Toggle sidebar

TJ = Hitler

atlkvb

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,691
6,298
113
tjebarr said:
Leading Civil Rights Lawyer Shows 20 Ways Trump Is Copying Hitler’s Early Rhetoric and Policies | Common Dreams Views
https://www.commondreams.org/views/...ways-trump-copying-hitlers-early-rhetoric-and
Click to expand...

So you've gone from he was a "Russian asset" who "colluded" with them to steal the election, to a xenophobic anti muslim, anti hispanic anti immigration White racist, to a Black inner city hating White Supremacist, to an anti-American hating White Nationalist to now where he's the reincarnation of Adolph Hitler.o_O

What's next?
 
G

Gunny46

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2018
61,300
4,106
113
Boomerwv said:
Do you think this is a fair description of yourself?

"Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of the nation; whoever has understood our great national anthem."
Click to expand...

Somebody's upset his precious socialism has a horrendous track record. You idiots keep trying to label Trump supporters white nationalist. Going to blow up in your face.
So no Stalin I don't agree with your fellow socialist Hitler on anything.
 
B

boomerwv

Freshman
Jan 16, 2008
9,988
79
48
Gunny46 said:
Somebody's upset his precious socialism has a horrendous track record. You idiots keep trying to label Trump supporters white nationalist. Going to blow up in your face.
So no Stalin I don't agree with your fellow socialist Hitler on anything.
Click to expand...

So you dont believe in America First?
 
G

Gunny46

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2018
61,300
4,106
113
Boomerwv said:
So you dont believe in America First?
Click to expand...

I believe in not allowing you communist to ever have any power. Keep calling 60 + million people of different races and ethnic backgrounds "white nationalist" and watch Trump get 80 + million votes this time. Moderate Democrats are fleeing your socialist policies. Nobody's buying your propaganda anymore.
 
B

boomerwv

Freshman
Jan 16, 2008
9,988
79
48
Gunny46 said:
I believe in not allowing you communist to ever have any power. Keep calling 60 + million people of different races and ethnic backgrounds "white nationalist" and watch Trump get 80 + million votes this time. Moderate Democrats are fleeing your socialist policies. Nobody's buying your propaganda anymore.
Click to expand...

I haven't done anything of the sort, but I do notice your obfuscation.

The quote I posted above was Hitler, but it wasnt his definition of nationalism, it was his definition of socialism.

So, when Hitler talked about socialism he was talking about giving your country your highest loyalty. That doesnt mean anyone who is patriotic is a nazi, it just means Hitler would say you fit his version of socialism.

The full quote is a little longer...

Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of the nation; whoever has understood our great national anthem, “Deutschland ueber Alles,” to mean that nothing in the wide world surpasses in his eyes this Germany, people and land — that man is a Socialist.

Replace that with the Star Spangled Banner, Germany with America, and swap Socialist with any given mumbo jumbo and you could have a Trump line at a rally that would be met with thunderous applause.

So, do you still want to clung to this lie about Hitler and Nazis being anything resembling what we call socialism?
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,601
818
113
Boomerwv said:
I haven't done anything of the sort, but I do notice your obfuscation.

The quote I posted above was Hitler, but it wasnt his definition of nationalism, it was his definition of socialism.

So, when Hitler talked about socialism he was talking about giving your country your highest loyalty. That doesnt mean anyone who is patriotic is a nazi, it just means Hitler would say you fit his version of socialism.

The full quote is a little longer...

Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of the nation; whoever has understood our great national anthem, “Deutschland ueber Alles,” to mean that nothing in the wide world surpasses in his eyes this Germany, people and land — that man is a Socialist.

Replace that with the Star Spangled Banner, Germany with America, and swap Socialist with any given mumbo jumbo and you could have a Trump line at a rally that would be met with thunderous applause.

So, do you still want to clung to this lie about Hitler and Nazis being anything resembling what we call socialism?
Click to expand...
Hahaha....doubles down. So entertaining. Thanks for the laugh moron.
 
G

Gunny46

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2018
61,300
4,106
113
Boomerwv said:
I haven't done anything of the sort, but I do notice your obfuscation.

The quote I posted above was Hitler, but it wasnt his definition of nationalism, it was his definition of socialism.

So, when Hitler talked about socialism he was talking about giving your country your highest loyalty. That doesnt mean anyone who is patriotic is a nazi, it just means Hitler would say you fit his version of socialism.

The full quote is a little longer...

Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of the nation; whoever has understood our great national anthem, “Deutschland ueber Alles,” to mean that nothing in the wide world surpasses in his eyes this Germany, people and land — that man is a Socialist.

Replace that with the Star Spangled Banner, Germany with America, and swap Socialist with any given mumbo jumbo and you could have a Trump line at a rally that would be met with thunderous applause.

So, do you still want to clung to this lie about Hitler and Nazis being anything resembling what we call socialism?
Click to expand...

You're a fvcking moron. Hope you idiots continue to run on this stupidity. Hitler was a racist socialist. Fact. To you want to discuss other ethnic cleansing performed in socialist countries ? You shi*heads have a long history of it. Another fact.
 
Last edited:
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,601
818
113
Boomerwv said:
Do you think this is a fair description of yourself?

"Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of the nation; whoever has understood our great national anthem."
Click to expand...
Hahahahahahaha....
 
B

boomerwv

Freshman
Jan 16, 2008
9,988
79
48
Gunny46 said:
You're a fvcking moron. Hope you idiots continue to run on this stupidity. Hitler was a racist socialist. Fact. To you want to discuss other ethnic cleansing performed in socialist countries ? You shi*heads have a long history of it. Another fact.
Click to expand...

Clinging to the lie it is then. Enjoy your fantasy world.
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,601
818
113
Gunny46 said:
You're a fvcking moron. Hope you idiots continue to run on this stupidity. Hitler was a racist socialist. Fact. To you want to discuss other ethnic cleansing performed in socialist countries ? You shi*heads have a long history of it. Another fact.
Click to expand...
But Trump said America was his first concern instead of paying to fix the rest of the worlds problems and Hitler wanted to kill everyone who wasnt a blonde hair blue eyed German. Its the same thing Gunny
 
G

Gunny46

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2018
61,300
4,106
113
Boomerwv said:
Clinging to the lie it is then. Enjoy your fantasy world.
Click to expand...

You're a nutjob. Are you seriously going to say that socialist countries have'nt killed millions in ethnic cleansing campaigns ? Did your professor leave that out of your political theory 101 class ?
 
B

boomerwv

Freshman
Jan 16, 2008
9,988
79
48
Gunny46 said:
You're a nutjob. Are you seriously going to say that socialist countries have'nt killed millions in ethnic cleansing campaigns ? Did your professor leave that out of your political theory 101 class ?
Click to expand...

Where did I say that? If you would like to keep arguing your indefensible position, try to atleast not just make things up.

Lenin, Stalin, Mao.....they killed millions of people either directly or indirectly. Extreme leftist regimes have plenty to blood on their hands. The similarity between these and the fascists is totalitarianism.

Putting fascism and Nazism in particular in its correct spot, to the far right, on the political spectrum is not a defense of Stalinism.

Again, all you have to do is read some of the things Hitler said about communism or look at the things he did to the communist elements in Germany during the early and mid 1930s to see that he was clearly anti-communist. Look at today, the groups waving nazi flags are right wing extremist groups.

There isnt any need to have this discussion. Just because Dinesh D'Souza wants people to believe it, doesnt make it true.
 
T

tjebarr

Senior
Feb 3, 2007
25,122
917
0
Boomerwv said:
Where did I say that? If you would like to keep arguing your indefensible position, try to atleast not just make things up.

Lenin, Stalin, Mao.....they killed millions of people either directly or indirectly. Extreme leftist regimes have plenty to blood on their hands. The similarity between these and the fascists is totalitarianism.

Putting fascism and Nazism in particular in its correct spot, to the far right, on the political spectrum is not a defense of Stalinism.

Again, all you have to do is read some of the things Hitler said about communism or look at the things he did to the communist elements in Germany during the early and mid 1930s to see that he was clearly anti-communist. Look at today, the groups waving nazi flags are right wing extremist groups.

There isnt any need to have this discussion. Just because Dinesh D'Souza wants people to believe it, doesnt make it true.
Click to expand...

You are arguing with a guy who says he is a character in Call of Duty.
 
G

Gunny46

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2018
61,300
4,106
113
Boomerwv said:
Where did I say that? If you would like to keep arguing your indefensible position, try to atleast not just make things up.

Lenin, Stalin, Mao.....they killed millions of people either directly or indirectly. Extreme leftist regimes have plenty to blood on their hands. The similarity between these and the fascists is totalitarianism.

Putting fascism and Nazism in particular in its correct spot, to the far right, on the political spectrum is not a defense of Stalinism.

