Log in

View Full Version : Cuba propaganda war



h&s
18th December 2004, 09:16
Has anyone heard about this? I read it in the news this morning. Apparently the US mission in Cuba has included a neon '75' in their Christmas decorations in Cuba in 'solidarity' with the 75 dissidents imprisoned by Cuba this year. Naturally this infuriated the Cuban government.
Just look at what they have erected opposite to the US mission buiding to infuriate the Americans!
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20041217/capt.sge.pvm14.171204225331.photo01.photo.default-369x276.jpg
I may not be the worlds's biggest fan of Castro's government, but you have just got to love them for this!

Commie Rat
18th December 2004, 09:17
nice

go castro go castro

woot

:lol:

Intifada
18th December 2004, 10:09
I love Cuba!

Free Spirit
18th December 2004, 11:40
These kinds of images should be put at as many places as possible in most countries. They at least say, "Wake up".

h&s
18th December 2004, 13:36
Wouldn't it be funny if the Cubans put up a similar banner in the window of their mission in Washington DC? :P

Edelweiss
18th December 2004, 13:46
I fucking hate those unhistorical, and simply tasteles US-Nazi comparisons. Being a German, I feel offended by it. Cuba should stop with such cheap propaganda tricks. Comparing the US to Nazi Germany, is blatantly playing down the Nazi crimes. I can't understand anybody cheering such foolishness.

h&s
18th December 2004, 13:51
Sorry about that Malte - I didn't realise that this would cause offence. I'll change the picture.

Colombia
18th December 2004, 15:29
Nice comeback.

Edelweiss
18th December 2004, 15:56
Originally posted by h&[email protected] 18 2004, 03:51 PM
Sorry about that Malte - I didn't realise that this would cause offence. I'll change the picture.
Well, it's not the picture itself and the swatika that is pissing me off, it's the message itself that it's propagating (USA = Nazi)!

PRC-UTE
18th December 2004, 19:03
everybody gets offended by something.

the nazis arose during Germany's crisis in capitalism, same as bush. They're both fascists, cop on.

h&s
18th December 2004, 20:05
They're both fascists, cop on.
They're both evil, but they are not both fascists. Fascsim is an ideology to set up a 'racially pure' nation by any means necessary. Bush may be a racist, but do you really think that he wants that? Does Bush want Lebensraum? No.
Bush is motivated by greed, not by racism.

RagsToRevolution
18th December 2004, 23:19
Originally posted by h&[email protected] 18 2004, 08:05 PM

They're both fascists, cop on.
They're both evil, but they are not both fascists. Fascsim is an ideology to set up a 'racially pure' nation by any means necessary. Bush may be a racist, but do you really think that he wants that? Does Bush want Lebensraum? No.
Bush is motivated by greed, not by racism.
Fascism isn't inherently racist, only the Nazi variety is specifically racist. This is a good Wikipedia article on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

I wouldn't neccesarily compare Bush with fascism or Nazism. Still, the condemnation of Abu Ghraib is on target, and Castro isn't neccesarily just trying to equate Nazism, the main message is that America is worse than anything they could make Cuba out to be.

And often greed fuels racism, and I am in the personal belief that Bush is a racist individual, even if not openly.

refuse_resist
19th December 2004, 11:27
Does Bush want Lebensraum?
It's only obvious.

redstarshining
19th December 2004, 11:57
This is also an interesting read, from the inventor of fascism himself. This should also put an end to all the infantile "Stalin was a nazi/The USSR was fascist" arguments that I've come across on other forums recently.
I would have also posted some Hitler speeches and publications on naziism and the party, but due to legal reasons I will refrain from doing so.



The doctrine of fascism

complete and original text by Benito Mussolini - 1932

Like all sound political conceptions, Fascism is action and it is thought; action in which doctrine is immanent, and doctrine arising from a given system of historical forces in which it is inserted, and working on them from within (1). It has therefore a form correlated to contingencies of time and space; but it has also an ideal content which makes it an expression of truth in the higher region of the history of thought (2). There is no way of exercising a spiritual influence in the world as a human will dominating the will of others, unless one has a conception both of the transient and the specific reality on which that action is to be exercised, and of the permanent and universal reality in which the transient dwells and has its being. To know men one must know man; and to know man one must be acquainted with reality and its laws. There can be no conception of the State which is not fundamentally a conception of life: philosophy or intuition, system of ideas evolving within the framework of logic or concentrated in a vision or a faith, but always, at least potentially, an organic conception of the world.

Thus many of the practical expressions of Fascism such as party organization, system of education, and discipline can only be understood when considered in relation to its general attitude toward life. A spiritual attitude (3). Fascism sees in the world not only those superficial, material aspects in which man appears as an individual, standing by himself, self-centered, subject to natural law, which instinctively urges him toward a life of selfish momentary pleasure; it sees not only the individual but the nation and the country; individuals and generations bound together by a moral law, with common traditions and a mission which suppressing the instinct for life closed in a brief circle of pleasure, builds up a higher life, founded on duty, a life free from the limitations of time and space, in which the individual, by self-sacrifice, the renunciation of self-interest, by death itself, can achieve that purely spiritual existence in which his value as a man consists.

The conception is therefore a spiritual one, arising from the general reaction of the century against the materialistic positivism of the XIXth century. Anti-positivistic but positive; neither skeptical nor agnostic; neither pessimistic nor supinely optimistic as are, generally speaking, the doctrines (all negative) which place the center of life outside man; whereas, by the exercise of his free will, man can and must create his own world.

Fascism wants man to be active and to engage in action with all his energies; it wants him to be manfully aware of the difficulties besetting him and ready to face them. It conceives of life as a struggle in which it behooves a man to win for himself a really worthy place, first of all by fitting himself (physically, morally, intellectually) to become the implement required for winning it. As for the individual, so for the nation, and so for mankind (4). Hence the high value of culture in all its forms (artistic, religious, scientific) (5) and the outstanding importance of education. Hence also the essential value of work, by which man subjugates nature and creates the human world (economic, political, ethical, and intellectual).

This positive conception of life is obviously an ethical one. It invests the whole field of reality as well as the human activities which master it. No action is exempt from moral judgment; no activity can be despoiled of the value which a moral purpose confers on all things. Therefore life, as conceived of by the Fascist, is serious, austere, and religious; all its manifestations are poised in a world sustained by moral forces and subject to spiritual responsibilities. The Fascist disdains an “easy " life (6).

The Fascist conception of life is a religious one (7), in which man is viewed in his immanent relation to a higher law, endowed with an objective will transcending the in*dividual and raising him to conscious membership of a spiritual society. "Those who perceive nothing beyond opportunistic considerations in the religious policy of the Fascist regime fail to realize that Fascism is not only a system of government but also and above all a system of thought.

In the Fascist conception of history, man is man only by virtue of the spiritual process to which he contributes as a member of the family, the social group, the nation, and in function of history to which all nations bring their contribution. Hence the great value of tradition in records, in language, in customs, in the rules of social life (8). Outside history man is a nonentity. Fascism is therefore opposed to all individualistic abstractions based on eighteenth century materialism; and it is opposed to all Jacobinistic utopias and innovations. It does not believe in the possibility of "happiness" on earth as conceived by the economistic literature of the XVIIIth century, and it therefore rejects the theological notion that at some future time the human family will secure a final settlement of all its difficulties. This notion runs counter to experience which teaches that life is in continual flux and in process of evolution. In politics Fascism aims at realism; in practice it desires to deal only with those problems which are the spontaneous product of historic conditions and which find or suggest their own solutions (9). Only by entering in to the process of reality and taking possession of the forces at work within it, can man act on man and on nature (10).

Anti-individualistic, the Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State, which stands for the conscience and the universal, will of man as a historic entity (11). It is opposed to classical liberalism which arose as a reaction to absolutism and exhausted its historical function when the State became the expression of the conscience and will of the people. Liberalism denied the State in the name of the individual; Fascism reasserts

The rights of the State as expressing the real essence of the individual (12). And if liberty is to he the attribute of living men and not of abstract dummies invented by individualistic liberalism, then Fascism stands for liberty, and for the only liberty worth having, the liberty of the State and of the individual within the State (13). The Fascist conception of the State is all embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism, is totalitarian, and the Fascist State - a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values - interprets, develops, and potentates the whole life of a people (14).

No individuals or groups (political parties, cultural associations, economic unions, social classes) outside the State (15). Fascism is therefore opposed to Socialism to which unity within the State (which amalgamates classes into a single economic and ethical reality) is unknown, and which sees in history nothing but the class struggle. Fascism is likewise opposed to trade unionism as a class weapon. But when brought within the orbit of the State, Fascism recognizes the real needs which gave rise to socialism and trade unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or corporative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State (16).

Grouped according to their several interests, individuals form classes; they form trade-unions when organized according to their several economic activities; but first and foremost they form the State, which is no mere matter of numbers, the suns of the individuals forming the majority. Fascism is therefore opposed to that form of democracy which equates a nation to the majority, lowering it to the level of the largest number (17); but it is the purest form of democracy if the nation be considered as it should be from the point of view of quality rather than quantity, as an idea, the mightiest because the most ethical, the most coherent, the truest, expressing itself in a people as the conscience and will of the few, if not, indeed, of one, and ending to express itself in the conscience and the will of the mass, of the whole group ethnically molded by natural and historical conditions into a nation, advancing, as one conscience and one will, along the self same line of development and spiritual formation (18). Not a race, nor a geographically defined region, but a people, historically perpetuating itself; a multitude unified by an idea and imbued with the will to live, the will to power, self-consciousness, personality (19).

In so far as it is embodied in a State, this higher personality becomes a nation. It is not the nation which generates the State; that is an antiquated naturalistic concept which afforded a basis for XIXth century publicity in favor of national governments. Rather is it the State which creates the nation, conferring volition and therefore real life on a people made aware of their moral unity.

The right to national independence does not arise from any merely literary and idealistic form of self-consciousness; still less from a more or less passive and unconscious de facto situation, but from an active, self-conscious, political will expressing itself in action and ready to prove its rights. It arises, in short, from the existence, at least in fieri, of a State. Indeed, it is the State which, as the expression of a universal ethical will, creates the right to national independence (20).

A nation, as expressed in the State, is a living, ethical entity only in so far as it is progressive. Inactivity is death. Therefore the State is not only Authority which governs and confers legal form and spiritual value on indi*vidual, Hills, but it is also Power which makes its will felt and respected beyond its own frontiers, thus affording practical proof of the universal character of the decisions necessary to ensure its development. This implies organization and expansion, potential if not actual. Thus the State equates itself to the will of man, whose development cannot he checked by obstacles and which, by achieving self-expression, demonstrates its infinity (21).

The Fascist State , as a higher and more powerful expression of personality, is a force, but a spiritual one. It sums up all the manifestations of the moral and intellectual life of man. Its functions cannot therefore be limited to those of enforcing order and keeping the peace, as the liberal doctrine had it. It is no mere mechanical device for defining the sphere within which the individual may duly exercise his supposed rights. The Fascist State is an inwardly accepted standard and rule of conduct, a discipline of the whole person; it permeates the will no less than the intellect. It stands for a principle which becomes the central motive of man as a member of civilized society, sinking deep down into his personality; it dwells in the heart of the man of action and of the thinker, of the artist and of the man of science: soul of the soul (22).

Fascism, in short, is not only a law-giver and a founder of institutions, but an educator and a promoter of spiritual life. It aims at refashioning not only the forms of life but their content - man, his character, and his faith. To achieve this propose it enforces discipline and uses authority, entering into the soul and ruling with undisputed sway. Therefore it has chosen as its emblem the Lictor’s rods, the symbol of unity, strength, and justice.

POLITICAL AND SOCIAL DOCTRINE

When in the now distant March of 1919, speaking through the columns of the Popolo d'Italia I summoned to Milan the surviving interventionists who had intervened, and who had followed me ever since the foundation of the Fasci of revolutionary action in January 1915, I had in mind no specific doctrinal program. The only doctrine of which I had practical experience was that of socialism, from 1903-04 until the winter of 1914 - nearly a decade. My experience was that both of a follower and a leader - but it was not doctrinal experience. My doctrine during that period had been the doctrine of action. A uniform, universally accepted doctrine of Socialism had not existed since 1905, when the revisionist movement, headed by Bernstein, arose in Germany, countered by the formation, in the see-saw of tendencies, of a left revolutionary movement which in Italy never quitted the field of phrases, whereas, in the case of Russian so*cialism, it became the prelude to Bolshevism.

Reformism, revolutionism, centrism, the very echo of that terminology is dead, while in the great river of Fascism one can trace currents which had their source in Sorel, Peguy, Lagardelle of the Movement Socialists, and in the cohort of Italian syndicalist who from 1904 to 1914 brought a new note into the Italian socialist environment - previously emasculated and chloroformed by fornicating with Giolitti's party - a note sounded in Olivetti's Pagine Libere, Orano's Lupa, Enrico Leone's Divenirs Socials.

When the war ended in 1919 Socialism, as a doctrine, was already dead; it continued to exist only as a grudge, especially in Italy where its only chance lay in inciting to reprisals against the men who had willed the war and who were to be made to pay for it.

The Popolo d'Italia described itself in its subtitle as the daily organ of fighters and producers. The word producer was already the expression of a mental trend. Fascism was not the nursling of a doctrine previously drafted at a desk; it was born of the need of action, and was action; it was not a party but, in the first two years, an anti-party and a movement. The name I gave the organization fixed its character.

Yet if anyone cares to reread the now crumpled sheets of those days giving an account of the meeting at which the Italian Fasci di combattimento were founded, he will find not a doctrine but a series of pointers, forecasts, hints which, when freed from the inevitable matrix of contingencies, were to develop in a few years time into a series of doctrinal positions entitling Fascism to rank as a political doctrine differing from all others, past or present.

“If the bourgeoisie - I then said - believe that they have found in us their lightening-conductors, they arc mistaken. We must go towards the people... We wish the working classes to accustom themselves to the responsibilities of management so that they may realize that it is no easy matter to run a business... We will fight both technical and spiritual rear-guirdism... Now that the succession of the re*gime is open we must not be fainthearted. We must rush forward; if the present regime is to be superseded we must take its place. The right of succession is ours, for we urged the country to enter the war and we led it to victory... The existing forms of political representation cannot satisfy us; we want direst representation of the several interests... It' may be objected that this program implies a return to the guilds (corporazioni). No matter!. I therefore hope this assembly will accept the economic claims advanced by national syndicalism …

Is it not strange that from the very first day, at Piazza San Sepolcro, the word "guild" (corporazione) was pronounced, a word which, as the Revolution developed, was to express one of the basic legislative and social creations of the regime?

The years preceding the March on Rome cover a period during which the need of action forbade delay and careful doctrinal elaborations. Fighting was going on in the towns and villages. There were discussions but... there was some*thing more sacred and more important... death... Fascists knew how to die. A doctrine - fully elaborated, divided up into chapters and paragraphs with annotations, may have been lacking, but it was replaced by something far m :) re decisive, - by a faith. All the same, if with the help of books, articles, resolutions passed at congresses, major and minor speeches, anyone should care to revive the memory of those days, he will find, provided he knows how to seek and select, that the doctrinal foundations were laid while the battle was still raging. Indeed, it was during those years that Fascist thought armed, refined itself, and proceeded ahead with its organization. The problems of the individual and the State; the problems of authority and liberty; political, social, and more especially national problems were discussed; the conflict with liberal, democratic, socialistic, Masonic doctrines and with those of the Partito Popolare, was carried on at the same time as the punitive expeditions. Nevertheless, the lack of a formal system was used by disingenuous adversaries as an argument for proclaiming Fascism incapable of elaborating a doctrine at the very time when that doctrine was being formulated - no matter how tumultuously, - first, as is the case with all new ideas, in the guise of violent dogmatic negations; then in the more positive guise of constructive theories, subsequently incorporated, in 1926, 1927, and 1928, in the laws and institutions of the regime.

Fascism is now clearly defined not only as a regime but as a doctrine. This means that Fascism, exercising its critical faculties on itself and on others, has studied from its own special standpoint and judged by its own standards all the problems affecting the material and intellectual interests now causing such grave anxiety to the nations of the world, and is ready to deal with them by its own policies.

