Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

What’s your most controversial opinion? **Read OP** **Mod Warning in Post #8023**

1314315317319320

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 713 ✭✭✭fortwilliam


    Can we please take the Left/Right argument to a seperate thread somewhere, it is ruining this thread!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 41,950 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Ah jaysus not the old "Hitler was a socialist" guff again.

    The hallmarks you mention are not exclusive to the left or right, they are authoritarian. Authoritarians can be far left or far right.

    I'm partial to your abracadabra
    I'm raptured by the joy of it all



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 41,950 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    When did the 'traditional American right' ever argue for taking the State out of the bedroom?

    Instead they imposed laws on what acts could take place between consenting adults, restricted marriage on gender and race grounds, banned contraception, banned sex toys (some states still do). Personal freedom, don't make me laugh.

    No government which aims to police the behaviour of consenting adults in private could ever be called a 'small government'.

    Oh and 'small government' never seemed or seems to apply to the Department of Defense, for some odd reason.

    I'm partial to your abracadabra
    I'm raptured by the joy of it all



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,262 ✭✭✭thomil


    There is none. There is no way in hell that the nazis were socialist.

    a) There was no nationalisation of private assets, a hallmark of socialist regimes. On the contrary, Hitler went out of his way to ensure that companies like Thyssen or Krupp retained all of their assets. Even when the nazis started seizing Jewish-owned companies, as well as the businesses of individuals critical to the regime, these businesses were not absorbed into the state, but redistributed amongst those loyal to the party.

    b) As soon as they seized power in 1933, the nazis set about dismantling labour unions, going out of their way to shut them down and imprisoning labour leaders en masse. A new nationwide labour union loyal to the nazi party was set up, but this was a mere fig leaf and had far less power than even the weakest of the pre-1933 unions. Workers were disenfranchised on a large scale as a matter of policy.

    c) The party went out of its way to eliminate anti-capitalist elements within its ranks, such as Georg & Otto Strasser, or Ernst Röhm, who had advocated for a more revolutionary approach, including large scale business seizures and nationalisations. One of the two aims of the "night of the long knives" in 1934 was specifically to eliminate these elements.

    d) Hitler had been unequivocally anti-leftist since the early 1920s. That's no supposition on my part, he wrote as such in Mein Kampf. The name NSDAP, that is National Socialist German Workers' Party, was chosen as a deliberate attempt to poach away voters from traditional left wing parties such as SPD or KPD, rather than serving as a declaration of political principles. Hitler was staunchly opposed to this choice of name, by the way.

    Those are just a few highlight examples. There are many more to reinforce the point that the Nazi=Left story is just a lie!

    None of these aspects are unique to leftist movements. They are hallmarks of totalitarian regimes regardless of political alignment, popping up in Peron's Argentina, Pinochet's Chile, Franco's Spain, and a whole host of other fascist and fascist-adjacent regimes all over the world.

    Attempting to paint the NSDAP as a left-wing party is a well-known, and thoroughly debunked, fascist dog whistle that flies in the face of historic facts. Reading even these two lines of clueless drivel killed off more brain cells than an all-night booze binge, but without any of the fun and says more about you and your perverted view of the world than about history.

    Good luck trying to figure me out. I haven't managed that myself yet!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 41,950 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Because you are trying to pass off your opinions as facts

    I'm partial to your abracadabra
    I'm raptured by the joy of it all



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 41,950 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    They shared those characteristics with the fascist states of that era, too.

    I'm partial to your abracadabra
    I'm raptured by the joy of it all



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,138 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    You've claimed the Nazis were far left, that's a specific claim. I can easily point to lots of credible sources that point to them being far right. Similarly being far right is intrinsic to the very definition of fascism. So if you can't provide any sources for your claim(unsurprisingly) then we can easily conclude that it's a completely ill informed opinion. It's the classic case of somebody holding far right views and wanting to dissociate from the likes of the Nazis.

