29-01-2004 16:33									#151
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Well, I'm off to sleep. No doubt, I'll have a page of responses to make tomorrow.

	29-01-2004 16:56									#152
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Ramo -

quote: That isn't crazy, it's reality.

So craziness doesn't exist in the real world? It's crazy to place autocrats on both sides of a political spectrum designed to highlight differences. You're a left wing autocrat, no you're a right wing autocrat, no, you're a centrist autocrat...

quote: I wouldn't be President in the first place. But if I were I certainly wouldn't detain over a thousand immigrants without cause for several months without ever charging (and I woudn't use it as an excuse to start a mass-deportation).

"Immigrants"? The only mass detainment I've heard of are the Afghanis suspected of being Al Qaida/Taliban fighters.

quote: Ronnie was far more authoritarian than Slick Willy. Shrub manages to be even more authoritarian than Ronnie.

You just claimed Bush was fascistic because of drug arrests and I pointed out far more people were arrested under Clinton's watch than Reagan's, but you think Reagan was far more authoritarian? Did you move the goal posts?

quote: I was primarily referring to the prosecution of the drug war in foreign places, such as Colombia and Bolivia (bombing coca fields and the like). But there's a noticable increase domestically as well. The new head of the DEA for instance is insane.

My God, US military intervention in Colombia dramatically escalated under Clinton. We haven't seen anything different from Bush...

quote: Fascists are generally big spenders. And liberals and conservatives both can spend a lot (look at Reagan).

So are liberals fascistic?

quote: Some of the left believes in freedom from the state, just as some of the right does. It's not a determining issue as equality is.

You can't believe in "equality" and believe in freedom from the state at the same time. Look at the advocates of "equality" in this thread, they're a bunch of ~socialists who want to use the state to "re-distribute" wealth.

quote: Which demonstrates that high spending can be conservative.

Not according to the definitions of liberal and conservative. If you think Bush's spending is conservative, how much more would he have to spend to qualify as a liberal spender? No, when the instructions for a creme tell you to spread liberally, they're not telling you to use it sparingly (conservatively)... Bush is liberal wrt spending, not conservative. So why is he a conservative?

quote: It varies among the left: economic control is the primary issue among socialists, income/wealth is the primary issue among social democrats.

How does a socialist having control over my business endeavors constitute equality between me and the socialist?
And how does a social democrat obtaining my money constitute equality between me and the social democrat?

	29-01-2004 17:31									#153
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Ramo -

quote: I don't. Many do not. And there isn't anything "illogical" about state-socialists who want to impose socialism by force, and then distribute power to the workers.

You aren't a socialist, you're supposed to be an anarchist. It is illogical to call that equality. If it was equality, then socialists would want their opponents to force a foreign ideology onto them. You see, we punch each other = equality. I punch you and you fear for your life and obey my commands != equality. The Golden Rule is about equality, treat others as you want to be treated. Socialists don't want others treating them to the forceful imposition of an ideology they dislike...

quote: That's because you have that strange idea that advocating greater government power mean one's more left.

Doesn't matter to me if we identify this as left or right as long as we identify it as one or the other and don't confuse our identification by placing it alongside ideological opposites. If we were associating your brand of anarchism with fascism, would that make sense to you? No, that would be crazy... So if fascism is right wing, then anarchism is left wing. And libertarianism is closely related to anarchism, but we're called right wingers by socialists. Why the confusion? Because liberals and social conservatives don't like the fact they have so much in common and feel the need to create separation, hence left and right.

quote: 1. Once again, the point was that no one taken seriously on the left wants total control.

The commies want total control.

quote: 2. Wouldn't the entire US gov't be left-wing according to your scale?

Not at all, much of what government does is valid under libertarianism.

quote: Regardless of what he personally wanted, the Nazi Party didn't want it.

And if they did want it? Who was going to stop them?

quote: The Party was run by industrialists. It doesn't make sense to say that the government was in total control of business when business was in control of government.

That doesn't mean the Nazis were capitalists, but you're wrong. The Nazi party was created and built by WWI veterans, the industrialists like Krupp staved off a complete Nazi takeover to maintain their own niche in the power struggle.

	29-01-2004 19:29									#154
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger The US government intervened to save the S&L mess -- does it mean that the US is on the left?

Surely you know what I mean? Intervention can be a little as requiring accurate financial statements, to wage and price controls, the controlling the Board of Directors, to outright state ownership.

	29-01-2004 19:39									#155
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Ramo Shrub is one of the most authoritarian presidents in recent history. He's certainly more authoritarian than Clinton. So much for the right's apprecation for liberty....

So much for diverting attention.

It is well known that on the social spectrum, it appears that the more state intervention the more to the right one is. So in a way it is true that Republicans typically like economic freedom and social authoritarianism.

quote: Eh? Who on the left is arguing for "total government control of business" besides a handful of commies?

What is Howard been talking about when he talks about "re-regulating" business.

quote: No, they didn't want "total government control of business" either. Industrialists were basically running the NSDAP. The gov't was subservient to businesses, through attacking strikers and the like. In fact, Nazi Germany was one of the last major countries to start nationalizing businesses in WWII. Hitler is firmly on the right.

Talk about living an a fantasy land.

Why is it that we always hear about corporations running the government from the left - pointing to Nazi Germany as an example? The opposite was clearly the case in Germany. The German government controlled Boards of Directors, controlled profits and set wages and prices. The Nazi party clearly controlled the German economy.

	29-01-2004 19:42									#156
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

geez, go away for a little while, and the thread goes all to hell.


Thanks to the usual suspects


Oh well, we had some good points while it lasted.

	29-01-2004 19:53									#157
	Remove this text

You're welcome, LoTM. It just seem that some here do not accept that Saddam was a national socialist in the very same sense that Hitler was a national socialist. We quickly find that we fail to communicate because we do not agree on what the words fascist, socialist, communist, etc. mean.

But, can't you see a problem in approving of socialism while condemning fascism when they are practically the same thing, with socialism being a more extreme form in that it provides for even more state control?

	29-01-2004 20:03									#158
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Berzerker The commies want total control.

We want to control the economy, yes. So does Alan Greenspan.

	29-01-2004 20:06									#159
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Ned But, can't you see a problem in approving of socialism while condemning fascism when they are practically the same thing, with socialism being a more extreme form in that it provides for even more state control?

Fascism means complete economic and political control by the govt. Anything less than complete is not fascism. So how can socialism be more extreme. The difference is that the purpose of socialism is equality. That's why it's a left wing ideology. You all know this.

	29-01-2004 20:19									#160
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Fascism means complete economic and political control by the govt. Anything less than complete is not fascism. So how can socialism be more extreme. The difference is that the purpose of socialism is equality. That's why it's a left wing ideology. You all know this.

wrong... well not wrong... fascism and it's little brother corporatism (Mussolini said the two were one and the same) wants government control by private interests (business, corporations).

	29-01-2004 20:22									#161
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Kid, socialism provides for more complete control because it eliminates capitalists completely. And, despite the attempt at equality, it turns out that party members are more equal than non party members.

Besides, even under fascism, the state can be strongly pro-worker as was seen in Nazi Germany where employment was nearly 100%, wages were good, and the Nazi's provided the first universal health care to the people. There is a reason Hitler was popular.

	29-01-2004 22:18									#162
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Sava wrong... well not wrong... fascism and it's little brother corporatism (Mussolini said the two were one and the same) wants government control by private interests (business, corporations).

Mussolini's making the rules now? Besides that, how can you compare the two as equal?

The article is interesting. While I don't fully agree with his view of the war as antifascist (at least in intent), I have seen far too many examples of the flaws in reasoning he describes both here on the internet and and in real life. In fact, we have two self-proclaimed lefties teaching here. One of them basically admits that her opinions are primarily based on a hatred of Bush and general American policy and a love for France. The other one, just makes an ass out of himself, and often finds himself sitting alone with his 'moral superiority.'

	29-01-2004 22:36									#163
	Remove this text

quote: i think youll enjoy it - be forewarned, his socialism is more of the revisionist school - democratic socialist - anti communist school - think Michael Walzer (though MW was a dove on Iraq, IIRC)

So Berman's a Menchivek (sp?)?

quote: In fact, we have two self-proclaimed lefties teaching here. One of them basically admits that her opinions are primarily based on a hatred of Bush and general American policy and a love for France.

Uhhh... who would that be?

	29-01-2004 22:36									#164
	Remove this text

I've been thinking about this since yesterday, trying to figure out what the disparate ideologies share that qualifies them left or right. I think this is it.

Property. The further right you go, the more absolute the belief in the right of proerpty. The further left you go, the less. This is the only way you can get Stalinists and anarchists anywhere near each other on a political scale. The same goes for fascists and libertarians.

So on this scale, anarchists are the farthest to the left, while libertarians are the farthest to the right. Th further left you go, the more you believe in the right of society to interfere with private property untill you reach the socialists, where it goes from total regulation to the abolition of private property, giving way to communal and/or state property, and ultimately the abolition of property altogether.

