people who looked like him, and once the Jews and others races were eliminated, Nazi Germany, had it survived, would be nothing more than a practicing socialist nation. This is a simple fact.

The problem is, for those of you that are socialist today, you do not want to be associated with the likes of Hitler. Too bad, he was one of you. And a stark reminder, as is Saddam, to EXACTLY why we must guard against ANY government becoming too powerful and oppressive.

You, Champ, and Hillary, and other socialists, all think that YOUR brand of socialism will be okay. It will be benevolent, fair, and good. Bullshit! Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts, absolutely!

I saw what raw, unabridged capitalism could be like, when I spent time in Hong Kong in the early '90's. It was awesome! And it was trying... The highs, the goods, reached way beyond anything we can experience in this nation, but the drawbacks, the lows, were alarming. I only thought I lived in a "free" country, I learned that we are not "free" in the U.S. With freedom comes awesome responsibility. But, through a true republic, with laws that transcend the ages and POLITICS, a nation of people can come close to true "freedom" while protecting the public good.

It is a tricky balance, but one that our Founding Fathers have come the closest to, in all of history. Unfortunately, for all of us, their great work, our Constitution, has been bastardized over the decades. This is NOT a republic any longer.

I know one thing, as we continue to creep closer and closer to a true socialist regime, we continue to surrender more and more of the moral high ground. God was there when this great nation was founded, His mark was clearly on it. But now, we have allowed His influence to wane.

History is ripe with examples of the great socialist experiments. The Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Saddam's Iraq.... yeah, sure, let's take the U.S. down that same road. Want to?




I don't...

[NTXDawg]

Does this 80 Dog know that the primitive Christian church was communist? Cf. Acts 4: 32-37, 5:1-6. I wonder if he would associate the twelve apostles with dastardly tyrants

Well in the sense that the believers gave to each other freely, yes. But no one was forced by the government to give up their possessions for the "greater good".

[TYLERTECHSAS]

Heck. Hitler begins with H. So do Hussein and Hillary. That's just as strong a link as the one you draw D80. Why not just use that?

I think you might be on to something Champ :idea: . I will add HELL, HARASS, HEARTLESS, HAUNTED, HAZING, HADES, HAUGHTY, HEINOUS, and HATE to your list. These do seem to fit very close to the above referenced people. OK>> maybe one of the above does not exhibit all of the traits above. :wink:

[american]

The primary definition of communism in Websters is

"any theory or system of common ownership of property".

If you will re-read the passage cited you will see that this is precisely what it is referring to. You are attempting to hijack the meaning of the word communism - mistakenly thinking one of its secondary or tertiary meanings is its only possible meaning. The old USSR was an oligarchy in no way similar to the early Christian community.

[PawDawg]

The primary definition of communism in Websters is

"any theory or system of common ownership of property".

If you will re-read the passage cited you will see that this is precisely what it is referring to. You are attempting to hijack the meaning of the word communism - mistakenly thinking one of its secondary or tertiary meanings is its only possible meaning. The old USSR was an oligarchy in no way similar to the early Christian community.

No Sir. It is you who is attempting to "hijack" the meaning of the word. I have studied communism and know full well the meaning, but since you seem to rely on dictionary definitions...........

Main Entry: com·mu·nism
Pronunciation: 'käm-y&-"ni-z&m
Function: noun
Etymology: French communisme, from commun common
Date: 1840
1 a : a theory advocating elimination of private property b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed
2 : capitalized a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the U.S.S.R. b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably d : communist systems collectively

I'll give you the fact that you were thinking 1b while I was thinking 2, but I will say that since I took high school civics back in '75 that 1b was and continues to be the definition of socialism. NTXdawg made a good point in that early members of the Church were not forced to pool assets where in a communist/socialist society the "members" have no choice.

[aubunique]

It is a real stretch to call Hitler or Saddam Hussein socialists. They were dictators like Stalin but their economic and social schemes were the opposite. And believing in a particular religion or not believing in any supernatural ideas or even in the concept of an ultimate creator has nothing to do with any particular economic system.
Obviously, dictators don't want people believing in any power greater than themselves. That would have nothing to do with a particular economic system. Interestingly, dictators have been able to manipulate religious people at times because Christianity and Judaism both teach acceptance of suffering and non-violent protest.


It is almost as great a stretch to call Hillary a socialist. However, it is true that she has spent a great deal of effort trying to see that EVERY child gets a good education so that every child can compete in our capitalist society. She also spent a lot of effort trying to see that health care would become available to everyone. Maybe those efforts could be called socialist by some people who do not want EVERY child to compete with their children or prefer that POOR people not get health care. Those, of course, would be the same people who would prefer that the children of their employees go to prison rather than college or that their old employees die young and not deplete the Social Security fund.

Champ, how about putting in a list of the world's great books on the pawlitics board and let's suggest that everyone spend a couple of months at least reading something besides gibberish from the Internet and parts of the Bible that don't DIRECTLY quote Jesus.

If a person's Christianity doesn't make him more loving, understanding, tolerant and charitable, that person is reading the wrong stuff!

