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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (597833)	1/12/2011 6:27:47 PM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1574214

Individualism over collectivism. Sorry, the Nazis were all about the collective - the volk. They just limited it to the nation. Racism or racial segregation over racial tolerance. The history of leftism shows lots of racism ... consider the Progressive Democrat Woodrow Wilson. Or FDR who invented redlining to prevent blacks from benefiting from his home loan and farm loan programs. Eugenics over freedom of reproduction. Leftists were historically engenicists. Margaret Sanger, Bertrand Russell, lots of others. Merit over equality. Merit? Where do you get that idea? They expelled meritorious scholars who weren't racially pure. Power politics and militarism over pacifism. Power politics? Militarism? Tell Mao or Castro leftism isn't about that. One-person rule or self-rule over democracy. Stalin, Hugo, Mao, etc etc. Meat-eating over vegetarianism. You don't know Hitler was a vegetarian? Gun ownership over gun control Hitler was for gun conrol. Religion over secularism. Nazis were pretty hostile to religion.

To: bentway who wrote (597833)	1/12/2011 7:57:37 PM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574214

A “Right Wing” Book …is what Mein Kampf isn’t: First, other than the clear warning Hitler was giving the world about his genocidal anti-Semitism, the important takeaway from Mein Kampf isn’t its ideological coherence, but its author’s obsession with revolutionary change. (Depending on your translation) The word “fascist” appears twice in Mein Kampf, and “Fascism” only once, while “revolution,” “rebellion,” “overthrowing,” and the like festoon nearly every page. His chief obsession (other than the Jews) is with the revolutionary “idea,” the notion that the masses can be galvanized and commanded through a radical new way of thinking. “The appearance of a new and great idea was the secret of success in the French Revolution. The Russian Revolution owes its triumph to an idea. And it was only the idea that enabled [Italian] Fascism triumphantly to subject a whole nation to a process of complete renovation.” Which brings me to the second point. Mein Kampf is not in any serious way the opposite or parallel “right-wing” work to the “left-wing” Communist Manifesto. The two works are very different in style, intent, audience and, yes, ideology etc., but they do share a commitment to revolutionary change. All of these people insisting that it is some grand contradiction to admire both books don’t know much about one or the other. And to the extent Loughner read these books (which, again, I doubt), it is entirely plausible that he would like both of them. This is a kid who thought the entire metaphysical system was a con job in need of being torn down (David Brooks was very good on this point the other day, by the way). On that sort of thing, Hitler and Marx saw eye to eye. What shouldn’t need to be said is that neither Mein Kampf nor the Communist Manifesto are prominent Tea Party tracts. But the smears and rewriting of history will continue. transterrestrial.com nationalreview.com