Again, all you have to do is read some of the things Hitler said about communism or look at the things he did to the communist elements in Germany during the early and mid 1930s to see that he was clearly anti-communist. Look at today, the groups waving nazi flags are right wing extremist groups.

There isnt any need to have this discussion. Just because Dinesh D'Souza wants people to believe it, doesnt make it true.
Click to expand...
Facist or Communist. All were socialist. Fact.
 
G

Gunny46

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2018
61,300
4,106
113
Boomerwv said:
No.

What socialist would outlaw workers unions?
Click to expand...

Hitler's government controlled the means of production. He was a socialist. You're in major denial. Socialist use unions to wrestle away power from the owners then eventual the government takes over. You are a die hard communist. That's certain.
 
K

Keyser76

Freshman
Apr 7, 2010
11,912
58
0
lmfao, trumps fanboys have their safe space on here, no one can imply their emperors new clothes aren't the bestest and biggest in the whole world! They probably send him "beautiful letters" too!
 
G

Gunny46

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2018
61,300
4,106
113
Keyser76 said:
lmfao, trumps fanboys have their safe space on here, no one can imply their emperors new clothes aren't the bestest and biggest in the whole world! They probably send him "beautiful letters" too!
Click to expand...

Stop drinking your breakfast dummy.
 
B

BoremanSouth

Redshirt
Jul 28, 2016
1,715
0
0
Gunny46 said:
Avoiding crack houses would be more beneficial for your future success.
Click to expand...

 
P

Pospecteer

All-Conference
Dec 8, 2006
36,507
3,168
113
Boomerwv said:
O oo7


Yeah, I'm not teaching anymore. I have written two long threads on this subject. Honestly, most people who push this theory are probably nazi sympathizers who would have been rushing to join the silver shirts in 1935.

I am going to keep telling them they are stupid though.
Click to expand...


You mean this tread where you quit replying and could not defend how Hitler used socialist tactics to take control of Germany's economy? Germany used various tactics to take control of the county, some of which were socialist in nature. One thing is 100% accurate, the NAZI's were not capitalists!

It is interesting to think that the NAZI's read a book on fascism and somehow created NAZI Germany to reflect that. They used whatever tactics achieved the end result. Socialist polices was one the tactics they used. They had 100% control of what was produced, how much was produced, and at what price it was sold. That is socialism defined.

You could not even say that you were not a socialist, but deflected instead.

https://westvirginia.forums.rivals....-identify-a-white-nationalist-updated.207888/
 
P

Pospecteer

All-Conference
Dec 8, 2006
36,507
3,168
113
Boomerwv said:
No.

What socialist would outlaw workers unions?
Click to expand...

Workers Unions had control of workers, the NAZI's wanted 100% control...that aligns with the very fact that they created a socialist economy. The end result is 100% control of:
  • What is produced
  • How much is produced
  • The price and area where the goods/services are sold
  • How much the workers make
This is textbook socialism.
 
B

boomerwv

Freshman
Jan 16, 2008
9,988
79
48
Pospecteer said:
You mean this tread where you quit replying and could not defend how Hitler used socialist tactics to take control of Germany's economy? Germany used various tactics to take control of the county, some of which were socialist in nature. One thing is 100% accurate, the NAZI's were not capitalists!

It is interesting to think that the NAZI's read a book on fascism and somehow created NAZI Germany to reflect that. They used whatever tactics achieved the end result. Socialist polices was one the tactics they used. They had 100% control of what was produced, how much was produced, and at what price it was sold. That is socialism defined.

You could not even say that you were not a socialist, but deflected instead.

https://westvirginia.forums.rivals....-identify-a-white-nationalist-updated.207888/
Click to expand...

Of course nazis weren't capitalists, they were FASCISTS. The reason Ibstopped responding to that thread was because you had lost. Just because you won't shut up doesnt mean there is still a debate.

Nazis went on a widespread privatization industry when they gained power. They privatized public companies that had been publicly owned for decades. That allowed companies to make their own decisions and maximize profits. They encouraged entrepreneurship. Theybdidnt consolidate those profits. Ecause they believed it was motivation for the industries to be strong. Survival of the strong and death of the weak was a pretty important idea to Nazis. That led to them abolishing existing social welfare programs when they came to power and only creating their own during the worst of the depression, which was only available to working whites.

