Your passage about the managerial/bureaucratic class is brilliant and eerily appropos to current realities. I know a former senior US Navy Officer (and a capable one) who turned down ship command for the reasons you stated and in civilian life works for a congressionally funded think tank. Her refusal to take command followed several highly publicized collisions at sea in the mid 2010's. The Navy simply denied any organizational culpability and hung those skippers out to dry.
The Nazis were Socialists, it's in their name, so don't call Hitler right wing, or a counter to Marxism.
Yes, there are some very evil, powerful Jewish people. There are some very evil, powerful non Jewish people. Your admiration for Hitler, and blaming Jews as the problem is disturbing.
Where you are correct is the managerial and bureaucratic class. They don't solve problems, because if they did, they would become obsolete. They are parasites.
The National Socialists were clearly a right wing party and I wish the Boomercons who make your dumb point would just shuffle off already.
His was the purest application of Nietzschean thought ever attempted by a serious polity (excluding perhaps the ancient Greeks). If that’s not right wing, literally nothing is and the term has no meaning.
You think modern wokism, which at its core is enforced equality of outcome across racial and sexual characteristics, is *Nietzschean*? No, I don’t think so.
Wokism at its core is about ignoring social traditions to act according to your Will.
If you say that only applies to the "natural nobility", well Nietzsche himself was a loser who couldn't even hold down a job and ended up in an asylum, and what have you done that would qualify you as "natural nobility"?
So, what is your idea of "left wing"? Communism? Fascism is corporatism, where the state and the producers work in tandem. I don't define that as right wing, and only idiots in ANTIFA and others who use brown shirt tactics, acting like Fascists, who think they fighting Fascists, might agree with you.
Left wing is egalitarian, right wing is hierarchical. That’s a basic and binding distinction. You think of state involvement in production as inherently left wing because modern left states use political power to redistribute economic production from the competent to the incompetent, but that’s only a symptom not a cause of the ideology.
And fwiw, the pre-war German economy, even in the midst of an enormous arms buildup, was very laissez-faire by modern standards: state spending was about 35% of GNP in 1938, of which two thirds was military spending. The US currently spends ~38% of GDP across all levels of government and modern European economies routinely get over 50%.
So egalitarian, meaning Socialism or Communism. Right is not hierarchical, it believes as our Constitution spells out that everyone is free to pursue and achieve or fail and take responsibility. That does not mean that those who are incompetent aren't taken care of, but it is by personal charity to churches and civic groups, not taken against their will (theft) by the government to be redistributed.
I have heard that distinction before. Not a fan of hierarchical either unless it is truly meritocratic, which is why its important to remember a possible y-axis to the x of left-right; authoritarianism or totalitarianism. Hence you have confusing similarities and difference, such as stalin criminaliing homosexuality and heavy use of camps, while our left thinks there is no higher calling, or nazi germany's heavy use of state media and pseudo science to create a biomedical state dedicated to german 'hygiene' complete with sterilization and marriage laws, smoking laws, human experimentation etc is a similar method our country used when scaring everyone into their homes, experimental vaccines and murderous rage against those without a mask. wachowski 'brothers' probably didnt expect v for vendetta to look so much like the dems during covid. as a libertarian, im first and foremost wary of totalitarianism. i have no problem with an aristocracy, just that those in power can curb their lust for control.
I am not going to waste my time when you don’t actually understand the words used here since that is a requirement in order to have a productive discussion.
Democracy and democracy are not the same thing; Democracy is a just name the later is a form of government characterized by specific characteristics which you can find within its definition. Is the county democratic … let’s look if the characteristics of a democratic country apply to the country in question.
1. elections / free elections ? NO
2. direct of representative democracy ? NO
3. any successful political challengers to establishments ? NO
4. limited terms ? NO
Therefore NK is not a democracy therefore you cannot determine what something is or not just because they call themselves as such.
There is no definition of right wing that will satisfy everyone, and any reasonable definition will necessarily exclude many or most of the people labeled as right wing or even "far right."
The definitions I favor are:
1. Aesthetic: Right Wing/Fascism is when healthy, attractive people don't hate themselves and sometimes wear uniforms.
(This definition would for instance capture the ultra-liberal society of Verhoven's Starship Troopers)
2. Ideological: Right Wing/Fascism is when you believe that equality is neither possible nor desirable.
"Left Wing" would then be the same but "1. ...and that's a bad thing" or "2. Equality is possible & desirable"
Both definitions I offered would include the Nazi's as right wing.
I suppose everyone has different ideas. I know most people who believe everything that is far left consider themselves as "Moderates", which of course they are not. They just have the approval of the media and government.
People on the Right consider themselves "Conservatives", although the whole system is corrupted by the Uniparty, which works through the mangers and bureaucrats.
Unfortunately it was a German Jew, Marx, that is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions... maybe? However, think a little. Was he responsible any more than Satan was responsible for the demise of the idyllic Garden utopia? After all it was Eve that listened to the forked tongue that Russians, Chinese, Cubans, Argentinians, Venezuelans and so many others, including Americans, also listen to and vote based on the promises? After the power is acquired voting becomes useless. Blacks are the main race behind most of American violent crime. Not all blacks are criminals and neither are all Jews communists but clearly statistics show things such as the chances of a woman being raped by a Muslim as opposed to a fatherly Intuit Eskimo. I truly believe that without the support of the Jewish press and the many powerful Jews in the world, such as Mark Zuckerberg, communism would not stand a chance and neither would Iran's Islam. That said, strangely, the policies supported by Jews are the greatest threat to Israel a state mainly designed to provide security and protection for Jews. Do you have an explanation to this imbroglio that is better than the one provided by the author of Mein Kampf? I may not have thought about as for as long as he has but I put in a lot of time as I'm sure many others also have as well as Kulak has.