And lay off the talk radio. Get your news directly from news sources and absorb its content. Don't spend hours listening to hate-mongers interpret the day's events.

[american]

"early members of the Church were not forced to pool assets"

If you'll read my post, you'll see I never made this claim.


"where in a communist/socialist society the "members" have no choice"

Nobody would dispute this claim if you're referring to some system like the one used in the former Soviet Union.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

let's suggest that everyone spend a couple of months at least reading something besides gibberish from the Internet and parts of the Bible that don't DIRECTLY quote Jesus.

If a person's Christianity doesn't make him more loving, understanding, tolerant and charitable, that person is reading the wrong stuff!

And lay off the talk radio. Get your news directly from news sources and absorb its content. Don't spend hours listening to hate-mongers interpret the day's events.

Well ... well let's just ignore a huge amount of knowledge base that's out there huh AUB?

Let's start with your "read something besides parts of the Bible that don't directly quote Jesus." HUM>> that eliminates about 98% of the BIBLE (grab one and check out the bold red lettering) even though 99.9% of the bible points to Christ. Remember Christ himself said that "I did not come to change the law but fulfill it." Let's just ditch all of Paul's and Johns writtings in the New Test. huh? Not to mention the Old Test.! Gee, the Jews and Christians would be a tad upset with this thought. I know that you dislike reading or hearing about the wrath of GOD, as we have discussed before, and only want to read about the touchy feely stuff but you can not just blank out what's written by the Old Test. Prophets, Christ, Paul, John and others.

As far as your comment about being "tolerant" I would venture to say that this IS part of the world's biggest problems these days. Toleration has become a terrible NEW AGE Religion in part. However, I do believe in "LOVE the sinner but Hate the sin ." IMHO, I still think that the Good LORD sees things in Black and White NOT GRAY! We shall all find out one day.

"Lay off the talk radio" huh AUB? Bummer, will you give up your CNN, BBC and NPR? You really don't think that spewed hate, only going in the opposite direction, is not presented by these media outlets as well? Even in Tyler, we have a flamming liberal talk show at noon (they moved RUSH to 1:00 so folks going to lunch can not listen>>JK), that makes me want to puke. I still listen every now and then to get an idea of spin that they are attempting on any given issue.

"Get news directly from news sources and absorb it's content." You must be kidding! What do you think is happening. NBC, ABC and CBS NEWS STINK (not to mention their sick sitcoms sp?) and are DYING a slow death! There are finally a few out there that are showing both sides of the story! PRAISE GOD! The Libs have dominated the media way too long! FOX now leads all cable news and just even past the morning news shows. THERE IS A REASON for this AUB! Do you really think that the main networks, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and others don't have their major share of "hate-mongers" as you called them and spinning doctors. We have all had to listen to and watch these for years and are FED UP!!! I suggest and firmly believe that it is LONG OVERDUE for you to listen and watch the other side of the world that has gone unreported (note the post about CNN) or just plain lied about.

All in all, it sounds to me as if the "Left" is running scared and wants to keep the rest of us from hearing, reading and seeing the whole picture as in past years. Or maybe, they are more worried about the poor welfare state and lower-middle class seeing the truth. This is why Dem. Al Sharpton scares the doo-doo out of the Dems! He knows they have been feeding off of the blacks, poor whites and elderly and have done nothing for them all of these years except use fear as a tactic.

You even mentioned laying off "reading the gibberish from the internet." My goodness Aub, didn't GORE invent this :roll: to enlighten us all. This is getting SPOOKY my friend 8O .

[PawDawg]

"early members of the Church were not forced to pool assets"

If you'll read my post, you'll see I never made this claim.


"where in a communist/socialist society the "members" have no choice"

Nobody would dispute this claim if you're referring to some system like the one used in the former Soviet Union.

Does this 80 Dog know that the primitive Christian church was communist? Cf. Acts 4: 32-37, 5:1-6. I wonder if he would associate the twelve apostles with dastardly tyrants. - Your first post

You did claim that the first primitive Christian church was communist though. That is simply not correct. You can't have something before something exists.

[PawDawg]

It is almost as great a stretch to call Hillary a socialist. However, it is true that she has spent a great deal of effort trying to see that EVERY child gets a good education so that every child can compete in our capitalist society. She also spent a lot of effort trying to see that health care would become available to everyone. Maybe those efforts could be called socialist by some people who do not want EVERY child to compete with their children or prefer that POOR people not get health care. Those, of course, would be the same people who would prefer that the children of their employees go to prison rather than college or that their old employees die young and not deplete the Social Security fund. - Aubrey

Liberal BS!

Where are poor people not getting a good education in the U.S.?

Where do poor people not get health care?

Give me examples of employers who would rather their employees children go to prison than college.

Give me examples of employers who hope thier employees die young and do not deplete SS. (your obviously typing before thinking here)

Please give us real sources just like Rush and O'Reilly do.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

Please give us real sources just like Rush and O'Reilly do.

A BIG DITTO there MD! BTW, where can I hear someone even further right of these guys? I need a fix bad!