They outlawed unions, strikes, and collective bargaining. They ensured wages stayed low and required men to have jobs to protect companies profitably. They, in theory, required that companies participate in public works projects, especially militarization projects, but companies often said no because it would hurt their profits and nothing really happened to them. Industrialists were very much on the side of the Nazi party and many of them profited hugely during Hitlers reign, some of which still operate today.

The are all antithetical to socialism.

Stalin and Hitler did have common traits, especially populism and totalitarianism. Both spoke a lot about how they were for the people, both were lying. They both also consolidated power to themselves. Neither these are exclusive to any ideology.
 
P

Pospecteer

All-Conference
Dec 8, 2006
36,507
3,168
113
Boomerwv said:
Of course nazis weren't capitalists, they were FASCISTS. The reason Ibstopped responding to that thread was because you had lost. Just because you won't shut up doesnt mean there is still a debate.

Nazis went on a widespread privatization industry when they gained power. They privatized public companies that had been publicly owned for decades. That allowed companies to make their own decisions and maximize profits. They encouraged entrepreneurship. Theybdidnt consolidate those profits. Ecause they believed it was motivation for the industries to be strong. Survival of the strong and death of the weak was a pretty important idea to Nazis. That led to them abolishing existing social welfare programs when they came to power and only creating their own during the worst of the depression, which was only available to working whites.

They outlawed unions, strikes, and collective bargaining. They ensured wages stayed low and required men to have jobs to protect companies profitably. They, in theory, required that companies participate in public works projects, especially militarization projects, but companies often said no because it would hurt their profits and nothing really happened to them. Industrialists were very much on the side of the Nazi party and many of them profited hugely during Hitlers reign, some of which still operate today.

The are all antithetical to socialism.

Stalin and Hitler did have common traits, especially populism and totalitarianism. Both spoke a lot about how they were for the people, both were lying. They both also consolidated power to themselves. Neither these are exclusive to any ideology.
Click to expand...

That is 100% not what happened. How can a company be independent if they were forced to do pubic works and used POW's and concentration camp workers? Bayer was their major pharma company and they employed slave labor. How could any company employ slave labor and stay independent. If they were forced to slave labor by the NAZI's, then they were not independent capitalist corporations, but socialist run organizations used for the war effort.

Here is a blurb from the Bayer site:

https://www.bayer.com/en/1925-1945.aspx

World War II Approaches
In 1936 the National Socialist government began systematically preparing for war.
When the Second World War finally broke out in 1939, the locations of the Lower Rhine consortium were among the sites of German industry that were considered "vital to the war." Production requirements grew steadily, yet more and more employees were drafted into military service. For this reason, foreign and forced laborers from the occupied countries of Europe were brought to work in Leverkusen, Dormagen, Elberfeld and Uerdingen – and throughout the German industry as a whole – to maintain output levels. At times during the war, these laborers accounted for up to one third of the workforce. Concentration camp prisoners were not employed in the Lower Rhine sites.

For the Leverkusen site, the war ended on April 14, 1945, with the arrival of American troops. As Leverkusen was located in the British occupation zone, the British military government soon assumed complete control over the Lower Rhine sites.

Read this article that does a nice job of covering the NAZI and how they managed industry. They refer to it "socialist"

https://www.adl.org/news/op-ed/german-businesses-and-nazis
 
B

boomerwv

Freshman
Jan 16, 2008
9,988
79
48
Pospecteer said:
That is 100% not what happened. How can a company be independent if they were forced to do pubic works and used POW's and concentration camp workers? Bayer was their major pharma company and they employed slave labor. How could any company employ slave labor and stay independent. If they were forced to slave labor by the NAZI's, then they were not independent capitalist corporations, but socialist run organizations used for the war effort.

Here is a blurb from the Bayer site:

https://www.bayer.com/en/1925-1945.aspx

World War II Approaches
In 1936 the National Socialist government began systematically preparing for war.
When the Second World War finally broke out in 1939, the locations of the Lower Rhine consortium were among the sites of German industry that were considered "vital to the war." Production requirements grew steadily, yet more and more employees were drafted into military service. For this reason, foreign and forced laborers from the occupied countries of Europe were brought to work in Leverkusen, Dormagen, Elberfeld and Uerdingen – and throughout the German industry as a whole – to maintain output levels. At times during the war, these laborers accounted for up to one third of the workforce. Concentration camp prisoners were not employed in the Lower Rhine sites.

For the Leverkusen site, the war ended on April 14, 1945, with the arrival of American troops. As Leverkusen was located in the British occupation zone, the British military government soon assumed complete control over the Lower Rhine sites.