Demonizing one ethnic group, whoever that may be, and eliminating them from the earth won't solve any problems.
It's just lazy thinking to blame Marx for what others did in his name. All systems of government can be abused by people who crave power.
It's the culture, not the skin color or religion.
Blacks had strong families and religious lives until their culture was corrupted after LBJ's Great Society.
Muslims were not demanding women be covered or they were a target for rape until the Ayatollahs took over in the 70's. Look at pictures of Afghanistan, Iran, etc..before the late 70's and look how they dressed.
Jews, as well as some Asian countries, have a culture that promotes success in education and work, which leads them to be over represented in colleges, at least until the recent DEI crackdowns.
Does the NY Times Jewish Sulzberger family deserve any responsibility for underreporting the Holocaust and the Ukrainian Genocide? How about the mistreatment of dogs and puppies by Amish breeders? How about killing and eating dogs and cats that are raised in miserable environments? Race, nationality and cultures have a lot to do with human behavior.
Gandhi would agree with you recognizing that if you raising a Muslim as a Hindu; you would love him just as much. I disagreed with him on that because he missed the point. It is too late after they are raised as a Muslim. On the other hand Patton would agree with me. He had opinions based upon race and nationality and despised the Russians as a people. Nothing the prophet Mohamed said makes me belive that Islam treats women equally under their law. Remember that the God of Abraham had no mercy on many cultures.
I've struggled for a long time with a useful distinction between right and left. I think Kulak put it best when she argued it should be considered a struggle between those who value excellence and those who value equality (or at least pretend to).
By this metric the natsocs were mostly right wing.
You were there in germany, during the 30s and 40s? How much do we really know about what he did? which parts of what we know are propaganda? which parts are true?
Understanding that those are questions that merit investigation looks to me like an excellent occupation for one's mind.
I was born when Eisenhower was president, and he was there. He made sure pictures were taken of the concentration camps, because he knew people wouldn't believe how bad it was if they didn't see it. The shock and horror about what happened in Germany was still very fresh in people's minds at the time I was growing up. I knew lots of people who were actually in WW2.
I was living in Germany in 1975, when the German people were still very sensitive about the whole thing. They were ashamed. Hitler was a psychopathic dictator who everyone was afraid of, not some philosopher for the working class.
This is what Eisenhower said on pages 408-9 of “Crusade in Europe”
“The same day [April 12, 1945] I saw my first horror camp. It was near the town of Gotha. I have never felt able to describe my emotional reactions when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency. Up to that time I had known about it only generally or through secondary sources. I am certain, however that I have never at any other time experienced an equal sense of shock.
“I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at first hand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that `the stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda.’ Some members of the visiting party were unable to through the ordeal. I not only did so but as soon as I returned to Patton’s headquarters that evening I sent communications to both Washington and London, urging the two governments to send instantly to Germany a random group of newspaper editors and representative groups from the national legislatures. I felt that the evidence should be immediately placed before the American and British publics in a fashion that would leave no room for cynical doubt.”
And on page 439
“Of all these [Displaced Persons] the Jews were in the most deplorable condition. For years they had been beaten, starved, and tortured.”
Are you joking? There's photos and film reels of people looking like living skeletons in those concentration camps, but the Germans who are there are fat and happy. If you don't believe what happened, which has been very well documented, you are a waste of time for me.
“ In a direct democracy, the people have the direct authority to deliberate and decide legislation. In a representative democracy, the people choose governing officials through elections to do so. Who is considered part of "the people" and how authority is shared among or delegated by the people has changed over time and at different rates in different countries. Features of democracy oftentimes include freedom of assembly, association, personal property, freedom of religion and speech, citizenship, consent of the governed, voting rights, freedom from unwarranted governmental deprivation of the right to life and liberty, and minority rights.“
Minority rights are guaranteed in a Republic, not a Democracy, and don't tell me what the "internet" says today about "Democracy", which is be bandied about as a cause for wars all over the world.
This is why you need old, physical books, which can't be changed depending on the current narrative.
Webster's copyright 1983 defines democracy as political or social equality. I'd say everyone in a dictatorship has that equality.
As for NK, we find the definition "Democratic Centralism" defined as a principle of the Communist party organizations by which members take part in policy discussions and elections at all levels but must follow decisions made at higher levels.
Now as you say, "Features of democracy oftentimes include freedom of assembly, association, personal property, freedom of religion and speech, citizenship, consent of the governed, voting rights, freedom from unwarranted governmental deprivation of the right to life and liberty, and minority rights.“
Do you feel we have this in the US? I can tell you that we do not, although if you only read main stream media and believe everything the government says, you have your head in the sand.
Do you think they have that in Western Europe? Have you seen the mess Great Britain has become?
What does “Webster's copyright 1983 defines democracy as political or social equality.” even mean to you??
I am sure the definitions is more than the two words you picked. This is not an internet problem, the idea of democracy comes from Ancient Greece, fyi that’s before 1983; back then it mostly referred to a direct democracy. It evolved from direct democracy to representative democracy either through a parliament or presidential democracy. I don’t think North Korea runs any elections as far as I know…. Do you?
Guess you missed the definition of democratic centralization, so yes, they have elections, but it's a one party system.
Haven't you ever heard that Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner? That's why a Republic protects the rights of the minority.
You never answered about how you define "Left wing". I know many people on the Left will go to any extreme to be able to define those on the right as Hitler or Nazi's, which is humorous since the Left is big on censoring free speech.
Fortunately I can answer this as this was the topic of my recent research project. To oversimplify currently we operate on the fractional reserve system worldwide. This system creates a) lot of checkbook money which can only be created through debt
b) transfers the monetary authority to issue money in the hands of private banks and central bank and takes it away from the state. c) Necessitates inflation. The Nazi party followed the plan of Hjalmar Schacht which like the Chicago plan which I studied leads to better outcomes.
It really is amazing how relatable The Man was. Everything from growing up with unprejudiced, milquetoast conservative "boomer" parents, to walking through the various political movements of his time, to only embracing his most famous conclusion when all other possibilities were exhausted, I can see in an entire generation of men.
I do not think that the various middle-aged mischling "thought leaders" of Right-Wing Twitter will have relevance in however this shakes out, but I would say with better than half odds that the man who defines the next century in the same way Hitler defined the previous one will have been an anon in the glory days of 8/pol/.
Hitler and fascism are weird in their emphasis on creating a managerial class out of people who would never be in the managerial class in any diverse democracy.
The economic and military effectiveness of german fascism might be attributable to this, but haven't deep dived it
> Hitler and fascism are weird in their emphasis on creating a managerial class out of people who would never be in the managerial class in any diverse democracy.
Not sure about that. The German stereotype is being overly officious, and it predates the World Wars, as you yourself noted elsewhere.
Actually he adopted their tactics. He used force. Kind words, reason and negotiations rarely work without a backup. The way America was designed the character of the people and their contract with their government was as good as western man could do to eliminate force. However the character of the American electorate, and its government, has been diluted. The contract was designed for a moral people. The American culture of today is a different from what it was in 1789 as the current real estate in Manhattan is compared to that time. Kids could translate English words and phases into Latin and Greek. They could read Thomas Paine, do domestic farm and business chores, and then go fishing for fun.
I hesitate to call this man a visionary, because these conclusions are obvious. The thing is, most men, uppon learning the truth, don't do anything about it. Not out of cowardice, but out of a wise caution and self preservation instinct. Better to be called a coward than to die, most think. Yet, i can't help but be amazed at the lenghts one particular man can get when he does disregard caution and shelflessly does act uppon it. When they say H* was a madman they are right for the wrong reasons. He was a madman because he sacrificed himself and 20 million germans to right the wrongs of society. Was it justified? It's not for me to judge, but what he accomplished, even in his failure, was to expose the truth. May his sacrifice be at least dignified, along of all those men who followed him to his grave.
managerialism is part of capitalism just like it was part of communism it has nothing to do with left or right the way are described here. Communism and Capitalism are both products of enlightenment, managerialism is just the mechanism to try to make large scale organizations “work”, when social relations are not enough for coordination nor desired if one wants to avoid nepotism and corruption. For that reason you come up with a way of measuring performance “objectively” see Taylorism. You come up with different types of quantifiable data which is more or less accurate leading to boom and bust. This is a theoretical approach that fails in most situation in reality due to complexity of the real world. Managerialism is a method of trying to manage the complexity which only considers economic costs to be optimized, human costs are irrelevant; managerialism is very much part of the large scale modern capitalism which it tries to manage.
No one denies it's necessary to have managers, but at the same time there are consequences for allowing them to become a separate class (especially a separate racial group) and dominate society's institutions.
Ok, Hitler making sense wasn’t something that I was prepared for.
I think that you are correct to emphasize the “foreigner” component of the argument. There’s nothing inherently evil about any particular people, but two millennia of European history provides ample examples of how Jews were specifically excluded from, and persecuted by, Christian society. Of course they viewed themselves as separate.
And it’s interesting that you could replace the word “Jew” with almost any other “marginalized” grouping in today’s society and come up with a similar result. Tactics that work are reused, and similar incentives produce similar results.
Also, suddenly the Woke constantly calling Trump “Literally HITLER!” makes a lot more sense!
Are you implying they begun isolating from society and creating problems because of being marginalized? Lmao. I'm pretty sure any group who has a track record of being marginalized has done something to cause it, not the other way around, but hey, that might be my comom sense and historical observation speaking. Don't let it get in the way of your "bullies suck" fantasy.
Judiasm is interesting in HOW isolated and separate it is. It's a religious commandment, and for about 800 years one the Jewish authorities were empowered to enforce with either floggings or executions on their own people with the approval of the Christian kings. As well as thousands of other social controls and regulations.
Indeed many thinkers Jewish and Gentile, argue that traditional Jewish society, not Lenin's Russia, was the first totalitarian society, and that much of the Character of why Marxism became what it did is because of this heritage.
That does makes complete sense regarding the historical pattern i have observed. i have not studied jews in particular, but it is amusing how often they "pop up" when you are reading something completely unrelated. They were always separate from the majority, and always enjoyed a huge degree of freedom in their "in-group". Some attribute that to their role as money lenders, but i think the deeper truth is that they always negotiated their safety with the powers that be. Could be mistaken, idk.
Read the statute of Kalicz and you'll see what kind of terms they negotiated with the rulers they controlled. They're completely one sided, essentially they boil down to "we can do what we want and local laws don't apply."
I’m not implying anything. I’m stating that for most of Christian history, Jews have been the religiously designated Out-group. That’s a simple explanation for why, when a role selects for outsiders, there was a tendency for the role to have been filled by a Jew. Moneylenders for example, in a society where usury was considered sinful.
Replace Vienna with New York, Jews with either AWFULs or LGBTQ, and the union with the HR department, and the Habsburgs with the democrats, and tell me, does the pattern not still fit?
That's BS. There wasn't some empty role for "outsider" that was filled by jews, jews created the role. The restrictions on moneylending existed precisely because it gave them a monopoly. Prior to jews europeans had no problem managing their own finances.
> but two millennia of European history provides ample examples of how Jews were specifically excluded from, and persecuted by, Christian society. Of course they viewed themselves as separate.