First of all, as regards the future development of mankind, and quite apart from all present political considerations. Fascism does not, generally speaking, believe in the possibility or utility of perpetual peace. It therefore discards pacifism as a cloak for cowardly supine renuncia*tion in contradistinction to self-sacrifice. War alone keys up all human energies to their maximum tension and sets the seal of nobility on those peoples who have the courage to face it. All other tests are substitutes which never place a man face to face with himself before the alternative of life or death. Therefore all doctrines which postulate peace at all costs are incompatible with Fascism. Equally foreign to the spirit of Fascism, even if accepted as useful in meeting special political situations -- are all internationalistic or League superstructures which, as history shows, crumble to the ground whenever the heart of nations is deeply stirred by sentimental, idealistic or practical considerations. Fascism carries this anti-pacifistic attitude into the life of the individual. " I don't care a damn „ (me ne frego) - the proud motto of the fighting squads scrawled by a wounded man on his bandages, is not only an act of philosophic stoicism, it sums up a doctrine which is not merely poli*tical: it is evidence of a fighting spirit which accepts all risks. It signifies new style of Italian life. The Fascist accepts and loves life; he rejects and despises suicide as cowardly. Life as he understands it means duty, elevation, conquest; life must be lofty and full, it must be lived for oneself but above all for others, both near bye and far off, present and future.

The population policy of the regime is the consequence of these premises. The Fascist loves his neighbor, but the word neighbor “does not stand for some vague and unseizable conception. Love of one's neighbor does not exclude necessary educational severity; still less does it exclude differentiation and rank. Fascism will have nothing to do with universal embraces; as a member of the community of nations it looks other peoples straight in the eyes; it is vigilant and on its guard; it follows others in all their manifestations and notes any changes in their interests; and it does not allow itself to be deceived by mutable and fallacious appearances.

Such a conception of life makes Fascism the resolute negation of the doctrine underlying so-called scientific and Marxian socialism, the doctrine of historic materialism which would explain the history of mankind in terms of the class struggle and by changes in the processes and instruments of production, to the exclusion of all else.

That the vicissitudes of economic life - discoveries of raw materials, new technical processes, and scientific inventions - have their importance, no one denies; but that they suffice to explain human history to the exclusion of other factors is absurd. Fascism believes now and always in sanctity and heroism, that is to say in acts in which no economic motive - remote or immediate - is at work. Having denied historic materialism, which sees in men mere puppets on the surface of history, appearing and disappearing on the crest of the waves while in the depths the real directing forces move and work, Fascism also denies the immutable and irreparable character of the class struggle which is the natural outcome of this economic conception of history; above all it denies that the class struggle is the preponderating agent in social transformations. Having thus struck a blow at socialism in the two main points of its doctrine, all that remains of it is the sentimental aspiration-old as humanity itself-toward social relations in which the sufferings and sorrows of the humbler folk will be alleviated. But here again Fascism rejects the economic interpretation of felicity as something to be secured socialistically, almost automatically, at a given stage of economic evolution when all will be assured a maximum of material comfort. Fascism denies the materialistic conception of happiness as a possibility, and abandons it to the economists of the mid-eighteenth century. This means that Fascism denies the equation: well-being = happiness, which sees in men mere animals, content when they can feed and fatten, thus reducing them to a vegetative existence pure and simple.

After socialism, Fascism trains its guns on the whole block of democratic ideologies, and rejects both their premises and their practical applications and implements. Fascism denies that numbers, as such, can be the determining factor in human society; it denies the right of numbers to govern by means of periodical consultations; it asserts the irremediable and fertile and beneficent inequality of men who cannot be leveled by any such mechanical and extrinsic device as universal suffrage. Democratic regimes may be described as those under which the people are, from time to time, deluded into the belief that they exercise sovereignty, while all the time real sovereignty resides in and is exercised by other and sometimes irresponsible and secret forces. Democracy is a kingless regime infested by many kings who are sometimes more exclusive, tyrannical, and destructive than one, even if he be a tyrant. This explains why Fascism - although, for contingent reasons, it was republican in tendency prior to 1922 - abandoned that stand before the March on Rome, convinced that the form of government is no longer a matter of preeminent importance, and because the study of past and present monarchies and past and present republics shows that neither monarchy nor republic can be judged sub specie aeternitatis, but that each stands for a form of government expressing the political evolution, the history, the traditions, and the psychology of a given country.

Fascism has outgrown the dilemma: monarchy v. republic, over which democratic regimes too long dallied, attributing all insufficiencies to the former and proning the latter as a regime of perfection, whereas experience teaches that some republics are inherently reactionary and absolut*ist while some monarchies accept the most daring political and social experiments.

In one of his philosophic Meditations Renan - who had prefascist intuitions remarks, "Reason and science are the products of mankind, but it is chimerical to seek reason directly for the people and through the people. It is not essential to the existence of reason that all should be familiar with it; and even if all had to be initiated, this could not be achieved through democracy which seems fated to lead to the extinction of all arduous forms of culture and all highest forms of learning. The maxim that society exists only for the well-being and freedom of the individuals composing it does not seem to be in conformity with nature's plans, which care only for the species and seem ready to sacrifice the individual. It is much to be feared that the last word of democracy thus understood (and let me hasten to add that it is susceptible of a different interpretation) would be a form of society in which a degenerate mass would have no thought beyond that of enjoying the ignoble pleasures of the vulgar ".

In rejecting democracy Fascism rejects the absurd conventional lie of political equalitarianism, the habit of collective irresponsibility, the myth of felicity and indefinite progress. But if democracy be understood as meaning a regime in which the masses are not driven back to the margin of the State, and then the writer of these pages has already defined Fascism as an organized, centralized, authoritarian democracy.

Fascism is definitely and absolutely opposed to the doctrines of liberalism, both in the political and the economic sphere. The importance of liberalism in the XIXth century should not be exaggerated for present day polemical purposes, nor should we make of one of the many doctrines which flourished in that century a religion for mankind for the present and for all time to come. Liberalism really flourished for fifteen years only. It arose in 1830 as a reaction to the Holy Alliance which tried to force Europe to recede further back than 1789; it touched its zenith in 1848 when even Pius IXth was a liberal. Its decline began immediately after that year. If 1848 was a year of light and poetry, 1849 was a year of darkness and tragedy. The Roman Republic was killed by a sister republic, that of France . In that same year Marx, in his famous Communist Manifesto, launched the gospel of socialism.

In 1851 Napoleon III made his illiberal coup d'etat and ruled France until 1870 when he was turned out by a popular rising following one of the severest military defeats known to history. The victor was Bismarck who never even knew the whereabouts of liberalism and its prophets. It is symptomatic that throughout the XIXth century the religion of liberalism was completely unknown to so highly civilized a people as the Germans but for one parenthesis which has been described as the “ridiculous parliament of Frankfort " which lasted just one season. Germany attained her national unity outside liberalism and in opposition to liberalism, a doctrine which seems foreign to the German temperament, essentially monarchical, whereas liberalism is the historic and logical anteroom to anarchy. The three stages in the making of German unity were the three wars of 1864, 1866, and 1870, led by such "liberals" as Moltke and Bismarck. And in the upbuilding of Italian unity liberalism played a very minor part when compared to the contribution made by Mazzini and Garibaldi who were not liberals. But for the intervention of the illiberal Napoleon III we should not have had Lombardy, and without that of the illiberal Bismarck at Sadowa and at Sedan very probably we should not have had Venetia in 1866 and in 1870 we should not have entered Rome. The years going from 1870 to 1915 cover a period which marked, even in the opinion of the high priests of the new creed, the twilight of their religion, attacked by decadentism in literature and by activism in practice. Activism: that is to say nationalism, futurism, fascism.

The liberal century, after piling up innumerable Gordian Knots, tried to cut them with the sword of the world war. Never has any religion claimed so cruel a sacrifice. Were the Gods of liberalism thirsting for blood?

Now liberalism is preparing to close the doors of its temples, deserted by the peoples who feel that the agnosticism it professed in the sphere of economics and the indifferentism of which it has given proof in the sphere of politics and morals, would lead the world to ruin in the future as they have done in the past.

This explains why all the political experiments of our day are anti-liberal, and it is supremely ridiculous to endeavor on this account to put them outside the pale of history, as though history were a preserve set aside for liberalism and its adepts; as though liberalism were the last word in civilization beyond which no one can go.

The Fascist negation of socialism, democracy, liberalism, should not, however, be interpreted as implying a desire to drive the world backwards to positions occupied prior to 1789, a year commonly referred to as that which opened the demo-liberal century. History does not travel backwards. The Fascist doctrine has not taken De Maistre as its prophet. Monarchical absolutism is of the past, and so is ecclesiolatry. Dead and done for are feudal privileges and the division of society into closed, uncommunicating castes. Neither has the Fascist conception of authority anything in common with that of a police ridden State.

A party governing a nation “totalitarianly" is a new departure in history. There are no points of reference nor of comparison. From beneath the ruins of liberal, socialist, and democratic doctrines, Fascism extracts those elements which are still vital. It preserves what may be described as "the acquired facts" of history; it rejects all else. That is to say, it rejects the idea of a doctrine suited to all times and to all people. Granted that the XIXth century was the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy, this does not mean that the XXth century must also be the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy. Political doctrines pass; nations remain. We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the " right ", a Fascist century. If the XIXth century was the century of the individual (liberalism implies individualism) we are free to believe that this is the "collective" century, and therefore the century of the State. It is quite logical for a new doctrine to make use of the still vital elements of other doctrines. No doctrine was ever born quite new and bright and unheard of. No doctrine can boast absolute originality. It is always connected, it only historically, with those which preceded it and those which will follow it. Thus the scientific socialism of Marx links up to the utopian socialism of the Fouriers, the Owens, the Saint-Simons ; thus the liberalism of the XIXth century traces its origin back to the illuministic movement of the XVIIIth, and the doctrines of democracy to those of the Encyclopaedists. All doctrines aim at directing the activities of men towards a given objective; but these activities in their turn react on the doctrine, modifying and adjusting it to new needs, or outstripping it. A doctrine must therefore be a vital act and not a verbal display. Hence the pragmatic strain in Fascism, it’s will to power, its will to live, its attitude toward violence, and its value.

The keystone of the Fascist doctrine is its conception of the State, of its essence, its functions, and its aims. For Fascism the State is absolute, individuals and groups relative. Individuals and groups are admissible in so far as they come within the State. Instead of directing the game and guiding the material and moral progress of the community, the liberal State restricts its activities to recording results. The Fascist State is wide awake and has a will of its own. For this reason it can be described as " ethical ".

At the first quinquennial assembly of the regime, in 1929, I said “The Fascist State is not a night watchman, solicitous only of the personal safety of the citizens; not is it organized exclusively for the purpose of guarantying a certain degree of material prosperity and relatively peaceful conditions of life, a board of directors would do as much. Neither is it exclusively political, divorced from practical realities and holding itself aloof from the multifarious activities of the citizens and the nation. The State, as conceived and realized by Fascism, is a spiritual and ethical entity for securing the political, juridical, and economic organization of the nation, an organization which in its origin and growth is a manifestation of the spirit. The State guarantees the internal and external safety of the country, but it also safeguards and transmits the spirit of the people, elaborated down the ages in its language, its customs, its faith. The State is not only the present; it is also the past and above all the future. Transcending the individual's brief spell of life, the State stands for the immanent conscience of the nation. The forms in which it finds expression change, but the need for it remains. The State educates the citizens to civism, makes them aware of their mission, urges them to unity; its justice harmonizes their divergent interests; it transmits to future generations the conquests of the mind in the fields of science, art, law, human solidarity; it leads men up from primitive tribal life to that highest manifes*tation of human power, imperial rule. The State hands down to future generations the memory of those who laid down their lives to ensure its safety or to obey its laws; it sets up as examples and records for future ages the names of the captains who enlarged its territory and of the men of genius who have made it famous. Whenever respect for the State declines and the disintegrating and centrifugal tendencies of individuals and groups prevail, nations are headed for decay".

Since 1929 economic and political development have everywhere emphasized these truths. The importance of the State is rapidly growing. The so-called crisis can only be settled by State action and within the orbit of the State. Where are the shades of the Jules Simons who, in the early days of liberalism proclaimed that the "State should endeavor to render itself useless and prepare to hand in its resignation "? Or of the MacCullochs who, in the second half of last century, urged that the State should desist from governing too much? And what of the English Bentham who considered that all industry asked of govern*ment was to be left alone, and of the German Humbolt who expressed the opinion that the best government was a lazy " one? What would they say now to the unceasing, inevitable, and urgently requested interventions of government in business? It is true that the second generation of economists was less uncompromising in this respect than the first, and that even Adam Smith left the door ajar - however cautiously - for government intervention in business.

If liberalism spells individualism, Fascism spells government. The Fascist State is, however, a unique and original creation. It is not reactionary but revolutionary, for it anticipates the solution of certain universal problems which have been raised elsewhere, in the political field by the splitting up of parties, the usurpation of power by parliaments, the irresponsibility of assemblies; in the economic field by the increasingly numerous and important functions discharged by trade unions and trade associations with their disputes and ententes, affecting both capital and labor; in the ethical field by the need felt for order, discipline, obedience to the moral dictates of patriotism.

Fascism desires the State to be strong and organic, based on broad foundations of popular support. The Fascist State lays claim to rule in the economic field no less than in others; it makes its action felt throughout the length and breadth of the country by means of its corporative, social, and educational institutions, and all the political, economic, and spiritual forces of the nation, organized in their res*pective associations, circulate within the State. A State based on millions of individuals who recognize its authority, feel its action, and are ready to serve its ends is not the tyrannical state of a mediaeval lordling. It has nothing in common with the despotic States existing prior to or subsequent to 1789. Far from crushing the individual, the Fascist State multiplies his energies, just as in a regiment a soldier is not diminished but multiplied by the number of his fellow soldiers.

The Fascist State organizes the nation, but it leaves the individual adequate elbow room. It has curtailed useless or harmful liberties while preserving those which are essential. In such matters the individual cannot be the judge, but the State only.

The Fascist State is not indifferent to religious phenomena in general nor does it maintain an attitude of indif*ference to Roman Catholicism, the special, positive religion of Italians. The State has not got a theology but it has a moral code. The Fascist State sees in religion one of the deepest of spiritual manifestations and for this reason it not only respects religion but defends and protects it. The Fascist State does not attempt, as did Robespierre at the height of the revolutionary delirium of the Convention, to set up a "god” of its own; nor does it vainly seek, as does Bolshevism, to efface God from the soul of man. Fascism respects the God of ascetics, saints, and heroes, and it also respects God as conceived by the ingenuous and primitive heart of the people, the God to whom their prayers are raised.

The Fascist State expresses the will to exercise power and to command. Here the Roman tradition is embodied in a conception of strength. Imperial power, as understood by the Fascist doctrine, is not only territorial, or military, or commercial; it is also spiritual and ethical. An imperial nation, that is to say a nation a which directly or indirectly is a leader of others, can exist without the need of conquering a single square mile of territory. Fascism sees in the imperialistic spirit -- i.e. in the tendency of nations to expand - a manifestation of their vitality. In the op*posite tendency, which would limit their interests to the home country, it sees a symptom of decadence. Peoples who rise or rearise are imperialistic; renunciation is characteristic of dying peoples. The Fascist doctrine is that best suited to the tendencies and feelings of a people which, like the Italian, after lying fallow during centuries of foreign servitude, are now reasserting itself in the world.

But imperialism implies discipline, the coordination of efforts, a deep sense of duty and a spirit of self-sacrifice. This explains many aspects of the practical activity of the regime, and the direction taken by many of the forces of the State, as also the severity which has to be exercised towards those who would oppose this spontaneous and inevitable movement of XXth century Italy by agitating outgrown ideologies of the XIXth century, ideologies rejected wherever great experiments in political and social transfor*mations are being dared.

Never before have the peoples thirsted for authority, direction, order, as they do now. If each age has its doctrine, then innumerable symptoms indicate that the doctrine of our age is the Fascist. That it is vital is shown by the fact that it has aroused a faith; that this faith has conquered souls is shown by the fact that Fascism can point to its fallen heroes and its martyrs.