Read this article that does a nice job of covering the NAZI and how they managed industry. They refer to it "socialist"

https://www.adl.org/news/op-ed/german-businesses-and-nazis
Click to expand...

First of all, they call it national socialism, which is not the same thing as socialism. National socialism is just another term for Nazism, and having the word socialism in it doesn't mean it is socialist. I have explained Hitlers definition of national socialism here enough that you should know that already. Hitler actually considered all Jews "socialists."

Secondly, do you really want this to be the source that you use to defend your position? It is an article about how German companies used slave labor during the Third Reich. They go on to explain how they have since tried to whitewash that history, but that those companies and executives are complicit in those crimes against humanity. That's not an argument you would make if the companies really had no choice in the matter. Bayer is one of the most guilty who has engaged in a whitewashing campaign, so it's actually pretty funny that you are citing them here.

As I said before. German companies were not state controlled. They had large freedom to act in their own interest. It was expected that they make decisions that were beneficial to Germany, but as a general rule they were not coerced into accepting bad contract from the government. I have a study, one that is actually peer reviewed (so you'll get to see what one of those looks like!) and published in an academic journal that dispels your arguments.

"Private property in the industry of the Third Reich is often considered a mere nominal provision without much substance. However, that is not correct, because firms, despite the rationing and licensing activities of the state, still had ample scope to devise their own production and investment profiles. Even regarding war-related projects, freedom of contract was generally respected; instead of using power, the state offered firms a number of contract options to choose from. There were several motives behind this attitude of the regime, among them the conviction that private property provided important incentives for increasing efficiency."

- The Role of Private Property in the Nazi Economy: The Case of Industry Author(s): Christoph Buchheim and Jonas Scherner Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 66, No. 2 (Jun., 2006), pp. 390-416

http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/cap...storicalGermanAccounts/BuchheimScherner06.pdf

Read the rest of the article if you'd like. German industry wasn't dominated by the state. It remained private and was given large liberty in how to operate. The Nazis could have just nationalized everything and save a lot of money, however, they valued private property and stakes. This is just one of the complete polar opposite stances that are fundamental to the differences in fascism and socialism. To suggest otherwise is simply wrong and to do so just because you see a word included in a name is intellectually lazy.
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,601
818
113
Boomerwv said:
First of all, they call it national socialism, which is not the same thing as socialism. National socialism is just another term for Nazism, and having the word socialism in it doesn't mean it is socialist. I have explained Hitlers definition of national socialism here enough that you should know that already. Hitler actually considered all Jews "socialists."

Secondly, do you really want this to be the source that you use to defend your position? It is an article about how German companies used slave labor during the Third Reich. They go on to explain how they have since tried to whitewash that history, but that those companies and executives are complicit in those crimes against humanity. That's not an argument you would make if the companies really had no choice in the matter. Bayer is one of the most guilty who has engaged in a whitewashing campaign, so it's actually pretty funny that you are citing them here.

As I said before. German companies were not state controlled. They had large freedom to act in their own interest. It was expected that they make decisions that were beneficial to Germany, but as a general rule they were not coerced into accepting bad contract from the government. I have a study, one that is actually peer reviewed (so you'll get to see what one of those looks like!) and published in an academic journal that dispels your arguments.

"Private property in the industry of the Third Reich is often considered a mere nominal provision without much substance. However, that is not correct, because firms, despite the rationing and licensing activities of the state, still had ample scope to devise their own production and investment profiles. Even regarding war-related projects, freedom of contract was generally respected; instead of using power, the state offered firms a number of contract options to choose from. There were several motives behind this attitude of the regime, among them the conviction that private property provided important incentives for increasing efficiency."

- The Role of Private Property in the Nazi Economy: The Case of Industry Author(s): Christoph Buchheim and Jonas Scherner Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 66, No. 2 (Jun., 2006), pp. 390-416

http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/cap...storicalGermanAccounts/BuchheimScherner06.pdf

Read the rest of the article if you'd like. German industry wasn't dominated by the state. It remained private and was given large liberty in how to operate. The Nazis could have just nationalized everything and save a lot of money, however, they valued private property and stakes. This is just one of the complete polar opposite stances that are fundamental to the differences in fascism and socialism. To suggest otherwise is simply wrong and to do so just because you see a word included in a name is intellectually lazy.
Click to expand...
National socialism isnt socialism. Hahaha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom