Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: thames_sider who wrote (8205)	3/12/2001 8:26:46 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

But only one ideology called for genocide as an active policy, and world domination as the desirable aim and logical result. IMHO, that makes only one of them intrinsically evil. I think you laid out the similarities and differences very well. Karen

To: thames_sider who wrote (8205)	3/13/2001 2:13:56 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Communism dictated that all people are equal and shall be treated equally, giving from their means and receiving according to their needs. Of course, if as one with more means, you didn't see that you should help pay for those with less, there's a problem... And there were splits over whether 'revolution' in other countries should be actively fomented, or merely encouraged... the pure theory (as I understand it) indicates that the latter would happen spontaneously I think that communist principle is itself if you include that it is imposed by force. An argument could be made that it is less "intrinsically evil" then Nazi thought, but IMO both philosophies are evil, and the actions they motivated even more so. I'm not sure what the "pure" form of nazi beliefs was. Beyond the general belief in a powerful centralized state, nazism was basically "whatever Hitler wanted". Nazi Germany was a dictatorship by one charismatic indvidual. Obviously he didn't come up with all of the ideas in Nazi Germany and he could not possibly have had direct oversight over all policies, but his underlings put in place policies to please him. There was no well developed Nazi philosophy. Mein Kamph was more of a personal writing then a laying out of a Nazi philosohpy, it isn't the same kind of book as Das Kapital, or The Communist Manifesto. There was not a historical development of Nazi thinking. Neither ideology was ever implimented in a really pure form, at least not on any large scale. When they were implimented on a large scale both inevitably resulted in a lot of death and abuse. Communism resulted in even more death and abuse but that is mostly because the idea was imposed over more people for a longer time. Fortunately Nazi ideas ceased to be the ruling ideas over any large country after WWII, and even the more general category of facist thought no longer had wide spread signigicance after the war ended. n practice, thankfully, both have failed. But I think it's understandable why communism retained some intellectual attraction, especially compared to the alternative. I'm not sure what you mean by "the alternative". Do you mean Nazi ideas? In most cases these were not the alternative (although before Hitler gained control over Germany, nazi ideas and communism where both possible alternatives). The real alternative to communism is capitalism, and the alternative to the totalitarian dictatorships that imposed communism is a liberal democracy. Tim