Fascism has now acquired throughout the world that universally which belongs to all doctrines which by achieving self-expression represent a moment in the history of human thought.

APPENDIX

1. Philosophic conception

(1) If Fascism does not wish to die or, worse still, commit suicide, it must now provide itself with a doctrine. Yet this shall not and must not be a robe of Nessus clinging to us for all eternity, for tomorrow is some thing mysterious and unforeseen. This doctrine shall be a norm to guide political and individual action in our daily life.

I who have I dictated this doctrine, am the first to realize that the modest tables of our laws and program the theoretical and practical guidance of Fascism should be revised, corrected, enlarged, developed, because already in parts they have suffered injury at the hand of time. I believe the essence and fundamentals of the doctrine are still to be found in the postulates which throughout two years have acted as a call to arms for the recruits of Italian Fascism. However, in taking those first fundamental assumptions for a starting point, we must proceed to carry our program into a vaster field.

Italian Fascists, one and all, should cooperate in this task, one of vital importance to Fascism, and more especially those who belong to regions where with and without agreement peaceful coexistence has been achieved between two antagonistic movements.

The word I am about to use is a great one, but indeed I do wish that during the two months which are still to elapse before our National Assembly meets, the philosophy of Fascism could be created. Milan is already contributing with the first Fascist school of propaganda.

It is not merely a question of gathering elements for a program, to be used as a solid foundation for the constitution of a party which must inevitably arise from the Fascist movement; it is also a question of denying the silly tale that Fascism is all made up of violent men. In point of fact among Fascists there are many men who belong to the restless but meditative class.

The new course taken by Fascist activity will in no way diminish the fighting spirit typical of Fascism. To furnish the mind with doctrines and creeds does not mean to disarm, rather it signifies to strength*en our power of action, and make us ever more conscious of our work. Soldiers who fight fully conscious of the cause make the best of warriors. Fascism takes for its own the twofold device of Mazzini : Thought and Action u. (Letter to Michele Bianchi, written on August 27, 1921, for the opening of the School of Fascist Culture and Propaganda in Milan, in Messaggi e Proclami, Milano, Libreria d'Italia, 1929, P. 39).

Fascists must be placed in contact with one another; their activity must be an activity of doctrine, an activity of the spirit and of thought

Had our adversaries been present at our meeting, they would have been convinced that Fascism is not only action, but thought as well (Speech before the National Council of the Fascist Party, August 8, 1924, in La Nuova Politica dell'Italia, Milano, Alpes, 1928, p. 267).

(2) Today I hold that Fascism as an idea, a doctrine, a realization, is universal; it is Italian in its particular institutions, but it is universal in the spirit, nor could it be otherwise. The spirit is universal by reason of its nature. Therefore anyone may foresee a Fascist Europe. Drawing inspiration for her institutions from the doctrine and practice of Fascism; Europe , in other words, giving a Fascist turn to the solution of problems which beset the modern State, the Twentieth Century State which is very different from the States existing before 1789, and the States formed immediately after. Today Fascism fills universal requirements; Fascism solves the threefold problem of relations between State and individual, between State and associations, between associations and organized associations. (Message for the year 1 October 27, 1930, in Discorsi del 1930, Milano, Alpes, 1931, p. 211).

2. Spiritualized conception

(3) This political process is flanked by a philosophic process. If it be true that matter was on the altars for one century, today it is the spirit which takes its place. All manifestations peculiar to the democratic spirit are consequently repudiated: easygoingness, improvisation, the lack of a personal sense of responsibility, the exaltation of numbers and of that mysterious divinity called n The People a. All creations of the spirit starting with that religious are coming to the fore, and nobody dare keep up the attitude of anticlericalism which, for several decades, was a favorite with Democracy in the Western world. By saying that God is returning, we mean that spiritual values are returning. (Da the parte va it mondo, in Tempi della Rivoluzione Fascista, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 34).

There is a field reserved more to meditation upon the supreme ends of life than to a research of these ends. Consequently science starts from experience, but breaks out fatally into philosophy and, in my opinion, philosophy alone can enlighten science and lead to the universal idea. (To the Congress of Science at Bologna , October 31, 19,26, in Discorsi del 1926. Milano, Alpes, 1927, p. 268).

In order to understand the Fascist movement one must first appre*ciate the underlying spiritual phenomenon in all its vastness and depth. The manifestations of the movement have been of a powerful and decisive nature, but one should go further. In point of fact Italian Fascism has not only been a political revolt against weak and incapable governments who had allowed State authority to decay and were threatening to arrest the progress of the country, but also a spiritual revolt against old ideas which had corrupted the sacred principles of religion, of faith, of country. Fascism, therefore, has been a revolt of the people. (Message to the British people; January 5, 1924, in Mes*saggi e Proclami, Milano, Libreria d' Italia, 1929, p. 107).

(3) Positive conception of life as a struggle

(4) Struggle is at the origin of all things, for life is full of contrasts: there is love and hatred, white and black, day and night, good and evil; and until these contrasts achieve balance, struggle fatefully remains at the root of human nature. However, it is good for it to be so. Today we can indulge in wars, economic battles, conflicts of ideas, but if a day came to pass when struggle ceased to exist, that day would be tinged with melancholy; it would be a day of ruin, the day of ending. But that day will not come, because history ever discloses new horizons. By attempting to restore calm, peace, tranquility, or. A would be fighting the tendencies of the present period of dynamism. Ore must be prepared for other struggles and for other surprises. Peace will only come when people surrender to a Christian dream of universal brotherhood, when they can hold out hands across the ocean and over the mountains. Personally I do not believe very much in these idealisms, but I do not exclude them for I exclude nothing. (At the Politeama Rossetti, Trieste , September 20, 1920 ; in Discorsi Politici, Milano, Stab. Tipografico del « Popolo d' Italia » , 1921, p. 107).

(5) For me the honor of nations consists in the contribution they have severally made to human civilization. (E. Ludwig, Talks with Mussolini, London, Allen and Unwin, 1932, p. 199)*

4. Ethical conception

I called the organization Fasci Italiani Di combat tin onto. This hard metallic name compromised the whole program of Fascism as I dreamed it. Comrades, this is still our program: fight.

Life for the Fascist is a continuous, ceaseless fight, which we accept with ease, with great courage, with the necessary intrepidity. (C n the VIIth anniversary of the Foundation of the Fasci, March 2E, 1926, in Discorsi del 1926, Milano, Alpes, 1927, P. 98).

You touch the core of Fascist philosophy. When recently a Finnish philosopher asked me to expound to him the significance of Fascism in one sentence, I wrote in German: ((We are against the “easy, lift! a. (E. Ludwig: Talks with Mussolini, London, Allen and Unwin, 1932, p. 190).

5. Religious conception

(7) If Fascism were not a creed how could it endow its followers with courage and stoicism only a creed which has soared to the heights of religion can inspire such words as passed the lips, now lifeless alas, of Federico Florio. (Legami di Sangue, in Diuturna, Mi*lano, Alpes, 1930, p. 256).

6. Historical and realistic conception

(8) Tradition certainly is one of the greatest spiritual forces of a people, inasmuch as it is a successive and constant creation of their soul. (Breve Preludio, in Tempi della Rivoluzione Fascista, Milano, Alpes, 1930, P- 13)*

(9) Our temperament leads us to appraise the concrete aspect of problems, rather than their ideological or mystical sublimation. There*fore we easily regain our balance. (Aspetti del Dramma, in Diuturna, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 86).

Our battle is an ungrateful one, yet it is a beautiful battle since it compels us to count only upon our own forces. Revealed truths we have torn to shreds, dogmas we have spat upon, we have rejected all theories of paradise, we have baffled charlatans white, red, black charlatans who placed miraculous drugs on the market to give a happiness n to mankind. We do not believe in program, in plans, in saints or apostles, above all we believe not in happiness, in salvation, in the Promised Land. (Diuturna, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 223).

We do not believe in a single solution, be it economical, political or moral, a linear solution of the problems of life, because of illustrious choristers from all the sacristies life is not linear and can never be reduced to a segment traced by primordial needs. (Navigare necesse, in Diuturna, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 233).

(10) We are not and do not wish to be motionless mummies, with faces perpetually turned towards the same horizon, nor do we wish to shut ourselves up within the narrow hedges of subversive bigotry, where formulas, like prayers of a professed religion, are muttered mechanically. We are men, living men, who wish to give our contribution, however 'modest, to the creation of history. (Audacia, in Diu* turna, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. ')*

We uphold moral and traditional values which Socialism neglects or despises; but, above all, Fascism has a horror of anything implying an arbitrary mortgage on the mysterious future. (Dopo due anni, in Diuturna, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 242).

In spite of the theories of conservation and renovation, of tradition and progress expounded by the right and the left, we do not cling desperately to the past as to a last board of salvation: yet we do not dash headlong into the seductive mists of the future. (Breve preludio, in Diuturna, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 14). `negation, eternal immobility, mean damnation. I am all for motion. I am, one who marches on (E. Ludwig, Talks with Mussolini, Lot Jon, Allen and Unwin, 1932, p. 203).

7. The individual and liberty

(11) We were the first to state, in the face of demo liberal individualism, that the individual exists only in so far as he is within the State and subjected to the requirements of the state and that, as civilization assumes aspects which grow more and more complicated, individual freedom becomes more and more restricted. (To the General staff Conference of Fascism, in Discorsi del 1929, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 280).

The sense of the state grows within the consciousness of Italians, for they feel that the state alone is the irreplaceable safeguard of their unit and independence; that the state alone represents continuity into the future of their stock and their history. (Message on the VIIth all anniversary, October 25, 1929, Discorsi del 1929, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 3oo).

If, in the course of the past eight years, we have made such astounding progress, you may well think suppose and foresee that in the course of the next fifty or eighty years the onward trend of Italy , of this Italy we feel to be so powerful, so full of vital fluid, will really be grandiose. It will be so especially if concord lasts among citizens, if the State continues to be sole arbitrator in political and social conflicts, if all remains within the state and nothing outside the State, because it is impossible to conceive any individual existing outside the State unless he be a savage whose home is in the solitude of she sandy desert. (Speech before the Senate, May 12, 1928, in Discorsi del 1928, Milano, Alpes, 1929, p. 109).

Fascism has restored to the State its sovereign functions by claiming its absolute ethical meaning, against the egotism of classes and categories; to the Government of the state, which was reduced to a mere instrument of electoral assemblies, it has restored dignity, as representing the personality of the state and its power of Empire. It has rescued State administration from the weight of factions and party interests (To the council of state, December 22, 1928, in Discorsi Del 1928, Milano, Alpes, 1929 p.328).

(12) Let no one think of denying the moral character of Fascism. For I should be ashamed to speak from this tribune if I did not feel that I represent the moral and spiritual powers of the state. What would the state be if it did not possess a spirit of its own, and a morality of its own, which lend power to the laws in virtue of which the state is obeyed by its citizens?

The Fascist state claims its ethical character: it is Catholic but above all it is Fascist, in fact it is exclusively and essentially Fascist. Catholicism completes Fascism, and this we openly declare, but let no one think they can turn the tables on us, under cover of metaphysics or philosophy. (To the Chamber of Deputies, May 13, 1929, in Discorsi del 1929, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 182).

A State which is fully aware of its mission and represents a people which are marching on; a state which necessarily transforms the people even in their physical aspect. In order to be something more than a mere administrator, the State must utter great words, expound great ideas and place great problems before this people (Di* scorsi del 1929, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 183).

(13) The concept of freedom is not absolute because nothing is ever absolute in life. Freedom is not a right, it is a duty. It is not a gift, it is a conquest; it is not equality, it is a privilege. The concept of freedom changes with the passing of time. There is a freedom in times of peace which is not the freedom of times of war. There is a freedom in times of prosperity which is not a freedom to be allowed in times of poverty. (Fifth anniversary of the foundation of the Fasci di Contbattimento, March 24, 1924, in La nuova politica dell'Italia, vol. III, Milano, Alpes, 1925, p. 30).

In our state the individual is not deprived of freedom. In fact, he has greater liberty than an isolated man, because the state protects him and he is part of the State. Isolated man is without defence. (E. Ludwig, Talks with Mussolini, London, Allen and Unwin, 1932, P. 129).

(14) Today we may tell the world of the creation of the powerful united State of Italy, ranging from the Alps to Sicily; this State is expressed by a well-organized, centralized, Unitarian democracy, where people circulate at case. Indeed, gentlemen, you admit the people into the citadel of the State and the people will defend it, if you close them out, the people will assault it. (speech before the Chamber of Deputies, May 26, 1927 , in Discorsi del 1927, Milano, Alpes, 1928, p. 159).

In the Fascist regime the unity of classes, the political, social and coral unity of the Italian people is realized within the state, and only within the Fascist state. (speech before the Chamber of Deputies, December 9, 1928 , in Discorsi del 1928, Milano, Alpes, 1929, p. 333).

8. Conception of a corporative state

(15) We have created the united state of Italy remember that since the Empire Italy had not been a united state. Here I wish to reaffirm solemnly our doctrine of the State. Here I wish to reaffirm with no weaker energy, the formula I expounded at the scala in Milan everything in the state, nothing against the State, nothing outside the state. (speech before the Chamber of Deputies, May 26, 1927 , Discorsi del 1927, Milano, Alpes, 1928, p. t57).

(16) We are, in other words, a state which controls all forces acting in nature. We control political forces, we control moral forces we control economic forces, therefore we are a full-blown Corporative state. We stand for a new principle in the world, we stand for sheer, categorical, definitive antithesis to the world of democracy, plutocracy, free-masonry, to the world which still abides by the fundamental principles laid down in 1789. (Speech before the new Na*tional Directory of the Party, April 7, 1926, in Discorsi del 1926, Milano, Alpes, 1927, p. 120).

The Ministry of Corporations is not a bureaucratic organ, nor does it wish to exercise the functions of syndical organizations which are necessarily independent, since they aim at organizing, selecting and improving the members of syndicates. The Ministry of Corporations is an institution in virtue of which, in the centre and outside, integral corporation becomes an accomplished fact, where balance is achieved between interests and forces of the economic world. Such a glance is only possible within the sphere of the state, because the state alone transcends the contrasting interests of groups and individuals, in view of co-coordinating them to achieve higher aims. The achievement of these aims is speeded up by the fact that all economic organizations, acknowledged, safeguarded and supported by the Corpo*rative State, exist within the orbit of Fascism; in other terms they accept the conception of Fascism in theory and in practice. (speech at the opening of the Ministry of Corporations, July 31, 1926, in Di*scorsi del 1926, Milano, Alpes, 1927, p. 250).

We have constituted a Corporative and Fascist state, the state of national society, a State which concentrates, controls, harmonizes and tempers the interests of all social classes, which are thereby protected in equal measure. Whereas, during the years of demo-liberal regime, labour looked with diffidence upon the state, was, in fact, outside the State and against the state, and considered the state an enemy of every day and every hour, there is not one working Italian today who does not seek a place in his Corporation or federation, who does not wish to be a living atom of that great, immense, living organization which is the national Corporate State of Fascism. (On the Fourth Anniversary of the March on Rome, October 28, 1926, in Discorsi del 1926, Milano, Alpes, 1927, p. 340).

9. Democracy

(17) The war was revolutionary, in the sense that with streams of blood it did away with the century of Democracy, the century of number, the century of majorities and of quantities. (Da the pane va it Mondo, in Tempi della Rivoluzione Fascista, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 37)*

(18) Cf. note 13.

(19) Race: it is a feeling and not a reality; 95 %, a feeling. (E. Ludwig, Talks with Mussolini, London, Allen and Unwin, 1932, p. 75).

10. Conception of the state

(20) A nation exists inasmuch as it is a people. A people rise inasmuch as they are numerous, hard working and well regulated. Power is the outcome of this threefold principle. (To the General Assembly of the Party, March lo, 1929, in Discorsi del 1929, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 24).

Fascism does not deny the State; Fascism maintains that a civic society, national or imperial, cannot be conceived unless in the form of a State (Stab, anti-Slato, Fascismo, in Tempi della Rivoluzione Fa*scista, Milano, Alpes, 1930, p. 94).