	29-01-2004 22:38									#165
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Theben quote: i think youll enjoy it - be forewarned, his socialism is more of the revisionist school - democratic socialist - anti communist school - think Michael Walzer (though MW was a dove on Iraq, IIRC) So Berman's a Menchivek (sp?)?

Worse, he's one of those 2nd International types that voted for WWI.

	29-01-2004 22:42									#166
	Remove this text

The other thing about the scale is that at extreme ends it meets together (aka anarchism/libertarianism).

	30-01-2004 00:42									#167
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

God. This thread's gone to the arse-end of hell on a skateboard.

	30-01-2004 00:51									#168
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Don't you have small children to go frighten?

	30-01-2004 00:52									#169
	Increase the size of your Attachments

You could try picking it up from where it last made sense.

	30-01-2004 01:08									#170
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Theben You could try picking it up from where it last made sense.

nah, as the thread starter i suggest abandoning it and starting over with something else.

	30-01-2004 01:21									#171
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

If you'd prefer (actually, I would as well - these debates never end ), I'll drop the debate.

	30-01-2004 01:39									#172
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara I've been thinking about this since yesterday, trying to figure out what the disparate ideologies share that qualifies them left or right. I think this is it. Property. The further right you go, the more absolute the belief in the right of proerpty. The further left you go, the less. This is the only way you can get Stalinists and anarchists anywhere near each other on a political scale. The same goes for fascists and libertarians. So on this scale, anarchists are the farthest to the left, while libertarians are the farthest to the right. Th further left you go, the more you believe in the right of society to interfere with private property untill you reach the socialists, where it goes from total regulation to the abolition of private property, giving way to communal and/or state property, and ultimately the abolition of property altogether.

Interesting framing of left and right.

	30-01-2004 01:46									#173
	Increase the size of your Attachments

There are political issues that have nothing to do with the issue of private property though. Equal treatment is a better measure.

	30-01-2004 01:50									#174
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I prefer Che's measuring stick moreso than equal treatmennt. As definitions of equal treatment are too fuzzy.

	30-01-2004 01:52									#175
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe I prefer Che's measuring stick moreso than equal treatmennt. As definitions of equal treatment are too fuzzy.

Either you believe in equal treatment or you don't. There's no fuzz.

	30-01-2004 01:54									#176
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Either you believe in equal treatment or you don't. There's no fuzz.

I'd edit post quickly. cuz no way that statement is standing up to scrutiny.

	30-01-2004 02:08									#177
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by yavoon I'd edit post quickly. cuz no way that statement is standing up to scrutiny.

Well some people claim to believe that inequality is equality, but that's just all crap of course.

	30-01-2004 06:07									#178
	Increase Your PM Length

Chegitz -

quote: Property. The further right you go, the more absolute the belief in the right of proerpty. The further left you go, the less. This is the only way you can get Stalinists and anarchists anywhere near each other on a political scale. The same goes for fascists and libertarians.

But Ramo is an anarchist and he has far more respect for property than either Fascists or Stalinists, in fact, his brand of anarchism is quite similar to libertarianism. And you think fascists and libertarians have a ~similar respect for private property? The fascists went around stealing from millions of people just like the communists...

quote: So on this scale, anarchists are the farthest to the left, while libertarians are the farthest to the right. The further left you go, the more you believe in the right of society to interfere with private property untill you reach the socialists, where it goes from total regulation to the abolition of private property, giving way to communal and/or state property, and ultimately the abolition of property altogether.

Anarchism should be on the right end with libertarianism since both want to dramatically minimise state interference in our lives. Anarchists generally reject authority (the state) so how can they be at the left end that believes "society" (the state) has the "right" to interfere completely?

	30-01-2004 06:28									#179
	Put an end to popups!

quote: As definitions of equal treatment are too fuzzy.

Agreed. Che's system seems to do a good job.

	30-01-2004 06:51									#180
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara I've been thinking about this since yesterday, trying to figure out what the disparate ideologies share that qualifies them left or right. I think this is it. Property. The further right you go, the more absolute the belief in the right of proerpty. The further left you go, the less. This is the only way you can get Stalinists and anarchists anywhere near each other on a political scale. The same goes for fascists and libertarians. So on this scale, anarchists are the farthest to the left, while libertarians are the farthest to the right. Th further left you go, the more you believe in the right of society to interfere with private property untill you reach the socialists, where it goes from total regulation to the abolition of private property, giving way to communal and/or state property, and ultimately the abolition of property altogether.

On this scale, fascists would clearly be to the left of the American center and even to the left of the Democrat Party, as no Democrat, save Dean, advocates as much interference with private propery as the fascists.