They always viewed themselves as separate. They wrote entire books about how their god is the only true god and chose them to inherit the entire earth.
The charge of exclusion is false. In most European societies they were given far more access to society than any other foreigner. Largely because aforementioned books had become the center of that society's culture.
As for persecution... their story that every single society they've ever infiltrated all came to hate them and mistreat them for no reason at all is ridiculous.
If dealing with managerialism comes before defending nation, some takeways:
1. Some Small is Beautiful measures are in order: antitrust, making the corporate income tax progressive, etc. Can get some liberal love on this one.
2. Shrinking the sizes of public schools vs. abolishing the public schools. I bet we can find boatloads of Disparate Impact on this one. (Inner city schools tend to be big.)
3. Demand that 401(k) plans offer individual stock picking as an option. Mutual funds are evil, an extra layer between owner and asset.
4. Tax the investment income of tax free foundations. Charities should be more dependent on ongoing donations.
5. Eliminate LLCs and S corporations. If you want the abrogation of responsibility that comes with incorporating, pay the double tax.
I've been in favor of the above for a while for other reasons. You made a connection between wokeness and the above that never occurred to me.
Johnny Carson used to make jokes about the LA smog every night. Things got better, but EPA is a good example of how a regulatory agency bloats into a harmful bureaucracy, even after solving the original problem.
Regulating the release of toxins is a hard problem. It's essentially making engineering specifications, and making readable engineering specifications is hard.
I once had a job working on a spill contingency plan for a local heating oil distributor. Combing through the state regs and coming up with an acceptable plan was not easy. In that case the regs were a bit nebulous, more a statement of intent than strict rules to follow.
But eventually we surveyed the site to figure out where a spill would flow, followed the storm drains to find a place to put a dam and separation system, and stockpiled sandbags, etc.
Years later, there was a spill. The plan and stockpiled equipment got used. The regulations actually worked.
Government laws, rules, regulations and statutes should stay as far away from business as religion stays away from government. The liberal mindset loves the money they can make manufacturing in China which has no labor laws that impede what these same people put together in America. And, in addition, Islam flourishes in America as though it is Mecca. It does not do too well in China where these same pro Islamic liberals, have no problem putting their profits above their supposed virtue. And how many of these companies are managed by Jews? I don't know but maybe, applying Adolph's investigatory nature, we may discover that many, like Thomas Friedman, who loves Chinese fascism, are similar and of the same faith.
> The liberal mindset loves the money they can make manufacturing in China which has no labor laws that impede what these same people put together in America.
This is a cop out. America got these regulations because the people voted for politicians pushing them.
“The decay of our culture, these mounds of contamination of our whole cultural life. The decomposition of our literature. The poisoning of our theaters, of our movie theaters, all the art is now falling for it. Millions of Germans do not participate anymore, it does not appeal to them anymore.
This art that was not born from our people, but is alien to us and will remain alien. That has nothing to do with the German character and did not come from our soul. It was imposed on our people by a subversive press, which made it palatable.
And parallel to this already the assault begins against the education of our children’s brains. The tearing out of all the memories of our German past. The insult to all the great men of our people. The removal of its memory from the heart and brain our of the German youth.”
Never read Mein Kampf, until some minutes ago. But of Adolf I've read thousands of pages... but I think the book forbidden in my country, but there's the internet!
Interestingly, in those few pages Adolf elegantly displays the God Complext, which should come as no surprise, given what happened in the years thereafter...
Interesting article. There is a problem though: If the jews are merely cossacks for the real ruling class then who are the real ruling class? This isn't metaphysics, we can't say "it's ruling classes all the way down." Some person or group of people have to be on top. As far as I can see, all of those people are jews.
No, I haven't read him that deeply. Like I said i read him once really young and got basically nothing out of it, now I'm rereading...
The Stalag edition was the official National Socialist German Workers Party translation and every "sympathizer" insists its the only one worth reading. However it is possible it varied from the German edition in ways meant for an outside audience...
But that'd be the most sympathetic translation
I'm just reading the one i found a hardcover copy of.
Your passage about the managerial/bureaucratic class is brilliant and eerily appropos to current realities. I know a former senior US Navy Officer (and a capable one) who turned down ship command for the reasons you stated and in civilian life works for a congressionally funded think tank. Her refusal to take command followed several highly publicized collisions at sea in the mid 2010's. The Navy simply denied any organizational culpability and hung those skippers out to dry.
The Nazis were Socialists, it's in their name, so don't call Hitler right wing, or a counter to Marxism.
Yes, there are some very evil, powerful Jewish people. There are some very evil, powerful non Jewish people. Your admiration for Hitler, and blaming Jews as the problem is disturbing.
Where you are correct is the managerial and bureaucratic class. They don't solve problems, because if they did, they would become obsolete. They are parasites.
The National Socialists were clearly a right wing party and I wish the Boomercons who make your dumb point would just shuffle off already.
His was the purest application of Nietzschean thought ever attempted by a serious polity (excluding perhaps the ancient Greeks). If that’s not right wing, literally nothing is and the term has no meaning.
> His was the purest application of Nietzschean thought ever attempted by a serious polity (excluding perhaps the ancient Greeks).
By that logic Sartre, Foucault, and modern wokism is right wing.
You think modern wokism, which at its core is enforced equality of outcome across racial and sexual characteristics, is *Nietzschean*? No, I don’t think so.
Wokism at its core is about ignoring social traditions to act according to your Will.
If you say that only applies to the "natural nobility", well Nietzsche himself was a loser who couldn't even hold down a job and ended up in an asylum, and what have you done that would qualify you as "natural nobility"?
So, what is your idea of "left wing"? Communism? Fascism is corporatism, where the state and the producers work in tandem. I don't define that as right wing, and only idiots in ANTIFA and others who use brown shirt tactics, acting like Fascists, who think they fighting Fascists, might agree with you.
Left wing is egalitarian, right wing is hierarchical. That’s a basic and binding distinction. You think of state involvement in production as inherently left wing because modern left states use political power to redistribute economic production from the competent to the incompetent, but that’s only a symptom not a cause of the ideology.
And fwiw, the pre-war German economy, even in the midst of an enormous arms buildup, was very laissez-faire by modern standards: state spending was about 35% of GNP in 1938, of which two thirds was military spending. The US currently spends ~38% of GDP across all levels of government and modern European economies routinely get over 50%.
So egalitarian, meaning Socialism or Communism. Right is not hierarchical, it believes as our Constitution spells out that everyone is free to pursue and achieve or fail and take responsibility. That does not mean that those who are incompetent aren't taken care of, but it is by personal charity to churches and civic groups, not taken against their will (theft) by the government to be redistributed.
I have heard that distinction before. Not a fan of hierarchical either unless it is truly meritocratic, which is why its important to remember a possible y-axis to the x of left-right; authoritarianism or totalitarianism. Hence you have confusing similarities and difference, such as stalin criminaliing homosexuality and heavy use of camps, while our left thinks there is no higher calling, or nazi germany's heavy use of state media and pseudo science to create a biomedical state dedicated to german 'hygiene' complete with sterilization and marriage laws, smoking laws, human experimentation etc is a similar method our country used when scaring everyone into their homes, experimental vaccines and murderous rage against those without a mask. wachowski 'brothers' probably didnt expect v for vendetta to look so much like the dems during covid. as a libertarian, im first and foremost wary of totalitarianism. i have no problem with an aristocracy, just that those in power can curb their lust for control.
found this for you https://youtu.be/0gfYbEk6rBY?si=uGjeBjVbKCka1eGV
Dude, do you want be to send you videos that saturate the internet? It proves nothing, and I'm not watching it. Use your own words.
I am not going to waste my time when you don’t actually understand the words used here since that is a requirement in order to have a productive discussion.
Democracy and democracy are not the same thing; Democracy is a just name the later is a form of government characterized by specific characteristics which you can find within its definition. Is the county democratic … let’s look if the characteristics of a democratic country apply to the country in question.
1. elections / free elections ? NO
2. direct of representative democracy ? NO
3. any successful political challengers to establishments ? NO
4. limited terms ? NO
Therefore NK is not a democracy therefore you cannot determine what something is or not just because they call themselves as such.
There is no definition of right wing that will satisfy everyone, and any reasonable definition will necessarily exclude many or most of the people labeled as right wing or even "far right."
The definitions I favor are:
1. Aesthetic: Right Wing/Fascism is when healthy, attractive people don't hate themselves and sometimes wear uniforms.
(This definition would for instance capture the ultra-liberal society of Verhoven's Starship Troopers)
2. Ideological: Right Wing/Fascism is when you believe that equality is neither possible nor desirable.
"Left Wing" would then be the same but "1. ...and that's a bad thing" or "2. Equality is possible & desirable"
Both definitions I offered would include the Nazi's as right wing.
> Right Wing/Fascism is when healthy, attractive people don't hate themselves and sometimes wear uniforms.
Well, by that definition Soviet Realism was Right Wing.
I suppose everyone has different ideas. I know most people who believe everything that is far left consider themselves as "Moderates", which of course they are not. They just have the approval of the media and government.
People on the Right consider themselves "Conservatives", although the whole system is corrupted by the Uniparty, which works through the mangers and bureaucrats.
Unfortunately it was a German Jew, Marx, that is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions... maybe? However, think a little. Was he responsible any more than Satan was responsible for the demise of the idyllic Garden utopia? After all it was Eve that listened to the forked tongue that Russians, Chinese, Cubans, Argentinians, Venezuelans and so many others, including Americans, also listen to and vote based on the promises? After the power is acquired voting becomes useless. Blacks are the main race behind most of American violent crime. Not all blacks are criminals and neither are all Jews communists but clearly statistics show things such as the chances of a woman being raped by a Muslim as opposed to a fatherly Intuit Eskimo. I truly believe that without the support of the Jewish press and the many powerful Jews in the world, such as Mark Zuckerberg, communism would not stand a chance and neither would Iran's Islam. That said, strangely, the policies supported by Jews are the greatest threat to Israel a state mainly designed to provide security and protection for Jews. Do you have an explanation to this imbroglio that is better than the one provided by the author of Mein Kampf? I may not have thought about as for as long as he has but I put in a lot of time as I'm sure many others also have as well as Kulak has.
Demonizing one ethnic group, whoever that may be, and eliminating them from the earth won't solve any problems.
It's just lazy thinking to blame Marx for what others did in his name. All systems of government can be abused by people who crave power.
It's the culture, not the skin color or religion.
Blacks had strong families and religious lives until their culture was corrupted after LBJ's Great Society.
Muslims were not demanding women be covered or they were a target for rape until the Ayatollahs took over in the 70's. Look at pictures of Afghanistan, Iran, etc..before the late 70's and look how they dressed.
Jews, as well as some Asian countries, have a culture that promotes success in education and work, which leads them to be over represented in colleges, at least until the recent DEI crackdowns.
Does the NY Times Jewish Sulzberger family deserve any responsibility for underreporting the Holocaust and the Ukrainian Genocide? How about the mistreatment of dogs and puppies by Amish breeders? How about killing and eating dogs and cats that are raised in miserable environments? Race, nationality and cultures have a lot to do with human behavior.