For us the Nation is mainly spirit and not only territory. There are States which owned immense territories and yet left no trace in the history of mankind. Neither is it a question of number, because there have been, in history, small, microscopic States, which left immortal, imperishable documents in art and philosophy.

The greatness of a nation is the compound of all these virtues and conditions. A nation is great when the power of the spirit is translated into reality. (Speech at Naples, October 24, 1922, in Discorsi della Rivoluzione, Milano, Alpes, 1928, p. 103). We wish to unity the nation within the sovereign State, which is above everyone arid can afford to be against everyone, since it represents the moral continuity of the nation in history. Without the State there is no nation. There are, merely. human aggregations. subject to all the disintegration's which history may inflict upon them. (Speech before the National Council of the Fascist Party, August 8, 1924, in La Nuova Politica dell'Italia, vol. III; Milano, Alpes, 1928, p. 269).

Dynamic reality

(21) I believe that if a people wish to live they should develop a will to power, otherwise they vegetate, live miserably and become prey to a stronger people, in whom this will to power is developed to a higher degree. (Speech to the Senate, May 28, 1926).

(22) It is Fascism which has refashioned the character of the Italians, removing impurity from our souls, tempering us to all sacrifices, restoring the true aspect of strength and beauty to our Italian face. (Speech delivered at Pisa , May 25, 1926 , in Discorsi del 1926, Milano, Alpes, 1927, p. 193).

It is not out of place to illustrate the intrinsic character and profound significance of the Fascist Levy. It is not merely a ceremony, but a very important stage in the system of education and integral preparation of Italian men which the Fascist revolution considers one of the fundamental duties of the State: fundamental indeed, for if the State does not fulfill this duty or in any way accepts to place it under discussion, the State merely and simply forfeits its right to exist. (Speech before the Chamber of Deputies, May 28, 1928, in Discorsi del 1928, Milano, Alpes, 1929, p. 68).



taken from this http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/R...ni.htm#APPENDIX (http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm#APPENDIX) wonderful reactionary website, but obviously public domain since the full text can be found on many websites.

Edelweiss
20th December 2004, 09:28
Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 09:03 PM
everybody gets offended by something.

the nazis arose during Germany's crisis in capitalism, same as bush. They're both fascists, cop on.
Well, fuck you, asshole! You are totally missing the point here. It doesn't matter if the US in the current state can be called fascist, or not. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about foolish US-Nazi comparisons. I'm shocked how many "leftists" us this comparisons without thinking about it. It's just wrong. It's unhistorical, and it's blatantly playing down the Nazi crimes. It's helping the Nazi scum to Nazi crimes to relativate their crimes. If you can't see that, stop calling yourself a leftist. Have the US commited an idustrialized genocide which has killed more than 6 million people for nothing more than pure ideolgical reasons? Are the US war crimes remotely comparabe to those of the SS and the Wehrmacht? Is the 2nd world war in general comparable to the imperilalist wars of the US? I would like to advice many here to think better before writingsome nonsense.

Ian
20th December 2004, 10:20
HAHA LOL LOL I LOVE THIS AMERKKKA IS TEH FASH

chebol
20th December 2004, 10:46
I'm not going to fully engage in this debate at the moment (I'm on holiday with limited access to the net for about another week), but just a quick point or two.

Malte, I agree, it's a mistake to directly equate Nazi=US, and there is an interesting debate about whether the US is fascist or proto-fascist, but I'm disturbed that you might be belittling US crimes in relation to Nazi ones. I'm half-german, and recognise the need for a balanced appraisal of the rise of Nazism, but it's important to keep a larger historical perspective too.
Korean war- c. 4 million dead
Vietnam war- c. 3 million dead
Iraq war 04- 100,000 dead
Iraq sanctions- 500,000 children dead over 12 years (not to mention others)
etc etc etc.
The US has been dirfectly responsible for millions of deaths as well- and these are clearly crimes. Whether this is as the result of fascism is another story. Capitalism is continually causing the death and suffering of millions worldwide, and the US serves to protect this system without being the full extent of it.
But aside from the indirect crimes against humanity caused by the US (fascist or not), there has been a clear and undeniable thread of direct responsibility of the US itself in the deliberate murder of milions of people in the last 50 years alone.

In response to your last three questions; in reverse- not really, yes, and the crimes of Nazi germany were not merely ideological.
Will say more later.
chiao

P.S. It would actually be useful (and interesting) to see a proper debate on how "fascist" the US is or is becoming (rather than "NAZI", which is an historically limited term which cannot apply to present-day US)

P.P.S. The use of the swastika is a different story, as it evokes not only nazi germany bu the general idea of fascist horror, and can be employed as a symbol of sucH)

Ok I'm really going this time.

Dio
20th December 2004, 12:35
Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 01:46 PM
I fucking hate those unhistorical, and simply tasteles US-Nazi comparisons. Being a German, I feel offended by it. Cuba should stop with such cheap propaganda tricks. Comparing the US to Nazi Germany, is blatantly playing down the Nazi crimes. I can't understand anybody cheering such foolishness.
Wether or not you think its "unhistorical" and/or "tasteless" is arbitrary. Abu Gharib did happen and much of the propoganda schemes were modeled from Nazi manuals.

RedAnarchist
20th December 2004, 12:38
Both Nazi Third Reich (i dont think we should call that monstrosity Germany as the German people were oppressed by it as much as anyone) and the United States are as bad as one another. Maybe the Americans have taken a few leaves out of the Nazi book, but they are certainly not Nazis. Fascism comes in many disguises, and it is up to us on the left to tear off the camoflage and destroy each and every type of Fascism in existence.

Edelweiss
20th December 2004, 15:01
Originally posted by Dio+Dec 20 2004, 02:35 PM--> (Dio @ Dec 20 2004, 02:35 PM)
[email protected] 18 2004, 01:46 PM
I fucking hate those unhistorical, and simply tasteles US-Nazi comparisons. Being a German, I feel offended by it. Cuba should stop with such cheap propaganda tricks. Comparing the US to Nazi Germany, is blatantly playing down the Nazi crimes. I can't understand anybody cheering such foolishness.
Wether or not you think its "unhistorical" and/or "tasteless" is arbitrary. Abu Gharib did happen and much of the propoganda schemes were modeled from Nazi manuals. [/b]
So??? The lack of political consciousness of some of you kids here is disgusting! Is Abu Gharib in any way comparable to the holocaust? Of course not! I urge you to stop all Nazi-US comparisons, I think I have given you enough reaons. Don't get me wrong, I don't wanna defend the US, but things like in Abu Gharib happen in every fucking war of the world. Just like propaganda is part of every war. It hasn't do anything with Nazism!

NoiseUnited
20th December 2004, 15:31
while you're looking up Fascism you may want to run by Godwin's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_Law)

h&s
21st December 2004, 15:20
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
Well thats fucking insightful isn't it?
I bet it takes a university degree to work that out?
Just like 'the sky is blue' does. :rolleyes:



Wether or not you think its "unhistorical" and/or "tasteless" is arbitrary. Abu Gharib did happen and much of the propoganda schemes were modeled from Nazi manuals.
Did you even read the post you were replying to? Regardless of whether or not the toture at abu-Ghraib (or any other US run prison in Iraq for that matter) had any likeness to Nazi prisons, the very fact that you compare a small-scale thing like that to the Holocaust plays down what actually happened in the Holocaust. The murder of 6,000,000 Jews, gipsys, and countless millions of others on the Eastern front to a few guys being beaten/killed in prisons do not compare to each other. Comparing the two is disrespectful to the victims of the Holocaust.

dso79
21st December 2004, 18:48
Even though there are similarities between the Nazis and the Yanks, each regime should be analyzed separately; comparing them doesn't serve any purpose.


Well, fuck you, asshole!

I know you have a bit of a temper problem when it comes to Nazism, Malte, but by flaming and insulting people who have a different opinion you are destroying this community. If you're unable to show some respect it's better not to say anything at all.

Dio
21st December 2004, 21:45
In terms of genocide, U.S. history in that aspect overwhelms Nazi Germany's history. However i wasn't equating U.S. with the Nazis. Ill just stop before everyone gets pissed and says im not marxist enough, or something.

Paradox
22nd December 2004, 00:14
Not to interrupt your "friendly" discussion about amerikan and nazi comparisons, but while the u.$. has its display criticizing Cuba locking up political dissidents, ironically enough, the ACLU comes up with FBI memos detailing acts of torture against prisoners held in Guantanamo Bay. HA HA HA!!! I love this!!! They're criticizing Cuba and all the while, they're abusing prisoners IN Cuba!!! The FBI memos listed acts including strangulation, beatings, and inserting LIT cigarettes INTO prisoners' ears!!! The memos even went so far as to call the interrogation processes used as "torture." And these memos are old. I think they said more than a year old, so they've known about these acts for quite some time, only they wouldn't be calling for an investigation on them now, had the ACLU not found the memos.


Malte, I agree, it's a mistake to directly equate Nazi=US, and there is an interesting debate about whether the US is fascist or proto-fascist, but I'm disturbed that you might be belittling US crimes in relation to Nazi ones. I'm half-german, and recognise the need for a balanced appraisal of the rise of Nazism, but it's important to keep a larger historical perspective too.
Korean war- c. 4 million dead
Vietnam war- c. 3 million dead
Iraq war 04- 100,000 dead
Iraq sanctions- 500,000 children dead over 12 years (not to mention others)
etc etc etc.
The US has been directly responsible for millions of deaths as well- and these are clearly crimes.

Let us not forget about the acts against the Native peoples. A population estimated to be between 5 and 15 million dropped to some 250,000 by 1769. I think I remember reading that hitler based his final solution idea on the amerikans' treatment of the Indians. I mean let's face it, reservations were nothing more than concentration camps. And many still are, just read about Pine Ridge, or take a drive through Arizona and look at the poverty of the Apache reservations. Still, it's probably a stretch to say the u.$. is exactly the same as nazi germany.

fuerzasocialista
22nd December 2004, 03:26
What was carried out against the Native Americans and the Africans on US soil constitutes acts of genocide in every sense. When the African slave trade started (because of the dwindling Indian population, they needes to enslave others to do the work), Christianity was used as an ideological front and "purpose" for the importation of "savage negroes". A prisoner in Abu Graib that suffered through the torture would have no problem in making a connection between what Hitler did to the Jews and what Bush is doing to them as we speak. Only difference now is that the Iraqis can fight back and have been doing so. Is the US's agenda as blatant as the Nazi's with presenting a final solution? No. While there is carnage in the streets of Iraq, the US media and gov. always find a way of sugar coating it. However, what they tell us is one thing and what we see is another. Is Bush bent on killing every last Iraqi? No. His real desire is to set up a puppet government and a puppet democracy. However, how many people is he willing to kill on both sides in order to achieve that is the real question. We have no idea how many Iraqis have died till this date as a result of this illegal and criminal intervention on behalf of the US. I do not doubt that this number is rapidly approaching genocidal figures. Point is that if you have been oppressed by the US and more of your people are being murdered everyday as a result of this oppression, its not unjust to equate the US as another Nazi regime.

PRC-UTE
22nd December 2004, 06:06
Malte: Well, fuck you, asshole!

Grow up.


You are totally missing the point here. It doesn't matter if the US in the current state can be called fascist, or not. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about foolish US-Nazi comparisons. I'm shocked how many "leftists" us this comparisons without thinking about it. It's just wrong. It's unhistorical, and it's blatantly playing down the Nazi crimes. It's helping the Nazi scum to Nazi crimes to relativate their crimes. If you can't see that, stop calling yourself a leftist. Have the US commited an idustrialized genocide which has killed more than 6 million people for nothing more than pure ideolgical reasons? Are the US war crimes remotely comparabe to those of the SS and the Wehrmacht? Is the 2nd world war in general comparable to the imperilalist wars of the US? I would like to advice many here to think better before writingsome nonsense.

You're the one 'totally missing the point here'. We're talking about a current event, you're flying off the handle about an historical comparison used to condemn America's genocide in Iraq. Get a grip. There are many comparisons between the current US regime and the Nazis, but no one on this board said they're literally the same.


Malte: So??? The lack of political consciousness of some of you kids here is disgusting! Is Abu Gharib in any way comparable to the holocaust? Of course not! I urge you to stop all Nazi-US comparisons, I think I have given you enough reaons. Don't get me wrong, I don't wanna defend the US, but things like in Abu Gharib happen in every fucking war of the world. Just like propaganda is part of every war. It hasn't do anything with Nazism!

Things like abu gharib don't happen in every war, don't whitewash it you selective pos.


H&s:
the very fact that you compare a small-scale thing like that to the Holocaust plays down what actually happened in the Holocaust. The murder of 6,000,000 Jews, gipsys, and countless millions of others on the Eastern front to a few guys being beaten/killed in prisons do not compare to each other. Comparing the two is disrespectful to the victims of the Holocaust.

Take your silly shite to the philosophy board. No one here is insulting the dead.

There weren't a few guys killed, there were many killed in Abu Gahrib, btw. And what about the huge number of Iraqis murdered by sanctions? That was a genocide by any standard.

chebol
22nd December 2004, 07:15
Guaranteed to stir things up some more...

IRAQ: Fallujah to become concentration camp
Doug Lorimer
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2004/610/610p16b.htm

The US military is discussing plans to turn the Iraqi city of Fallujah into a giant concentration camp. Most of the city's 300,000 residents were driven out by a massive US bombing campaign in the week prior to an invasion by 10,000 US marine and army troops on November 8.

The December 5 Boston Globe reported that US commanders plan to turn Fallujah into a “model city” : “Under the plans, {US} troops would funnel Fallujans to so-called citizen processing centers on the outskirts of the city to compile a database of their identities through DNA testing and retina scans. Residents would receive badges displaying their home addresses that they must wear at all times. Buses would ferry them into the city, where cars, the deadliest tool of suicide bombers, would be banned.”

The plans call for “all men to work, for pay, in military-style battalions”, the Globe reported, adding that: “To accomplish those goals, [US commanders] think they will have to use coercive measures allowed under martial law imposed last month by [puppet Iraqi] Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.”

According to the Globe, US commanders say they want to make Fallujah into a “model city” where “they can maintain the security that has eluded them elsewhere” in Iraq.

The Globe reported that “US marine commanders cautioned against raising hopes that Fallujans would warmly welcome [US] troops when they return to ruined houses and rubble-strewn streets”. They acknowledged that “many Fallujans were among the [resistance] fighters who ruled the city until the US assault drove them out in November”.

US commanders say they will soon start organising the return of the refugees to Fallujah. However, a month after US commanders declared they had “secured” control over the bombed-out city, there are still intense battles there.

On December 5, CNN reported that US commanders had ordered the Iraqi Red Crescent to withdraw from the city after “an intense firefight raged for hours” about 300 metres from the IRC's headquarters in downtown Fallujah on December 3.

When he declared on November 16 that the battle for Fallujah was over, US Marine General John Sattler, said 51 US troops had died in the reoccupation of the city. Since then, the US military has imposed a virtual news blackout on what is happening in the city, including on the number of continuing US military casualties. However, on December 7, General John Abizaid, commander of all US forces in the Middle East, told reporters in Washington that 71 US troops had been killed in Fallujah since November 8.

From Green Left Weekly, December 15, 2004

Commie Rat
22nd December 2004, 07:20
thats fuked

Edelweiss
22nd December 2004, 10:15
It's still shocking to see how some of you seem to resistant against all arguments me or h&s. Comapring the US to Nazi Germany is plain bullshit. Especially when it's used for own political propaganda purposes. It's a proof of political sillyness. It's simple as as that. Noone so far was able to really justify that comparison, because it's a cheap, polemic statement on the back of all victims of the Nazi terror, it's a disgusting relativization of the Nazi crimes. If you are not able understand that, go fuck yourself.
OglachMcGlinchey, and other "leftists" here trying to defend Us-Nazi comparisons, listen and learn: The holocaust, and Nazi Germany in general where a unique historical event, which can not be compared to anything before and after. Never in human history before, and after, has happned such an industrialized genocide because of pure, ideological reasons, an ideology of race delusion, and anti-semitism. All genocides (and what is happening in Iraq is even far away fom being called a genocide, although people like OglachMcGlinchey are not realizing it, crimes as the US have comitted are happening in every war on both sides, if you say othewise, you are a naive fool!) before and after have happned because of interests, which can not be justified, but which can be at least be explained (soil, resources etc), just like the genocide of the US on the native Americans. It was a geocide which happened during several centuries, and was not planned like the holocaust.
And now where you have learned that, and understand the unique dimension of Nazi Germany, all you kids please just stop using Nazi-US comparisons, stop waving US flags with swastikas, stop cheering for stupid Cuban propaganda, stop helping our enemies by mking a fool out of yourself. Thank you.

dso79
22nd December 2004, 13:09
Nazi Germany may have been unique, but does that make it worse? Is an industrialized, systematic genocide worse than an unsystematic one? For the victims it doesn't matter how many other victims there are or why they are being tortured and killed.



All genocides before and after have happned because of interests, which can not be justified, but which can be at least be explained (soil, resources etc), just like the genocide of the US on the native Americans.

That's not a good explanation. It's not necessary to commit a genocide just to capture some resources. Racial hatred often plays a role as well. Besides, the Nazis also reckoned that getting rid of the Jews would be in their best interest. The reason why they killed them was the same as the reason why the Americans killed the Natives: it was the easiest way to get them off 'their' land. If deporting the Jews had been easier, they would have done that (they had already considered deporting them to Madagascar).


crimes as the US have comitted are happening in every war on both sides

That doesn't make them any less horrible.



I still believe that all regimes and all events, whether it's the holocaust, the Abu Ghraib scandal or the bombing of Dresden, should be analyzed separately.

dso79
22nd December 2004, 15:56
This is also quite interesting. While Malte considers Nazi comparisons insulting to Jews and holocaust victims, some Jews seem to disagree: Settlers opposed to Sharon's disengagement plan compare the evacuation of settlements in Gaza to the holocaust and have begun wearing stars similar to the ones that Jews were forced to wear by the Nazis.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4115505.stm

I have also read reports about Jewish politicians accusing other Jewish politicians of being anti-semites in Israel.

Any comments?

Edelweiss
22nd December 2004, 16:28
Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 05:56 PM
This is also quite interesting. While Malte considers Nazi comparisons insulting to Jews and holocaust victims, some Jews seem to disagree: Settlers opposed to Sharon's disengagement plan compare the evacuation of settlements in Gaza to the holocaust and have begun wearing stars similar to the ones that Jews were forced to wear by the Nazis.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4115505.stm

I have also read reports about Jewish politicians accusing other Jewish politicians of being anti-semites in Israel.

Any comments?
It's just the same bullshit, I wouldn't make any difference.

Dio
22nd December 2004, 16:32
I guess "politics" as you state it is in the eye of the beholder. I think its completley incorrect to state that all previous genocides were for pure interest reasons.

Edelweiss
22nd December 2004, 17:33
Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 06:32 PM
I guess "politics" as you state it is in the eye of the beholder. I think its completley incorrect to state that all previous genocides were for pure interest reasons.
Well, not pure, there of course always has been ideological or religous aspects of genocides. But such a "well planned", industrialized (I know I'm repeating myself, but I want you all to understand this, this is just a pretty important topic for me)genocide on the own population, in such dimensions like the holocaust was, for nothing than ideological reasons and without any interests that can be explained rationally, is unique in history. I think every historian will agree there with me.

PRC-UTE
22nd December 2004, 18:48
and what is happening in Iraq is even far away fom being called a genocide, although people like OglachMcGlinchey are not realizing it, crimes as the US have comitted are happening in every war on both sides, if you say othewise, you are a naive fool!)


In the past 12 years, as many as 1 million to 2 million Iraqis may have died as a result of the sanctions, many of them children under the age of 5. This is more than were massacred in Rwanda in 1994, and on a par with the Armenian Holocaust of 1915-1919. UNICEF officials estimated in 2000 that 5,000 to 6,000 Iraqi children were dying each month primarily due to sanctions.

Source (http://www.geocities.com/iraqinfo/index.html?page=/iraqinfo/sanctions/sarticles10/aregenocide.htm)

You sound almost as bad as the Israelis, insisting that nothing else is a genocide, the Nazi genocide is 'special'. The Germans weren't even the first to use them, the English were.

In some ways the US has been worse in Iraq; they are using shells that are full of radiation, which has caused cancer in Iraq to skyrocket, I heard one estimate that said cancer had risen by 1000%! And that won't go away for several hundered thousand years.

And thanks for successfully hijacking a discussion about US crimes and their hyporcritcal denunciation of Cuba.

Edelweiss
22nd December 2004, 20:29
Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 08:48 PM

and what is happening in Iraq is even far away fom being called a genocide, although people like OglachMcGlinchey are not realizing it, crimes as the US have comitted are happening in every war on both sides, if you say othewise, you are a naive fool!)


In the past 12 years, as many as 1 million to 2 million Iraqis may have died as a result of the sanctions, many of them children under the age of 5. This is more than were massacred in Rwanda in 1994, and on a par with the Armenian Holocaust of 1915-1919. UNICEF officials estimated in 2000 that 5,000 to 6,000 Iraqi children were dying each month primarily due to sanctions.

Source (http://www.geocities.com/iraqinfo/index.html?page=/iraqinfo/sanctions/sarticles10/aregenocide.htm)

You sound almost as bad as the Israelis, insisting that nothing else is a genocide, the Nazi genocide is 'special'. The Germans weren't even the first to use them, the English were.

In some ways the US has been worse in Iraq; they are using shells that are full of radiation, which has caused cancer in Iraq to skyrocket, I heard one estimate that said cancer had risen by 1000%! And that won't go away for several hundered thousand years.

And thanks for successfully hijacking a discussion about US crimes and their hyporcritcal denunciation of Cuba.
Well okay, to be honest I wasn't thinking of the results of the US embargo when I said there is no genocide in Iraq, I was thinking about the actual US war on Iraq now. If the figures are correct, you may call it a genocide.
However, the fact remains that US-Nazi comparisons shouldn't be made by any reasonable leftist for the reasons I have given you anough now. There are much better ways to agitate against the US politics!

PRC-UTE
22nd December 2004, 20:50
Well okay, to be honest I wasn't thinking of the results of the US embargo when I said there is no genocide in Iraq, I was thinking about the actual US war on Iraq now. If the figures are correct, you may call it a genocide.
However, the fact remains that US-Nazi comparisons shouldn't be made by any reasonable leftist for the reasons I have given you anough now. There are much better ways to agitate against the US politics!

Fair enough, I can see that you would be sensitive about the term and it should not be thrown around lightly either.

Guerrilla22
23rd December 2004, 04:06
Maybe the swastika was a little over the top, but I don't see why you people are all up in arms over it. THe USA has murdered far more people than Germany ever did. If you don't think so, you need to study history. Take for example the American holocaust, the genocide of countless indigenous peoples in the United States since the sixteenth centruy and the continuing crimes against the country's (tiny) surviving indigenous population today?


What about the dropping of the atomic bombs, and the fire bombing of Toyko? What about the CIA led intevention in Latin America and the School of the Americas that led to hundreds of thousands of innocent civillians getting killed? Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of civillian deaths in the Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraqi wars.

Yazman
23rd December 2004, 07:12
Malte, how about the millions of leftist latin american civilians the US has had killed over the past few decades, because the US government doesn't like their political beliefs? You wouldn't call that mass genocide purely for ideological reasons? There have been MUCH worse events in history than the holocaust. Now I'm not downplaying anti-semitic genocide, I'm simply saying that you shouldn't sit there and say stuff like "oh well native americans being killed is nowhere near as bad because it wasn't INDUSTRIALISED!"

..and please Malte, leave the insults out of the forum. They serve no purpose but to propagate anger and hatred here. If you want to flame people, create a seperate forum to do it, but please leave it out of this community because it is nothing but useless here.

h&s
23rd December 2004, 09:22
Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 04:06 AM
Maybe the swastika was a little over the top, but I don't see why you people are all up in arms over it. THe USA has murdered far more people than Germany ever did. If you don't think so, you need to study history. Take for example the American holocaust, the genocide of countless indigenous peoples in the United States since the sixteenth centruy and the continuing crimes against the country's (tiny) surviving indigenous population today?



I know that the US has murdered a hell of a lot of people, but lets put that into perspective. As you say, the US led genocides started in the 16th century. The second world war started in 1939, leading to tens of millions of deaths in under a decade, at the whim of just one man. The 'Final Solution' was thought up in 1941 - thats 6 million people dead in just 3 and a half years.


What about the dropping of the atomic bombs, and the fire bombing of Toyko?
Any other country would have done the same thing. When it comes to world wars, no side is innocent from commiting horrific acts - its not just America that is guilty of this.


how about the millions of leftist latin american civilians the US has had killed over the past few decades, because the US government doesn't like their political beliefs? You wouldn't call that mass genocide
That is not genocide (not saying it isn't wrong though). Genocide is the killing of people because of their race, not their political opinion.

Edelweiss
23rd December 2004, 11:47
Nazi Germany may have been unique, but does that make it worse? Is an industrialized, systematic genocide worse than an unsystematic one?

Yes, indeed it is. If you can't see that i feel sorry for you.


There have been MUCH worse events in history than the holocaust.

Really? Name one!


The reason why they killed them was the same as the reason why the Americans killed the Natives: it was the easiest way to get them off 'their' land. If deporting the Jews had been easier, they would have done that (they had already considered deporting them to Madagascar).

Now you are really shocking me. Spearding anti-semitic myths like the deportation to Madagaska here at RL like some Nazi. Just get it. there was no "rational" explanation for the holocaust at all. It wasn't about soil" at all, like it was with the genocide on the native americans, it was about the planned purge of a whole ethnicity.

But forget about it, you all simply fail to understand what I was trying to say you. Just keep on with your stupid Nazi-US comparison, our enemies will applaud you for that. Your ignorance is really disgusting.
BTW Guerrilla22: What is your stupid avatar implying? I guess it means that Bush is controlled by Israel, again anti-semitic world conspiracy theories at it's best.

Sorry for being so emotinal on this one, and sorry for the flaming, but I'm just shocked about the degree of poltical stupidity and nonsensitiveness here.

dso79
23rd December 2004, 14:41
Nazi Germany may have been unique, but does that make it worse? Is an industrialized, systematic genocide worse than an unsystematic one?



Yes, indeed it is. If you can't see that i feel sorry for you

Why? For the victims it doesn't matter. Saying one massacre is worse than other massacres is disrespectful towards the victims of other purges. Every violation of human rights is a tragedy in itself.


Now you are really shocking me. Spearding anti-semitic myths like the deportation to Madagaska here at RL like some Nazi.

I don't believe that's an anti-semitic myth. The plan is mentioned on several different websites, including those belonging to Jewish organizations such as Yad Vashem and Simon Wiesenthal Centre:

Madagascar plan (http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/text/x15/xm1550.html)

Sometimes such sites are nazi-sites-in-disguise, so I also looked it up in Hebrew (wikipedia):

תוכנית מדגסקר (http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%94%D7%99%D7%94%D7%95%D7%93%D7%99%D7%9D_%D7%91% D7%A4%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%9F_%D7%94%D7%9B%D7%91%D 7%95%D7%A9%D7%94)

As far as I know the Nazis came up with several different possible solutions to 'the Jewish question', such as deporting them (they were already doing that) and sterilization. The actual holocaust didn't start until 1941, I think.


BTW Guerrilla22: What is your stupid avatar implying? I guess it means that Bush is controlled by Israel, again anti-semitic world conspiracy theories at it's best.

Bullshit. Zionists do have a lot of influence on US policies. Exposing them isn't anti-semitic in any way. Nobody said (or implied) anything about a global Jewish conspiracy.

Edelweiss
23rd December 2004, 15:00
Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 04:41 PM
Bullshit. Zionists do have a lot of influence on US policies. Exposing them isn't anti-semitic in any way. Nobody said (or implied) anything about a global Jewish conspiracy.
I do not deny that zionists have influenece on the US foreign politics, but much more influenece have the US Chriatian evangelicanians about the US Israel policies. The avatar is just saying that Bush is obeying to Israel and the Jews in geneeral which is just anti-semitic conspiracy bullshit, in fact it's just the way round, Israel is totally dependent of the US.
I don't deny either that there have been plans of the deporatation of the Jews to Madagaskar, but as you may have noticed, they never where never implemented, instead the Nazis decided for the more radical solution; to purge all jews as a whole. Not beacsue it was "easier" (sic) for them, but because they seeked a "final" solution of the "Jewsish question". The way you are defending the Nazis by saying thhey would "just" have deported them if they would have only the chance, is again twisting historical facts, and again insulting the victims of the Nazis.
And I agree, for the victims it doesn't matter why they have died in a genocide. But historically and morally it DOES matter wheter a genocide was the result of one civilisation driving out the other like in the US with the native Americans, and as it has happned over and over again in human history, or like in Nazi germany, where a genocide was systematic, planned over just a few years and reached a level of "perfection" like in no other genocide before and after. Damn you, why the fuck can't you understand thi simple fact, and why still can't you understand why all comparisons of the Us and nazi Germany are just wrong?

RedAnarchist
23rd December 2004, 15:12
Zionists are not Jewish. They believe in some warped Judaism that advocates a Jewish state. They are the Jewish equivalent of Islamic fundamentalists - they take the religion they claim to belive in and warp and twist it into some evil idea that is even worse than the original reactionary religion.

The US is nowhere near Nazi Third Reich. Bush is no Hitler. Yes, hes reactionary, religious, a prick, a liar and a rascist, but he pales in comparison to Hitler. Hitler was so evil i doubt he was even human.

fuerzasocialista
23rd December 2004, 15:34
Bush is no Hitler. But he is just as scorned by the people he is dropping bombs on. Thats where the comparison comes from. To dismiss Cuba's attempt in reminding the world of what happened in Abu Graib as bullshit propaganda is unjust considering the fact that the US interests section put the "75" along with their christmas decorations without any provocation by the Cuban government. This was Cuba's answer; "Looks who's talking".

Dio
23rd December 2004, 16:01
What about the African Slave Trade? I think that had more killed than the holocaust, for both ideological and interest reasons. I could be wrong.

refuse_resist
23rd December 2004, 17:20
Hitler was actually very much influenced by the actions of America and England. There is no doubt about it. As a boy he was obsessed with the American wild west and with cowboys and indians. He even had officers on the eastern front carry around this book with them written by Karl May, who created a fictional American character in his books called Old Shatterhand, which was a cowboy who always fought and won against Native Americans. He also referred to the Russians as Redskins.

Also, Hitler quoted a lot from the bible and was heavily influenced by religion, like what Americans had done in order to justify Manifest Destiny as well as the enslavement and extermination of many indigenous peoples. One of the heads of the American military, General William Boykin, is a well known evangalical Christian. He has gone on to say that the war of terror is really a "Christian crusade against satanic forces" and that America is a Christian nation. When talking about his experience battling a Muslim warlord in Somalia he said "I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol." Bush himself talked about how god instructed him to strike and bin Laden and Saddam Hussein because he felt he was acting in accordance to the "almighty creator", which is what Hitler once said. The bible itself says that all non-believers of christ and those who worship other gods should be executed. Same goes with anyone else who doesn't fit the description of a perfect Christian.

If we look at the election results of this past election, it's clear that the parts of the coutnry that overwhelming supported Bush came from "bible belt" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_belt) states (a.k.a. the lynching belt), and is where the KKK formed after the civil war.

The interogation techniques used in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, etc. are nothing new. They were methods originally taught to contras and other right-wing fascists during the Cold War in parts of Latin America and elsewhere. This policy is far from being an isolated incident. Just look at what happend during MKULTRA.

As far as what's happening in Falluja, there are striking similarities between what's going on there and what happend in the ghettos during WWII. The citizens are now being tracked, having their eyes scanned in order to enter or leave the city, having gestapo tactics used on them, etc. The soldiers are taught to "shoot first, ask questions later" which is their policy out on the battlefield. There have been many incidents where innocent civilians are shot to death just for the hell of it. Speaking of which, lets not forget about the Native American "reservations" and the prison system as we currently know it.