Gandhi would agree with you recognizing that if you raising a Muslim as a Hindu; you would love him just as much. I disagreed with him on that because he missed the point. It is too late after they are raised as a Muslim. On the other hand Patton would agree with me. He had opinions based upon race and nationality and despised the Russians as a people. Nothing the prophet Mohamed said makes me belive that Islam treats women equally under their law. Remember that the God of Abraham had no mercy on many cultures.
I've struggled for a long time with a useful distinction between right and left. I think Kulak put it best when she argued it should be considered a struggle between those who value excellence and those who value equality (or at least pretend to).
By this metric the natsocs were mostly right wing.
You look like a complete moron posting this, Hitler himself explained this topic very clearly, go read.
I don't care what Hitler said, I care about what he did. Do you believe everything politicians say?
You were there in germany, during the 30s and 40s? How much do we really know about what he did? which parts of what we know are propaganda? which parts are true?
Understanding that those are questions that merit investigation looks to me like an excellent occupation for one's mind.
I was born when Eisenhower was president, and he was there. He made sure pictures were taken of the concentration camps, because he knew people wouldn't believe how bad it was if they didn't see it. The shock and horror about what happened in Germany was still very fresh in people's minds at the time I was growing up. I knew lots of people who were actually in WW2.
I was living in Germany in 1975, when the German people were still very sensitive about the whole thing. They were ashamed. Hitler was a psychopathic dictator who everyone was afraid of, not some philosopher for the working class.
I encourage yo to read Eisenhower's crusade in Europe.
His description of the camps and what happened there is surprisingly different from the official narrative.
Dwight D. Eisenhower on the Camps
This is what Eisenhower said on pages 408-9 of “Crusade in Europe”
“The same day [April 12, 1945] I saw my first horror camp. It was near the town of Gotha. I have never felt able to describe my emotional reactions when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency. Up to that time I had known about it only generally or through secondary sources. I am certain, however that I have never at any other time experienced an equal sense of shock.
“I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at first hand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that `the stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda.’ Some members of the visiting party were unable to through the ordeal. I not only did so but as soon as I returned to Patton’s headquarters that evening I sent communications to both Washington and London, urging the two governments to send instantly to Germany a random group of newspaper editors and representative groups from the national legislatures. I felt that the evidence should be immediately placed before the American and British publics in a fashion that would leave no room for cynical doubt.”
And on page 439
“Of all these [Displaced Persons] the Jews were in the most deplorable condition. For years they had been beaten, starved, and tortured.”
But what is in the pictures? Bodies of people who died from typhus which was raging because of the Allied bombing?
Are you joking? There's photos and film reels of people looking like living skeletons in those concentration camps, but the Germans who are there are fat and happy. If you don't believe what happened, which has been very well documented, you are a waste of time for me.
Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic, it’s in their name … :/
Democratic means majority rule. Lots of pure "Democracies" are run by dictatorship.
🤦🏻♂️ there’s still time to delete this
You really think you made a point, but I don't think you understand what "Democratic" means. It does not mean freedom.
Very much so…
“ In a direct democracy, the people have the direct authority to deliberate and decide legislation. In a representative democracy, the people choose governing officials through elections to do so. Who is considered part of "the people" and how authority is shared among or delegated by the people has changed over time and at different rates in different countries. Features of democracy oftentimes include freedom of assembly, association, personal property, freedom of religion and speech, citizenship, consent of the governed, voting rights, freedom from unwarranted governmental deprivation of the right to life and liberty, and minority rights.“
Minority rights are guaranteed in a Republic, not a Democracy, and don't tell me what the "internet" says today about "Democracy", which is be bandied about as a cause for wars all over the world.
This is why you need old, physical books, which can't be changed depending on the current narrative.
Webster's copyright 1983 defines democracy as political or social equality. I'd say everyone in a dictatorship has that equality.
As for NK, we find the definition "Democratic Centralism" defined as a principle of the Communist party organizations by which members take part in policy discussions and elections at all levels but must follow decisions made at higher levels.
Now as you say, "Features of democracy oftentimes include freedom of assembly, association, personal property, freedom of religion and speech, citizenship, consent of the governed, voting rights, freedom from unwarranted governmental deprivation of the right to life and liberty, and minority rights.“
Do you feel we have this in the US? I can tell you that we do not, although if you only read main stream media and believe everything the government says, you have your head in the sand.
Do you think they have that in Western Europe? Have you seen the mess Great Britain has become?
What does “Webster's copyright 1983 defines democracy as political or social equality.” even mean to you??
I am sure the definitions is more than the two words you picked. This is not an internet problem, the idea of democracy comes from Ancient Greece, fyi that’s before 1983; back then it mostly referred to a direct democracy. It evolved from direct democracy to representative democracy either through a parliament or presidential democracy. I don’t think North Korea runs any elections as far as I know…. Do you?
Guess you missed the definition of democratic centralization, so yes, they have elections, but it's a one party system.
Haven't you ever heard that Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner? That's why a Republic protects the rights of the minority.
You never answered about how you define "Left wing". I know many people on the Left will go to any extreme to be able to define those on the right as Hitler or Nazi's, which is humorous since the Left is big on censoring free speech.
Touché. 👍
Hitler was promising workers that they could eat their socialist cake and have it too.
When the debts to support the system he set up became unsustainable, he addressed the problem by invading his main creditor, namely France.
> When the debts to support the system he set up became unsustainable, he addressed the problem by invading his main creditor, namely France.
That's not true though. France declared war on Germany, not the other way around.
Fortunately I can answer this as this was the topic of my recent research project. To oversimplify currently we operate on the fractional reserve system worldwide. This system creates a) lot of checkbook money which can only be created through debt
b) transfers the monetary authority to issue money in the hands of private banks and central bank and takes it away from the state. c) Necessitates inflation. The Nazi party followed the plan of Hjalmar Schacht which like the Chicago plan which I studied leads to better outcomes.
Well economics wasn't the only reason it started.
Some impressively spicy takes in this one. :D
It really is amazing how relatable The Man was. Everything from growing up with unprejudiced, milquetoast conservative "boomer" parents, to walking through the various political movements of his time, to only embracing his most famous conclusion when all other possibilities were exhausted, I can see in an entire generation of men.
I do not think that the various middle-aged mischling "thought leaders" of Right-Wing Twitter will have relevance in however this shakes out, but I would say with better than half odds that the man who defines the next century in the same way Hitler defined the previous one will have been an anon in the glory days of 8/pol/.
Well, for all Hitler's supposed distaste for managerialism, he was perfectly happy to use large amounts of it in governing Germany.
Hitler and fascism are weird in their emphasis on creating a managerial class out of people who would never be in the managerial class in any diverse democracy.
The economic and military effectiveness of german fascism might be attributable to this, but haven't deep dived it
> Hitler and fascism are weird in their emphasis on creating a managerial class out of people who would never be in the managerial class in any diverse democracy.
Not sure about that. The German stereotype is being overly officious, and it predates the World Wars, as you yourself noted elsewhere.
https://www.anarchonomicon.com/p/teach-a-man-to-revolt
Actually he adopted their tactics. He used force. Kind words, reason and negotiations rarely work without a backup. The way America was designed the character of the people and their contract with their government was as good as western man could do to eliminate force. However the character of the American electorate, and its government, has been diluted. The contract was designed for a moral people. The American culture of today is a different from what it was in 1789 as the current real estate in Manhattan is compared to that time. Kids could translate English words and phases into Latin and Greek. They could read Thomas Paine, do domestic farm and business chores, and then go fishing for fun.
I hesitate to call this man a visionary, because these conclusions are obvious. The thing is, most men, uppon learning the truth, don't do anything about it. Not out of cowardice, but out of a wise caution and self preservation instinct. Better to be called a coward than to die, most think. Yet, i can't help but be amazed at the lenghts one particular man can get when he does disregard caution and shelflessly does act uppon it. When they say H* was a madman they are right for the wrong reasons. He was a madman because he sacrificed himself and 20 million germans to right the wrongs of society. Was it justified? It's not for me to judge, but what he accomplished, even in his failure, was to expose the truth. May his sacrifice be at least dignified, along of all those men who followed him to his grave.
managerialism is part of capitalism just like it was part of communism it has nothing to do with left or right the way are described here. Communism and Capitalism are both products of enlightenment, managerialism is just the mechanism to try to make large scale organizations “work”, when social relations are not enough for coordination nor desired if one wants to avoid nepotism and corruption. For that reason you come up with a way of measuring performance “objectively” see Taylorism. You come up with different types of quantifiable data which is more or less accurate leading to boom and bust. This is a theoretical approach that fails in most situation in reality due to complexity of the real world. Managerialism is a method of trying to manage the complexity which only considers economic costs to be optimized, human costs are irrelevant; managerialism is very much part of the large scale modern capitalism which it tries to manage.
No one denies it's necessary to have managers, but at the same time there are consequences for allowing them to become a separate class (especially a separate racial group) and dominate society's institutions.
Ok, Hitler making sense wasn’t something that I was prepared for.
I think that you are correct to emphasize the “foreigner” component of the argument. There’s nothing inherently evil about any particular people, but two millennia of European history provides ample examples of how Jews were specifically excluded from, and persecuted by, Christian society. Of course they viewed themselves as separate.
And it’s interesting that you could replace the word “Jew” with almost any other “marginalized” grouping in today’s society and come up with a similar result. Tactics that work are reused, and similar incentives produce similar results.
Also, suddenly the Woke constantly calling Trump “Literally HITLER!” makes a lot more sense!
Are you implying they begun isolating from society and creating problems because of being marginalized? Lmao. I'm pretty sure any group who has a track record of being marginalized has done something to cause it, not the other way around, but hey, that might be my comom sense and historical observation speaking. Don't let it get in the way of your "bullies suck" fantasy.
Judiasm is interesting in HOW isolated and separate it is. It's a religious commandment, and for about 800 years one the Jewish authorities were empowered to enforce with either floggings or executions on their own people with the approval of the Christian kings. As well as thousands of other social controls and regulations.
Indeed many thinkers Jewish and Gentile, argue that traditional Jewish society, not Lenin's Russia, was the first totalitarian society, and that much of the Character of why Marxism became what it did is because of this heritage.
That does makes complete sense regarding the historical pattern i have observed. i have not studied jews in particular, but it is amusing how often they "pop up" when you are reading something completely unrelated. They were always separate from the majority, and always enjoyed a huge degree of freedom in their "in-group". Some attribute that to their role as money lenders, but i think the deeper truth is that they always negotiated their safety with the powers that be. Could be mistaken, idk.
Read the statute of Kalicz and you'll see what kind of terms they negotiated with the rulers they controlled. They're completely one sided, essentially they boil down to "we can do what we want and local laws don't apply."
I’m not implying anything. I’m stating that for most of Christian history, Jews have been the religiously designated Out-group. That’s a simple explanation for why, when a role selects for outsiders, there was a tendency for the role to have been filled by a Jew. Moneylenders for example, in a society where usury was considered sinful.
Replace Vienna with New York, Jews with either AWFULs or LGBTQ, and the union with the HR department, and the Habsburgs with the democrats, and tell me, does the pattern not still fit?
That's BS. There wasn't some empty role for "outsider" that was filled by jews, jews created the role. The restrictions on moneylending existed precisely because it gave them a monopoly. Prior to jews europeans had no problem managing their own finances.
> and tell me, does the pattern not still fit?
Yes, because it's still jews doing it.
> but two millennia of European history provides ample examples of how Jews were specifically excluded from, and persecuted by, Christian society. Of course they viewed themselves as separate.
They always viewed themselves as separate. They wrote entire books about how their god is the only true god and chose them to inherit the entire earth.
The charge of exclusion is false. In most European societies they were given far more access to society than any other foreigner. Largely because aforementioned books had become the center of that society's culture.
As for persecution... their story that every single society they've ever infiltrated all came to hate them and mistreat them for no reason at all is ridiculous.
Fascinating!
If dealing with managerialism comes before defending nation, some takeways:
1. Some Small is Beautiful measures are in order: antitrust, making the corporate income tax progressive, etc. Can get some liberal love on this one.
2. Shrinking the sizes of public schools vs. abolishing the public schools. I bet we can find boatloads of Disparate Impact on this one. (Inner city schools tend to be big.)
3. Demand that 401(k) plans offer individual stock picking as an option. Mutual funds are evil, an extra layer between owner and asset.
4. Tax the investment income of tax free foundations. Charities should be more dependent on ongoing donations.
5. Eliminate LLCs and S corporations. If you want the abrogation of responsibility that comes with incorporating, pay the double tax.
I've been in favor of the above for a while for other reasons. You made a connection between wokeness and the above that never occurred to me.
> Some Small is Beautiful measures are in order: antitrust, making the corporate income tax progressive, etc. Can get some liberal love on this one.
And people wonder how the US ended up with all its industry outsourced to China.
We got tired of dirty air. American labor was considerably more expensive. We are overregulated.
Cutting some regulations IS an antitrust measure. Regulations create overhead. Overhead creates economies of scale.
But some regulations are useful. I'm old enough to remember when you could see the air in cities. (It wasn't as bad as China today, but it was bad.)
Johnny Carson used to make jokes about the LA smog every night. Things got better, but EPA is a good example of how a regulatory agency bloats into a harmful bureaucracy, even after solving the original problem.
Regulating the release of toxins is a hard problem. It's essentially making engineering specifications, and making readable engineering specifications is hard.
I once had a job working on a spill contingency plan for a local heating oil distributor. Combing through the state regs and coming up with an acceptable plan was not easy. In that case the regs were a bit nebulous, more a statement of intent than strict rules to follow.
But eventually we surveyed the site to figure out where a spill would flow, followed the storm drains to find a place to put a dam and separation system, and stockpiled sandbags, etc.
Years later, there was a spill. The plan and stockpiled equipment got used. The regulations actually worked.
I would hope that sometimes they work, but too many do not.
Agreed!
Instead of being anti-regulation per se, we should focus on:
* Stupid regulations
* Counter productive regulations
* Capricious regulations
* Unnecessarily complicated regulations
* Excessive fines
Sometimes the Republican approach to environmental protection resembles the recent Democrat call to defund the police.
Both the regulatory state and the criminal justice system need deep reforms. Simply slashing causes backlash.
None of the regulations you mentioned had anything to do with pollution.
Furthermore, these are additional regulations you want on top of our already over-regulated industry.
Government laws, rules, regulations and statutes should stay as far away from business as religion stays away from government. The liberal mindset loves the money they can make manufacturing in China which has no labor laws that impede what these same people put together in America. And, in addition, Islam flourishes in America as though it is Mecca. It does not do too well in China where these same pro Islamic liberals, have no problem putting their profits above their supposed virtue. And how many of these companies are managed by Jews? I don't know but maybe, applying Adolph's investigatory nature, we may discover that many, like Thomas Friedman, who loves Chinese fascism, are similar and of the same faith.
> The liberal mindset loves the money they can make manufacturing in China which has no labor laws that impede what these same people put together in America.
This is a cop out. America got these regulations because the people voted for politicians pushing them.
• Adolf Hitler on Cultural Marxism
https://archive.org/details/adolf-hitler-on-cultural-marxism
Transcript (manual) ...
“The decay of our culture, these mounds of contamination of our whole cultural life. The decomposition of our literature. The poisoning of our theaters, of our movie theaters, all the art is now falling for it. Millions of Germans do not participate anymore, it does not appeal to them anymore.
This art that was not born from our people, but is alien to us and will remain alien. That has nothing to do with the German character and did not come from our soul. It was imposed on our people by a subversive press, which made it palatable.
And parallel to this already the assault begins against the education of our children’s brains. The tearing out of all the memories of our German past. The insult to all the great men of our people. The removal of its memory from the heart and brain our of the German youth.”
Yup. Culture starts off on a biological footing. That means it starts with youth.
most excellent.
Never read Mein Kampf, until some minutes ago. But of Adolf I've read thousands of pages... but I think the book forbidden in my country, but there's the internet!
Interestingly, in those few pages Adolf elegantly displays the God Complext, which should come as no surprise, given what happened in the years thereafter...
Get wise to communist snitch culture in my podcast here:
https://spotifyanchor-web.app.link/e/zNKCxiJYMMb
Interesting article. There is a problem though: If the jews are merely cossacks for the real ruling class then who are the real ruling class? This isn't metaphysics, we can't say "it's ruling classes all the way down." Some person or group of people have to be on top. As far as I can see, all of those people are jews.
What's this translation and where do I find it?
https://www.anarchonomicon.com/p/the-managerial-minority-adolf-hitler/comment/66917208
Do you have any recommendations for which translations to read/avoid?
No, I haven't read him that deeply. Like I said i read him once really young and got basically nothing out of it, now I'm rereading...
The Stalag edition was the official National Socialist German Workers Party translation and every "sympathizer" insists its the only one worth reading. However it is possible it varied from the German edition in ways meant for an outside audience...
But that'd be the most sympathetic translation
I'm just reading the one i found a hardcover copy of.