I believe Cuba has every right to do what they're doing. When it comes down to it they are mocking the U.S. of being hypocritical. First of all, America has way more people in prisons, more than any other country in the world. It also still practices the death penalty, which the majority of the world is greatly opposed to except for a few countries. The whole "Fascism - Made In The U.S.A." thing is also true. All the fascist/Bautista loyalists who were sent to Cuba to commit terrorist attacks against innocent civilians were all trained in America.

Anyway, I would highly recommend these articles:

Adolf Hitler: A True American (http://www.bluecorncomics.com/hitler.htm)

God's War? (http://www.irregulartimes.com/holywarriorbush.html)

U.S. Army of God? General Casts War in Religious Terms (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1016-01.htm)

Guerrilla22
23rd December 2004, 18:51
That is not genocide (not saying it isn't wrong though). Genocide is the killing of people because of their race, not their political opinion.

Wrong.
Main Entry: geno·cide
Pronunciation: 'je-n&-"sId
Function: noun
: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book...nocide&x=8&y=12 (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=genocide&x=8&y=12)


BTW Guerrilla22: What is your stupid avatar implying? I guess it means that Bush is controlled by Israel, again anti-semitic world conspiracy theories at it's best.

No, actually I am implying that the United States serves Israel's self-interest on behalh of its own self interest. This is an absolute fact, if you don't see it, then you are either ignorant, or just dumb. You sound exactly like a zionist. To zionist, anyone who criticizes Israel, is anti-semitic. It turns out the person who started che lives or revolutionary left.com, whatever this site is called, isn't that revolutionary afterall.

Edelweiss
23rd December 2004, 20:59
Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 08:51 PM

That is not genocide (not saying it isn't wrong though). Genocide is the killing of people because of their race, not their political opinion.

Wrong.
Main Entry: geno·cide
Pronunciation: 'je-n&-"sId
Function: noun
: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book...nocide&x=8&y=12 (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=genocide&x=8&y=12)


BTW Guerrilla22: What is your stupid avatar implying? I guess it means that Bush is controlled by Israel, again anti-semitic world conspiracy theories at it's best.

No, actually I am implying that the United States serves Israel's self-interest on behalh of its own self interest. This is an absolute fact, if you don't see it, then you are either ignorant, or just dumb. You sound exactly like a zionist. To zionist, anyone who criticizes Israel, is anti-semitic. It turns out the person who started che lives or revolutionary left.com, whatever this site is called, isn't that revolutionary afterall.
And you sound like some KKK member: "The US isn't serving the American people, it's just serving the evil evil Jews"! You obviesly have no idea what you are talking about, a strong Israel absulutyl IS in the hegomonial interrests of the US, if you can't see that you are either just dum or an ignorant!

Edelweiss
23rd December 2004, 21:15
Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 07:20 PM
Hitler was actually very much influenced by the actions of America and England. There is no doubt about it. As a boy he was obsessed with the American wild west and with cowboys and indians. He even had officers on the eastern front carry around this book with them written by Karl May, who created a fictional American character in his books called Old Shatterhand, which was a cowboy who always fought and won against Native Americans. He also referred to the Russians as Redskins.

Also, Hitler quoted a lot from the bible and was heavily influenced by religion, like what Americans had done in order to justify Manifest Destiny as well as the enslavement and extermination of many indigenous peoples. One of the heads of the American military, General William Boykin, is a well known evangalical Christian. He has gone on to say that the war of terror is really a "Christian crusade against satanic forces" and that America is a Christian nation. When talking about his experience battling a Muslim warlord in Somalia he said "I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol." Bush himself talked about how god instructed him to strike and bin Laden and Saddam Hussein because he felt he was acting in accordance to the "almighty creator", which is what Hitler once said. The bible itself says that all non-believers of christ and those who worship other gods should be executed. Same goes with anyone else who doesn't fit the description of a perfect Christian.

If we look at the election results of this past election, it's clear that the parts of the coutnry that overwhelming supported Bush came from "bible belt" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_belt) states (a.k.a. the lynching belt), and is where the KKK formed after the civil war.

The interogation techniques used in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, etc. are nothing new. They were methods originally taught to contras and other right-wing fascists during the Cold War in parts of Latin America and elsewhere. This policy is far from being an isolated incident. Just look at what happend during MKULTRA.

As far as what's happening in Falluja, there are striking similarities between what's going on there and what happend in the ghettos during WWII. The citizens are now being tracked, having their eyes scanned in order to enter or leave the city, having gestapo tactics used on them, etc. The soldiers are taught to "shoot first, ask questions later" which is their policy out on the battlefield. There have been many incidents where innocent civilians are shot to death just for the hell of it. Speaking of which, lets not forget about the Native American "reservations" and the prison system as we currently know it.

I believe Cuba has every right to do what they're doing. When it comes down to it they are mocking the U.S. of being hypocritical. First of all, America has way more people in prisons, more than any other country in the world. It also still practices the death penalty, which the majority of the world is greatly opposed to except for a few countries. The whole "Fascism - Made In The U.S.A." thing is also true. All the fascist/Bautista loyalists who were sent to Cuba to commit terrorist attacks against innocent civilians were all trained in America.

Anyway, I would highly recommend these articles:

Adolf Hitler: A True American (http://www.bluecorncomics.com/hitler.htm)

God's War? (http://www.irregulartimes.com/holywarriorbush.html)

U.S. Army of God? General Casts War in Religious Terms (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1016-01.htm)
What a load of misinformed, twisted bullshit!

I won't waste my time to rip apart your mental shit piece by piece, just two corrections: The "Old Shatterhand" character of Karl May is not " fictional American character in his books called Old Shatterhand, which was a cowboy who always fought and won against Native Americans.", I have no idea where you got that from. He was quiet the opposite, he was a friend of the indians, especially with his best friend and blood brother (!) Winnetou, an Apache chief. In the books of Karl May the native Americans are described as a very brave and noble people, unlike many white settlers and bandits. In nearly all Karl May books, the bad guys are some white bandits, and the native Americans are on the site of the good guys along with Old Shatterhand.

About Hitler being such a faithful Christian: Bullsit again! He was far away from it, the Nazis did everything to get the Germans to get rid of "Judeo-Christian faith", with the aim to eteblish some esoteric, nordic myth religion. They even tried to turn Christmas into a Germanic fest (as it origanally was), so that the poeple are not celebrating the birth of Jesus, but the solstice.

When I see what an misinformed bullshit some of you American kids are writing here, I realize what a good idea it was to rename the board, to get mire serious leftists in here. It's bloody needed!

PRC-UTE
23rd December 2004, 21:53
When I see what an misinformed bullshit some of you American kids are writing here, I realize what a good idea it was to rename the board, to get mire serious leftists in here. It's bloody needed!

How do you determine who is a 'serious' leftists? :lol:

The US killed more Africans in the slave trade than the Nazis killed in the camps. I'm also surprirsed that Malte and H&S keep mentioning the 6 million dead figure, when that was the Jews alone. Between 30 - 50 million Russians died, too.

Guerrilla22
23rd December 2004, 22:38
Originally posted by Malte+Dec 23 2004, 08:59 PM--> (Malte @ Dec 23 2004, 08:59 PM)
[email protected] 23 2004, 08:51 PM

That is not genocide (not saying it isn't wrong though). Genocide is the killing of people because of their race, not their political opinion.

Wrong.
Main Entry: geno·cide
Pronunciation: 'je-n&-"sId
Function: noun
: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book...nocide&x=8&y=12 (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=genocide&x=8&y=12)


BTW Guerrilla22: What is your stupid avatar implying? I guess it means that Bush is controlled by Israel, again anti-semitic world conspiracy theories at it's best.

No, actually I am implying that the United States serves Israel's self-interest on behalh of its own self interest. This is an absolute fact, if you don't see it, then you are either ignorant, or just dumb. You sound exactly like a zionist. To zionist, anyone who criticizes Israel, is anti-semitic. It turns out the person who started che lives or revolutionary left.com, whatever this site is called, isn't that revolutionary afterall.
And you sound like some KKK member: "The US isn't serving the American people, it's just serving the evil evil Jews"! You obviesly have no idea what you are talking about, a strong Israel absulutyl IS in the hegomonial interrests of the US, if you can't see that you are either just dum or an ignorant! [/b]
How exactly is being critical of the Israeli govt. anti-semitic? I can't understand what you're trying to get at, and maybe you aren't totally getting what I'm trying to say because of a language barrier, which is not anyone's fault. I'm just trying to be critical of the Israeli and US governments, not anti-jew, there's a difference.

Dio
23rd December 2004, 22:40
Genocide in any way or form is still genocide. Instead of saying "yea U.S. has commited, sponsored and or condoned genocide" you say "No genocide is worse when yada yada yada." Lets stop trying to make the intensity of genocide as a statistic, and view it for what it is: genocide.

Edelweiss
23rd December 2004, 22:53
Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2004, 12:40 AM
Genocide in any way or form is still genocide. Instead of saying "yea U.S. has commited, sponsored and or condoned genocide" you say "No genocide is worse when yada yada yada." Lets stop trying to make the intensity of genocide as a statistic, and view it for what it is: genocide.
I haven't began to praise the Nazi-US comparisons, it's not my fault!

Edelweiss
23rd December 2004, 22:55
Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 11:53 PM

When I see what an misinformed bullshit some of you American kids are writing here, I realize what a good idea it was to rename the board, to get mire serious leftists in here. It's bloody needed!

How do you determine who is a 'serious' leftists? :lol:

The US killed more Africans in the slave trade than the Nazis killed in the camps. I'm also surprirsed that Malte and H&S keep mentioning the 6 million dead figure, when that was the Jews alone. Between 30 - 50 million Russians died, too.
I'm aware of that; and I praise the glorios red army who defeated the hordes of Hitler! I'm deeply grateful for Stalingrad!

Edelweiss
23rd December 2004, 23:00
Originally posted by Guerrilla22+Dec 24 2004, 12:38 AM--> (Guerrilla22 @ Dec 24 2004, 12:38 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 08:59 PM

[email protected] 23 2004, 08:51 PM

That is not genocide (not saying it isn't wrong though). Genocide is the killing of people because of their race, not their political opinion.

Wrong.
Main Entry: geno·cide
Pronunciation: 'je-n&-"sId
Function: noun
: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book...nocide&x=8&y=12 (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=genocide&x=8&y=12)


BTW Guerrilla22: What is your stupid avatar implying? I guess it means that Bush is controlled by Israel, again anti-semitic world conspiracy theories at it's best.

No, actually I am implying that the United States serves Israel's self-interest on behalh of its own self interest. This is an absolute fact, if you don't see it, then you are either ignorant, or just dumb. You sound exactly like a zionist. To zionist, anyone who criticizes Israel, is anti-semitic. It turns out the person who started che lives or revolutionary left.com, whatever this site is called, isn't that revolutionary afterall.
And you sound like some KKK member: "The US isn't serving the American people, it's just serving the evil evil Jews"! You obviesly have no idea what you are talking about, a strong Israel absulutyl IS in the hegomonial interrests of the US, if you can't see that you are either just dum or an ignorant!
How exactly is being critical of the Israeli govt. anti-semitic? I can't understand what you're trying to get at, and maybe you aren't totally getting what I'm trying to say because of a language barrier, which is not anyone's fault. I'm just trying to be critical of the Israeli and US governments, not anti-jew, there's a difference. [/b]
You avatar isn't just criticising Israel, which is currently more than justified, it's implying some zionist/Jew controlled USA, you said it by yourself that you think the US "serves Israel's self-interest on behalh of its own self interest". Which is of course not true, and near to anti-semitic conspiracy shit.

Sorry for being an asshole here to you all, but anti-semitism and relativation of Nazi crimes in favor of agitation against the US is a common disease among todays's Left, and I see it as my duty to speak out load against it, and to critisize it in the hardest form possible.

chebol
24th December 2004, 01:36
Malte,
To say that the US "serves Israel's self-interest on behalh of its own self interest" is NOT untrue, and it is not "anti-semitic conspiracy shit". In fact, Guerrilla22's statement is essentially no different to your own that "a strong Israel absulutyl IS in the hegomonial interrests of the US, if you can't see that you are either just dum or an ignorant!"

I'm currently of the opinion that you have overreacted to the "Nazi-card", a common reaction of German leftists (and not altogether unjustified- the comparisons being made here of US/NSDAP are almost entirely cosmetic). However, your overreaction is harming debate here, as insults and epithets don't convince anybody, and are just as likely to make people disbelieve you and disregard the points you are making. Criticising the false assertion that US=Nazi "in the hardest form possible" does not mean coming down like a ton of bricks on anyone who appears to be 'stepping out of line'- possibly from a lack of understanding fascism, rather than harbouring a deep-seated anti-semitism. It means addressing the arguments at hand: What is fascism? What was Nazism? In what ways and why do these terms apply (or not) to the modern-day US? And, based on this, was the Cuban billboard justified?

Another couple of points. The swastika was the symbol of Nazi Germany, but it has become a symbol of racist, fascist and generally unconscionable politics. It no longer 'merely' represents Nazi Germany (although it never entirely did anyway). It's use could be justified in this way alone.

Without trying to claim that the US is currently fascist (which it isn't), let alone Nazi (which is basically impossible), it is important to remember something else. The Bush family played a not-unsubstantial role in the rise of the NSDAP.

P.S. The billboard didn't cal the US Nazi, it indicated a fascist nature of the the US military's behaviour in Iraq. While not making the US fascist in itself, it is still a valid comment on the hypocrisy of a power claiming to foster freedom of speech, democracy and liberty. And that was always the point.

Dio
24th December 2004, 02:22
The US/Nazi comparison was made after the billboards, and was later removed sice it hurt someones feelings.

enriquev
24th December 2004, 03:06
The Cuba propaganda war shows how the Cuban government is really against Yankee Imperialism. The US Empire entrance to the Iraq War shows interests in humiliating the Iraqi people by disrespecting the POWs. I support the Cuban perspective against the US capitalists who are part of he Iraqi War and in a Communist perspective, the US will continue its policy in taking over the world, as Cuba is afraid of.

Edelweiss
24th December 2004, 03:38
Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2004, 03:36 AM
Malte,
To say that the US "serves Israel's self-interest on behalh of its own self interest" is NOT untrue, and it is not "anti-semitic conspiracy shit". In fact, Guerrilla22's statement is essentially no different to your own that "a strong Israel absulutyl IS in the hegomonial interrests of the US, if you can't see that you are either just dum or an ignorant!"
I apologize to guerilla22, I did indeed misunderstand her, English is not my native language, so sorry again! Still her avatar is quiet out of line IMO.
I disagree chebol that the swastika has become general fascist symbol, I bet for most people the swatika is still accosiated with nazism, to say otherwise is just dishonest.

RedAnarchist
24th December 2004, 08:34
Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 09:15 PM
About Hitler being such a faithful Christian: Bullsit again! He was far away from it, the Nazis did everything to get the Germans to get rid of "Judeo-Christian faith", with the aim to eteblish some esoteric, nordic myth religion. They even tried to turn Christmas into a Germanic fest (as it origanally was), so that the poeple are not celebrating the birth of Jesus, but the solstice.


Nordic? Thats Scandinavian. Why would Germany want nordic myths? Shows the lack of logic and reason in the Nazi Party.

Christmas a German invention? How? Do you mean the more commercial side or the more traditional parts? I know that Christmas trees were made popular by the Germans in the 19th Century.

Edelweiss
24th December 2004, 10:01
Originally posted by XPhile2868+Dec 24 2004, 10:34 AM--> (XPhile2868 @ Dec 24 2004, 10:34 AM)
[email protected] 23 2004, 09:15 PM
About Hitler being such a faithful Christian: Bullsit again! He was far away from it, the Nazis did everything to get the Germans to get rid of "Judeo-Christian faith", with the aim to eteblish some esoteric, nordic myth religion. They even tried to turn Christmas into a Germanic fest (as it origanally was), so that the poeple are not celebrating the birth of Jesus, but the solstice.


Nordic? Thats Scandinavian. Why would Germany want nordic myths? Shows the lack of logic and reason in the Nazi Party.

Christmas a German invention? How? Do you mean the more commercial side or the more traditional parts? I know that Christmas trees were made popular by the Germans in the 19th Century. [/b]
nordic mytholigy = Germanic mythology/religion
http://encyclopedia.com/html/G/GermancR1e.asp


Germanic religion

pre-Christian religious practices among the tribes of Western Europe, Germany, and Scandinavia. The main sources for our knowledge are the Germania of Tacitus and the Elder Edda and the Younger Edda. Although it is possible to perceive certain basic concepts that were important to the pre-Christian Germans, there was no Germanic religion common to all the Scandinavian and Teutonic peoples; neither can we know whether a ritual or legend peculiar to one Germanic tribe was common to all Germanic tribes. Conversion of the Germans to Christianity began as early as the 4th cent. AD, but it took many centuries for the new religion to spread throughout the northern lands of Europe. In Nazi Germany the spirit of the old religion and the heroic attributes of the Germanic gods were revived as part of the propaganda program of the Nazi party.

It would have bben easy to find that out by yourself, Xphile! Germanic is not the same as German, that's something you are learning in school in 5th grade, also in Holland, isn't it?

RedAnarchist
24th December 2004, 10:11
I've never been to Holland, Malte. I did try to, but the wording in some of the searches sounded a little strange and nationalistic.

Does anyone think that Christmas is in any way religious anymore? Most people nowadays would think of it as a commercial holiday. I'm glad that religion is dying, but commercialism and capitalism are taking over what was once religious, allowing religious values to remain in the mainstream.

Edelweiss
24th December 2004, 10:31
Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2004, 12:11 PM
I've never been to Holland, Malte. I did try to, but the wording in some of the searches sounded a little strange and nationalistic.

Does anyone think that Christmas is in any way religious anymore? Most people nowadays would think of it as a commercial holiday. I'm glad that religion is dying, but commercialism and capitalism are taking over what was once religious, allowing religious values to remain in the mainstream.
Who comes that you speak Dutch than? I saw you posting in the Dutch forum that#s why I assumed you are Dutch.

RedAnarchist
24th December 2004, 10:33
I cant speak Dutch - i was using a internet translator. I'm a typical Brit - cant speak any other language fluently except English, although i have some French and i know a few words and phrases in some languages.

You can speak English, Malte, but youre not fom England are you?

Guerrilla22
24th December 2004, 10:52
The Bush administration was trying to to be all clever and take a shot at Castro, but in the end Castro just made the US look hypocritical, which it is,

Albanian
24th December 2004, 14:48
Facstro is the best.
Greetings from Albania ;)

duk
24th December 2004, 17:57
well as an arab leftlist i think hitler is better then bush :P

Edelweiss
24th December 2004, 19:25
Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2004, 07:57 PM
well as an arab leftlist I think hitler is better then bush :P
As a German leftist I say you can go and fuck yourself!

RedAnarchist
24th December 2004, 19:38
Neither of them is better. Both have been terrible carcinomas on the Earth, and we should be glad that hitler is dead and that Bush will be gone from the WH in 2008 (methinks followed by Hilary Clinton, although both DP and GOP are just as bad as one another in their country).

PRC-UTE
24th December 2004, 23:57
I'm a typical Brit

Xphile, yer a brit?? that's really a schock. You seem so passionate about Ireland and that, good on you. You're one of the koolest, clued-up Brits I've met. ;)

Yazman
25th December 2004, 14:10
Originally posted by Malte+Dec 24 2004, 01:00 AM--> (Malte @ Dec 24 2004, 01:00 AM)
[email protected] 23 2004, 04:41 PM
Bullshit. Zionists do have a lot of influence on US policies. Exposing them isn't anti-semitic in any way. Nobody said (or implied) anything about a global Jewish conspiracy.
I do not deny that zionists have influenece on the US foreign politics, but much more influenece have the US Chriatian evangelicanians about the US Israel policies. The avatar is just saying that Bush is obeying to Israel and the Jews in geneeral which is just anti-semitic conspiracy bullshit, in fact it's just the way round, Israel is totally dependent of the US.
I don't deny either that there have been plans of the deporatation of the Jews to Madagaskar, but as you may have noticed, they never where never implemented, instead the Nazis decided for the more radical solution; to purge all jews as a whole. Not beacsue it was "easier" (sic) for them, but because they seeked a "final" solution of the "Jewsish question". The way you are defending the Nazis by saying thhey would "just" have deported them if they would have only the chance, is again twisting historical facts, and again insulting the victims of the Nazis.
And I agree, for the victims it doesn't matter why they have died in a genocide. But historically and morally it DOES matter wheter a genocide was the result of one civilisation driving out the other like in the US with the native Americans, and as it has happned over and over again in human history, or like in Nazi germany, where a genocide was systematic, planned over just a few years and reached a level of "perfection" like in no other genocide before and after. Damn you, why the fuck can't you understand thi simple fact, and why still can't you understand why all comparisons of the Us and nazi Germany are just wrong? [/b]
I can easily understand that a nazi-USA comparison is not entirely accurate at this stage, in fact it's nowhere near accurate. What I would like is for YOU to stop downplaying the genocides against fellow leftists in latin america (6-7 civilians killed in the past 40 years!), against the native americans (almost the ENTIRE race!), against the australian aborigines (Hell, there are NO indigenous people left in Tasmania anymore because of genocide, for purely ideological reasons (they considered them inferior for being black). Probably the biggest one in history was the European slave trade abducting tens of millions of africans over the years because they were considered 'savages' and thus only fit to be slaves.

By sitting there and spouting all this "OMFG THE NAZI HOLOCAUST WAS THE WORST GENOCIDE IN THE HISTORY OF MAN!!11111111ONEONE GENOCIDE AGAINST NATIVE AMERICANS DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE IT WAS JUSTIFIED." No, it wasn't fucking justified. Providing a reason like "we killed them because we are americans and we deserve this land more than those savages" is ENTIRELY alike the nazi idea of killing Jews so that they could claim their land back (europe!) By spouting such ignorant bullshit you are simply doing what you claim to be fighting against, the downplaying of historic events by simply fobbing them off with excuses such as "oh but those were justified."

Also, I can't believe you can just sit there and insult the entire community of these boards simply because we don't fit into your particular vision of what a leftist should be, and how they should think and act. You sure have done a great job of stereotyping an entire community of people.

Edelweiss
25th December 2004, 17:22
Calm down, yazman. I did never insult the entire community, I did insult those people participating in this thread, with certain exceptions.
And if you read my posts, I did clearly say that no genocide is justified (I said that almost literally, read my fucking post!), nor did I say that the native Americans did deserve their genocide, I have never said any things you just have put into my mouth. What I did say is that genocides like that one on the native Americans, as bad as it was, can somewhat be explained rationally on a historical perspective. It was one civilization driving out the other, weaker one, it was about soil and natural resources. Like it has happened many times before in human history, as cruel that is. It is an objective, historical analysis. I was just reacting to you, and others who b claimed that the holocaust can be compared with any other genocide in history, and even to what happened in Abu G. I think I proofed more than clearly that it can't.
My intention is to get you to avoid any comparisons to today's crimes of the US on the back of the victims of the holocaust and the Nazi crimes in general. I tried to explain who historically unique the 3rd Reich and the holocaust was, and that any comparisons to today's event in Iraq are relativizing the Nazi crimes. it was never my intention to downplay any other genocides, and I don't think I have.

Funky Monk
25th December 2004, 19:00
I think the native Americans were victims of circumstance whereas the Jews in the Nazi period were systematically targeted.

PRC-UTE
25th December 2004, 19:29
I think the native Americans were victims of circumstance whereas the Jews in the Nazi period were systematically targeted.

You couldn't be more wrong.

The Indians were herded into camps, rendered unable to feed their families, their food stuffs were systematically destroyed. The largest biological warfare in human history was unleashed against them in the form of contaminated blankets. Unlike the jews, they didn't recieve a new land to colonize but were pushed onto the land no-one wanted, where they still suffer from a huge suicide rate, unemployment and occasional outbreaks of the bubonic plague, as well as their best and brightest often being incarcerated for standing up for their community.

I realize you didn't know that and didn't mean insult, but it's astonishing how many leftists believe the Nazi camps were unique. Why do you think Hitler admired America so much?

Funky Monk
25th December 2004, 19:51
I really think you are misunderstanding there, whether on purpose or not i don't know.

The American Indians were targeted because they had something the settlers wanted. The jews were targeted because they were Jewish and acted as a focus for people's hatred.

The first concentration camps were made by the British.

Edelweiss
25th December 2004, 20:16
Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 09:29 PM

I think the native Americans were victims of circumstance whereas the Jews in the Nazi period were systematically targeted.

You couldn't be more wrong.

The Indians were herded into camps, rendered unable to feed their families, their food stuffs were systematically destroyed. The largest biological warfare in human history was unleashed against them in the form of contaminated blankets. Unlike the jews, they didn't recieve a new land to colonize but were pushed onto the land no-one wanted, where they still suffer from a huge suicide rate, unemployment and occasional outbreaks of the bubonic plague, as well as their best and brightest often being incarcerated for standing up for their community.

I realize you didn't know that and didn't mean insult, but it's astonishing how many leftists believe the Nazi camps were unique. Why do you think Hitler admired America so much?
You still don't get it, right? Sad! Ignorance is a bless!

PRC-UTE
25th December 2004, 20:21
I really think you are misunderstanding there, whether on purpose or not i don't know.


what bollix.


The American Indians were targeted because they had something the settlers wanted. The jews were targeted because they were Jewish and acted as a focus for people's hatred.


split hairs all ya want. Indians were also a target for people's hatred, and hitler did plan on colonising land taken from his victims with aryan settlers. They're very similar whether you want to admit it or not.


The first concentration camps were made by the British.

Yes, an uncomfortable fact I enjoy reminding our 'comrades' who excuse the crimes of Brittania. The nazis named one of their camps 'house of the saxon'.

Funky Monk
25th December 2004, 20:52
Yes, i've been to that camp.


And you seem to over-estimate the amount of space gained from the Nazi's attacks on the Jews. They didn't kill them to take their land. They killed them because they were "unpure".

Edelweiss
25th December 2004, 20:59
Originally posted by Funky [email protected] 25 2004, 10:52 PM
Yes, i've been to that camp.


And you seem to over-estimate the amount of space gained from the Nazi's attacks on the Jews. They didn't kill them to take their land. They killed them because they were "unpure".
The Nazis killed the Jews because they are Jews. Period!

But don't try to explain him. It's useless! He begins on and on with his Nazi-US comparisons, and his comparisons of the genocide on the native Americans, and the holocaust. I have repeated now many times why you can't compare or even equate those. I'll just give it up now.

PRC-UTE
25th December 2004, 21:50
But don't try to explain him. It's useless! He begins on and on with his Nazi-US comparisons, and his comparisons of the genocide on the native Americans, and the holocaust. I have repeated now many times why you can't compare or even equate those. I'll just give it up now.

The native american genocide has been far worse. Many more Indians were killed and they don't have the propaganda machine that the Jews have. The Jews are better off than they previously were; the Indians are so fucked it defies description and the genocide against them continues.


The Nazis killed the Jews because they are Jews. Period!

No shit. I've been over there to the death camps; lost some relatives in them too. I'm hardly ignorant about that, but if you don't think that many natives were killed just because they were native, you're wrong. 'The only good indian's a dead indian'.


And you seem to over-estimate the amount of space gained from the Nazi's attacks on the Jews. They didn't kill them to take their land. They killed them because they were "unpure".

Yes, I realize that. I know how terrible it was. My point is that it was not historically unique. Sorry, it wasn't. England's great hero Cromwell defended killing Irish children by saying 'nits make lice'. It was common for the English, up until the twentieth century, to describe the Irish as subhuman and attribute all of their problems to them, much like the Jewish conspiracies.

Yazman
26th December 2004, 04:51
Calm down, yazman. I did never insult the entire community, I did insult those people participating in this thread, with certain exceptions.

Malte, out of everybody in this thread I consider YOU to be the one MOST at fault here, purely because you keep insulting us all, when (though one or two may have been thrown at you) for the most part we do not sit here calling you a five year old child, a 'dumbass teenager', 'fucking idiot', etc. Let's all review what you have said to us so far:


Well, fuck you, asshole!


If you are not able understand that, go fuck yourself.


OglachMcGlinchey, and other "leftists" here trying to defend Us-Nazi comparisons note: denying your ignorance does not equal us defending US-Nazi comparisons, I never defended them.


if you say othewise, you are a naive fool


all you kids please just stop using Nazi-US comparisons


stop helping our enemies by mking a fool out of yourself.


t's just the same bullshit, I wouldn't make any difference.
note: this one was particularly ridiculous as you just discount his entire post as "the same bullshit."


you all simply fail to understand what I was trying to say you.
note: it's not a matter of us "failing to understand" it, it's a matter of us considering your belief of "systematic ideologised genocide is worse than all other genocides" to be complete bullshit.


Your ignorance is really disgusting.


I'm just shocked about the degree of poltical stupidity and nonsensitiveness here.


Sorry for being so emotinal on this one, and sorry for the flaming
note: Don't apologise if you're going to continue to flame us ANYWAY, which you DID.


Damn you, why the fuck can't you understand thi simple fact, and why still can't you understand why all comparisons of the Us and nazi Germany are just wrong?
note: disagreeing is not the same as mis-understanding. OBVIOUSLY you're not used to people disagreeing with you.


And you sound like some KKK member: "The US isn't serving the American people, it's just serving the evil evil Jews"!
note: this one is interesting because you attempt to quote him but instead recite something you just made up.


You obviesly have no idea what you are talking about


if you can't see that you are either just dum or an ignorant!


What a load of misinformed, twisted bullshit!


When I see what an misinformed bullshit some of you American kids are writing here, I realize what a good idea it was to rename the board, to get mire serious leftists in here. It's bloody needed!
note: for this particular one, I specifically direct a big FUCK YOU right to you, Malte.


that's something you are learning in school in 5th grade, also in Holland, isn't it?


As a German leftist I say you can go and fuck yourself!


You still don't get it, right? Sad! Ignorance is a bless!

Stop fucking flaming everybody because we don't agree with you, stop calling us ignorant and stupid because you think we "don't understand you", just because somebody disagrees with you this does not mean they do not understand you. I disagree with capitalism, but I still understand it. Finally, DO NOT BOTHER APOLOGISING to us for flaming us if you're going to keep flaming us ANYWAY like you did last time.



I was just reacting to you, and others who b claimed that the holocaust can be compared with any other genocide in history, and even to what happened in Abu G. I think I proofed more than clearly that it can't.

You didn't prove a thing about Abu G. to me because you never needed to, _I_ never made the comparison between that and the holocaust. Abu G. was not an example of genocide, it was an example of extreme racism that can lead to it if it continues without opposition (genocide).



My intention is to get you to avoid any comparisons to today's crimes of the US on the back of the victims of the holocaust

It isn't "on the backs of the victims of the holocaust", it has NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM. If I make a comparison between say, Pol Pot's Cambodia and Pinochet's Chile, it's not "on the backs of the victims of the Khmer Rouge", or "on the backs of the victims of Pinochet's dictatorship." It's a HISTORICAL comparison and it has no emotional attachment to it on the basis of that historical comparison.




and the Nazi crimes in general. I tried to explain who historically unique the 3rd Reich and the holocaust was, and that any comparisons to today's event in Iraq are relativizing the Nazi crimes. it was never my intention to downplay any other genocides, and I don't think I have.


The 3rd Reich itself was NOT unique, and the holocaust was only unique in that it was systematic and organised as such. In terms of reasons etc. it was not unique.


it was never my intention to downplay any other genocides, and I don't think I have.

Yes you have:


What I did say is that genocides like that one on the native Americans, as bad as it was, can somewhat be explained rationally on a historical perspective. It was one civilization driving out the other, weaker one, it was about soil and natural resources. Like it has happened many times before in human history, as cruel that is.

That is basically saying "that's not unique in history so it's not anywhere near as bad as the holocaust was", which is both an unrealistic thing to say and a ridiculous downplaying of genocides that were FAR WORSE than the holocaust.


And if you read my posts, I did clearly say that no genocide is justified (I said that almost literally, read my fucking post!), nor did I say that the native Americans did deserve their genocide, I have never said any things you just have put into my mouth.

But you did downplay them simply because you're defending the holocaust's horrific aspect because it was an "ideological genocide", which has happened before. But I do not believe it is worse because it was on an ideological basis, I think it is FAR WORSE than an entire race was almost wiped out (native americans) due to imperialism. I don't know about you, but I do NOT like capitalism or monarchy and I will fight both to the death, and I consider them far worse than anti-semitism because they provoke things far worse, such as genocide against leftists, latin americans, native americans, australian aborigines, africans, etc.

PRC-UTE
26th December 2004, 09:28
Wow, that's quite a rebuke by Yazman. I read through Malte's childish quotes and laughed and how many of them were directed at me.

I'm shocked to hear the crap he pulls: the nazi crimes were 'unique', whilst he excuses the massacre of over 9 million natives:

What I did say is that genocides like that one on the native Americans, as bad as it was, can somewhat be explained rationally on a historical perspective. It was one civilization driving out the other, weaker one, it was about soil and natural resources. Like it has happened many times before in human history, as cruel that is.

You're one sick puppy, Nietzche, er - Malte!

Sorry, don't think there's another comparison of cruelty, or systematic genocide as the one practiced by the colonisers of North America. The fact that it took longer only shows how cruel it was and how they weren't and that time as technologically advanced as the society the Nazis came about in.

Then if we dare mention the slavery of millions of Africans and the genocide against those folks, wonder what Malte'd say?

Edelweiss
26th December 2004, 11:33
Arrrgh, Yazman! Just forget it, you still haven't understand what my whole intention here was. I'll tell you what happened, you have twisted totally around:

1st: someone posted a picture of Cuban propaganda which compared Abu G, and the US in general to Nazism and the 3rd Reich, which includes the holocaust.

2st: many kids cheered that

3rd: I expressed my disgust, admitingly pretty emotional and with unneeded flaming, but still I think i have proved very clearly why the US and what happened in Abu G can not be compared with the holocaust or Nazism. The historical uniqueness of the holocaust and the 3rd Reich is consensus among leftists in Germany, but it should be among ALL serious leftists worldwide. Cuba was linking Abu G. to Nazism, so they have used the blood spoiled by the victims of the Nazis for their own propaganda needs, this is downright disgusting, and other leftists cheering that is even more disgusting.

4th: many "leftists" here keeped on defending the US-Nazi comparisons, and even added more ignorant bullshit like that the holocaust just was one genocide amongst many others, you are and are still denying the historical uniqueness of the holocaust and Nazi Germany, you keep on realativizing the Nazi crimes by that (I have heard that shit so often from German right-wingers, that's why I'm so shocked to read it here, at my very own forum!).

5th: Now you even starting to put things in my mouth that i have never said, like that I'm excusing the genocide on the native Americans (I have never excused it, I have explained it!!!)., which finally is bringing me to the conclusion to stop debating with you "leftists" for now and for ever.

Edelweiss
26th December 2004, 11:39
BTW Yazman, you seem to fail to understand the most simpliest leftist concepts. Anti-semitism is/can be one of the terrible effects of capitalism. You can't say "capitalism is worser than anti-semitism", that just proffes that you haven't understand much at all about capitalism.

RedAnarchist
26th December 2004, 11:41
Noone is totally wrong or totally right in this argument. This argument does not need to carry on, as it is already escalating out of control. Calm down, people!

Edelweiss
26th December 2004, 13:49
Okay, some final words: The discusion has reached a pretty ridiculous level now, we shoudln't have an endless discussion about "whose genocide is worse".
I think it's important for me as German leftist, and for the US Left as well to constantly remind our society about the blood that has been spoiled in our nations history, also in the very name of our nation. We should be a stinger in our society, willing to prevent oblivion and apology of the crimes of the past, remember the victims, and most important do everything that it can not happen again, so I see is as a duty for me to speak out load against anti-semitism, and relativation of Nazi crimes, also when it's done by US leftists.
But please , I urge you to not compare anything at all to the Nazi crimes and the holocaust. Especially not for your own political means, even if that is to show the cruelty of your owns nations history. The holocaust was not just another genocide amongs others, and Hitler was not just one dictator amongs others. NOTHING can and ever will be compareable to what happnened here during the "3rd Reich". Please just respect that, and I think I'm not only speaking here in the name of the German Left, but also for all victims of the Nazi fascism.

Kez
26th December 2004, 16:17
hilarious, love seeing those insults Malte, ironic isnt it how pleased you were for me being booted from the CC for "insults" (when clearly its a personal feud, i assume coz youve got nothing better to do) and yet you come out with this stream of insults.

However, i am impressed with this

"NOTHING can and ever will be compareable to what happnened here during the "3rd Reich".

Seeing into the future is a good skill, i advise you to harness this skill, and maybe predict lottery numbers, so people dont have to send this site any more money for the upkeep.

Yazman
26th December 2004, 17:35
BTW Yazman, you seem to fail to understand the most simpliest leftist concepts. Anti-semitism is/can be one of the terrible effects of capitalism. You can't say "capitalism is worser than anti-semitism", that just proffes that you haven't understand much at all about capitalism.

This is RIDICULOUS, as anti-semitism has existed in hundreds of non-capitalist nations for thousands of years!

I also find it hilarious that you finish up by saying this:

Okay, some final words: The discusion has reached a pretty ridiculous level now, we shoudln't have an endless discussion about "whose genocide is worse".

and then follow that up by then saying this:


The holocaust was not just another genocide amongs others, and Hitler was not just one dictator amongs others. NOTHING can and ever will be compareable to what happnened here during the "3rd Reich".

RedAnarchist
26th December 2004, 17:39
One of those being Nazi Germany.

edit - i.e. non-capitalist nation

Colombia
26th December 2004, 19:27
Can anyone actually show anything that surpasses the atrocities of the genocide of the Jews and other dissenters?

h&s
26th December 2004, 19:55
Completely off topic point here (well actually it isn't - the whole discussion in this thread is off-topic :P ):
It seems like the Cubans have removed the billboard with the US=Nazi abu Ghraib thingymajigy on it, but instead they have painted a massive bold eagle on the road right infront of the US mission so that the people who drive past (on the very busy road) get to crush the US on a daily basis. The Eagle has a large 'B' on it to represent the US trade blockade on Cuba.
http://images.thetimes.co.uk/TGD/picture/0,,168349,00.jpg

Edelweiss
27th December 2004, 12:19
Originally posted by h&[email protected] 26 2004, 09:55 PM
Completely off topic point here (well actually it isn't - the whole discussion in this thread is off-topic :P ):
It seems like the Cubans have removed the billboard with the US=Nazi abu Ghraib thingymajigy on it, but instead they have painted a massive bold eagle on the road right infront of the US mission so that the people who drive past (on the very busy road) get to crush the US on a daily basis. The Eagle has a large 'B' on it to represent the US trade blockade on Cuba.
http://images.thetimes.co.uk/TGD/picture/0,,168349,00.jpg
I congratulate the Cuban goverment, this is felicitous and originel propaganda! It seems Cuba has realized what bullshit they have done with their prevous propaganda campaign.

Edelweiss
27th December 2004, 12:27
Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2004, 07:39 PM
One of those being Nazi Germany.

edit - i.e. non-capitalist nation
nazi-germany a non-capitalist nation? alright...
what the hell are you talking about? Germany was a fully industralized, capitalist nation before and during the Nazis!
And yazman, again you proof your ignorance. I said anti-semitism can be one of the terrible effects of capitalism (just like racism, sexism etc). Not that it's always an effect of capitalism. Another things which is consensus among most leftists, which you seem to deny. the one being ridiculous here is you alone!

Yazman
27th December 2004, 13:07
And yazman, again you proof your ignorance. I said anti-semitism can be one of the terrible effects of capitalism (just like racism, sexism etc). Not that it's always an effect of capitalism. Another things which is consensus among most leftists, which you seem to deny. the one being ridiculous here is you alone!

I am not being ridiculous or ignorant as, just like you say it CAN be an effect of capitalism. This does not mean it always is, and it is not tied into capitalism in any way shape or form. It is quite easy to say "capitalism is far worse than anti-semitism" as they do not always co-exist with one another. I consider the effects of capitalism to be far worse than the effects of anti-semitism, and that is my point. Whereas anti-semitism affects a minority of people and does not oppress billions or entire classes, capitalism does all that and more. Capitalism affects EVERYBODY and not just jews.

Anti-semitism "CAN be" an effect of pretty much ANY political system which oppresses in any way shape or form.

P.S. Perhaps you should stop calling people "ignorant" and generalising the entire leftist community and fucking get over yourself, there is no need to add in little jibes here and there, the only one "proving ignorance" in here is you, as you're the only one slinging mud at other people.

PRC-UTE
27th December 2004, 14:45
Can anyone actually show anything that surpasses the atrocities of the genocide of the Jews and other dissenters?

Not within the same period of time, no. But so far both the Brits and the Americans have created a higher body count, especially America. There were between 10 - 100 million natives here when Europeans arrived. Now there's less than a million and they live very precariously.

Edelweiss
27th December 2004, 16:25
Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 03:07 PM

And yazman, again you proof your ignorance. I said anti-semitism can be one of the terrible effects of capitalism (just like racism, sexism etc). Not that it's always an effect of capitalism. Another things which is consensus among most leftists, which you seem to deny. the one being ridiculous here is you alone!

I am not being ridiculous or ignorant as, just like you say it CAN be an effect of capitalism. This does not mean it always is, and it is not tied into capitalism in any way shape or form. It is quite easy to say "capitalism is far worse than anti-semitism" as they do not always co-exist with one another. I consider the effects of capitalism to be far worse than the effects of anti-semitism, and that is my point. Whereas anti-semitism affects a minority of people and does not oppress billions or entire classes, capitalism does all that and more. Capitalism affects EVERYBODY and not just jews.

Anti-semitism "CAN be" an effect of pretty much ANY political system which oppresses in any way shape or form.

P.S. Perhaps you should stop calling people "ignorant" and generalising the entire leftist community and fucking get over yourself, there is no need to add in little jibes here and there, the only one "proving ignorance" in here is you, as you're the only one slinging mud at other people.
Sigh...You don't have a point at all, buddy...
Listen and learn, kid: Modern anti-semitism, unlike classic anti-semitism/anti-judaism (the Jews killed Jesus etc.), is always an effect of capitalism. Modern anti-semitism, you could also call it "anti-capitalism of the fools", is part of nearly every capitalist society. It is a simplified, short-minded form of anti-capitalism, which sees the Jews as "the base of capitalism" who are steering the capitalist system to their own needs by a worldwide Jewish conspiracy. It is a very dangerous and deeply reactionary world view, especially when anti-semitic minds are poisoning the Left, you should speak out load, clearly against it, and criticize it harshly. But you seem to totally underestimate the bad of anti-semitism by irrelevant statements like "capitalism is more dangerous than anti-semitism". I guess the conclusion for you out of this is to ignore anti-semitism entirely, which is inexcusably for any leftist.

Karl Marx's Camel
27th December 2004, 17:57
Fascsim is an ideology to set up a 'racially pure' nation by any means necessary.

Not neccesarily.

Many fascists are not not racialists.





Completely off topic point here (well actually it isn't - the whole discussion in this thread is off-topic :P ):
It seems like the Cubans have removed the billboard with the US=Nazi abu Ghraib thingymajigy on it, but instead they have painted a massive bold eagle on the road right infront of the US mission so that the people who drive past (on the very busy road) get to crush the US on a daily basis. The Eagle has a large 'B' on it to represent the US trade blockade on Cuba.
http://images.thetimes.co.uk/TGD/picture/0,,168349,00.jpg


Brilliant!! :)

Dio
27th December 2004, 18:29
Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 12:27 PM
I said anti-semitism can be one of the terrible effects of capitalism (just like racism, sexism etc). Not that it's always an effect of capitalism. Another things which is consensus among most leftists, which you seem to deny. the one being ridiculous here is you alone!


Listen and learn, kid: Modern anti-semitism, unlike classic anti-semitism/anti-judaism (the Jews killed Jesus etc.), is always an effect of capitalism. Modern anti-semitism, you could also call it "anti-capitalism of the fools", is part of nearly every capitalist society.

Wouldnt that be a contradiction? Unless anti-semitism, modern anti-semetism, and classic anti-semitism are different. Can you prove to me that capitalism always does this, without calling me a "kid?"

Edelweiss
27th December 2004, 18:41
Originally posted by Dio+Dec 27 2004, 08:29 PM--> (Dio @ Dec 27 2004, 08:29 PM)
[email protected] 27 2004, 12:27 PM
I said anti-semitism can be one of the terrible effects of capitalism (just like racism, sexism etc). Not that it's always an effect of capitalism. Another things which is consensus among most leftists, which you seem to deny. the one being ridiculous here is you alone!


Listen and learn, kid: Modern anti-semitism, unlike classic anti-semitism/anti-judaism (the Jews killed Jesus etc.), is always an effect of capitalism. Modern anti-semitism, you could also call it "anti-capitalism of the fools", is part of nearly every capitalist society.

Wouldnt that be a contradiction? Unless anti-semitism, modern anti-semetism, and classic anti-semitism are different. Can you prove to me that capitalism always does this, without calling me a "kid?" [/b]
Yes, it is different.
Classic, christian and pre-capitalist anti-semitism is mostly religously motivated, and sees the Jews as an evil people, as the muderer of Christ, etc.
I already explained modern anti-semitism.
Today's anti-semitism is mostly a mixture of both, not to forget that it also adds certain bad habbits generally to the Jews, like greed.

RedAnarchist
27th December 2004, 18:43
Does it really matter? Anti-Semitism is evil in whatever form it takes. It is one of the tenets of many on the far right, and we as Communists and as civilised people should reject it in all forms like we do with all kinds of discrimination.

Karl Marx's Camel
27th December 2004, 19:04
Isn't this off topic?

RedAnarchist
27th December 2004, 19:22
Like most long threads, its gone off-topic.

Either close the original thread and discuss this on a new one, or split the thread into two threads with each one getting relevant posts.

Dio
27th December 2004, 20:12
I disagree(not with Malte,) this thread has not gone off topic, it has just evolved.

Karl Marx's Camel
27th December 2004, 21:29
Well, at least it is pretty obvious that Cuba is good at propaganda. :)

Yazman
28th December 2004, 07:21
oh fucking hell, I just wrote up a big reply and got disconnected while posting it. I couldn't be fucked writing the whole thing up again, so here's my basic reply:

Malte, the idea of "jews as the base of capitalism" is just a conspiracy theory and has never been taken seriously by anybody but nazis and conspiracy theorists. If you can prove to me that it is a major part of modern capitalism and 20th century capitalism then I will believe it, but I have never seen anti-semitism as a part of modern capitalism except in the groups of nazis, extreme religious, and conspiracy theorists.

Also, AGAIN you throw in the insults, except this time you make a few baseless accusations & assumptions too. Why the hell do you do that? I don't get this need of yours to flame and insult people, WHY CAN'T YOU JUST MAKE A POINT AND LEAVE IT AT THAT? Why the hell do you need to sit there and say all this bullshit to people, "fuck you asshole", "you suck", "shut up kid", "kids are stupid", all this stupid bullshit based on fucking nothing at all, I don't know why the hell you have to insult us like that and then also insult entire groups of people and leftists as a whole.

Yazman
28th December 2004, 08:02
Anyway Malte, this argument is now simply going into irrelevant details, it's obvious we both disagree with anti-semitism and genocide in any shape or form, therefore there isn't really much point continuing this argument as with most of the issues in this topic here we're on the same page.

Edelweiss
28th December 2004, 14:18
Malte, the idea of "jews as the base of capitalism" is just a conspiracy theory and has never been taken seriously by anybody but nazis and conspiracy theorists. sic!

More resources on modern antisemitism:
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/history_co...ntisemitism.htm (http://www.myjewishlearning.com/history_community/Modern/ModernIntergroup/ModernAntisemitism.htm)
http://www.friends-partners.org/partners/b...english/20.html (http://www.friends-partners.org/partners/beyond-the-pale/english/20.html)
http://www.wujs.org.il/activist/campaigns/modern.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism#...he_20th_century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism#Anti-Semitism_in_the_20th_century)
http://www.tikkun.org/magazine/index.cfm/a...le/031111a.html (http://www.tikkun.org/magazine/index.cfm/action/tikkun/issue/tik0311/article/031111a.html)