    Eg here's the Holocaust museum

    In the 1920s and 1930s, Nazis were, in part, defined by their opposition to communism. After the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, Germany seemed vulnerable to the spread of communism, particularly after a communist uprising in Berlin. The Weimar democratic government was unstable, and its economy was in shambles. In their struggle against socialists and communists, fascists and other right-wing groups exploited the fact some prominent communists were Jews to harness antisemitism for their cause. Longstanding false links between Jews and Communism also underscored antisemitic conspiracy theories about Jewish global domination.

    https://www.ushmm.org/antisemitism/what-is-antisemitism/origins-of-neo-nazi-and-white-supremacist-terms-and-symbols

    A journal article similarly discussing the right wing group that was the Nazis. Additional sources at the bottom.

    https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/nazism



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,422 ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Thank you for this. One of the best posts I've seen in a while.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,053 ✭✭✭Dick phelan


    Generally any one particular idiology cannot solve all the problems. To be honest if I meet someone whereby I could pick out 10 issues and already know exactly how they feel about them, I think to myself they probably haven't thought very logically about things and are not very open to alternative viewpoints.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,422 ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I disagree. I think Liberalism is the only way.

    Let me elaborate. I mean liberalism in the English sense. Not the catch-all term for anyone to the left of Donald Trump the Americans use or the opposite in France. I mean liberalism focused on the rights of the individual. That means property rights, the right to life, and the right to free speech. It also often means deregulation, free markets, free trade and a small state. It dates from the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution and traces its heritage through figures like John Locke, Jeremy Bentham, John & Harriet Stewart Mill, Isiah Berlin and Bertrand Russell.

    I see it more as an ideological toolkit than an ideology itself. A bit like those self-help books with blank pages for exercises.

    For instance, I would expect any liberal to support gay marriage unequivocally. It enhances freedom and costs nobody any rights. Abortion is where things can get more nuanced. I personally would argue that a woman's body is her property so she should be free to choose. Someone else might say that the baby's right to life cannot be ignored. Neither position is wrong. We just have to make the best choice.

    You can apply this type of thinking to all sorts of things. Pragmatism is key. There's no point in passing laws which cannot be enforced but things which look like restrictions can actually improve people's liberty, such as the smoking ban in public places.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,746 ✭✭✭silliussoddius




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,959 ✭✭✭csirl


    This sounds very close to some of the minority parties that struggled/failed to get into US Presidential ballots in the 90s - usually splinters from the Reoublican Party.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,273 ✭✭✭Hoop66




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,273 ✭✭✭Hoop66


    You're seriously dragging that "Nazis were left wing" shite up again?

    That's probably why they imprisoned imprisoned socialists and trade unionists first, yeah?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,959 ✭✭✭csirl


    Im just being contrary! Putting out an alternative view.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,422 ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Soapboxing, in other words. It's been explained to you multiple times why you're wrong but you're still posting this nonsense anyway.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,959 ✭✭✭csirl


    Im not a fan of authoritarianism and regimes that dont respect peoples rights. From my perspective, they are all peas from the same pod and so should be lumped in with one another. To label them "left' or "right' is absurd as it gives the false impression that they are very different to one another.

    I think it would be better lsbeling regimes on a scale of their respect for individual rights and personal freedoms.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,273 ✭✭✭Hoop66


    It's not an "alternative view", it's "bollocks". Part and parcel with holocaust revisionism. Next you'll be telling us Churchill started the 2nd world war.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,513 ✭✭✭Rocket_GD


    Nazi means Natiional Socialist. Their society bore all the hallmarks of a left wing government

    You were the one who said the above though, you associated them as a "left wing government" but now say "to label them left or right is absurd"?

    Maybe just drop this attempt at being a contrarian as you're all over the place.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,138 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    You must tell the Holocaust museums to moderate their language cause you're not comfortable with the terminology. I do suspect you very much so believed what you were saying but know you can't win the argument in any way.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,422 ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Nonsense. You repeatedly described the Nazis as being left wing. Now you're doing the both sides thing.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,632 ✭✭✭Yeah Right


    First they came for the Communists
    And I did not speak out
    Because I was not a Communist

    Then they came for the Socialists
    And I did not speak out
    Because I was not a Socialist

    Then they came for the trade unionists
    And I did not speak out
    Because I was not a trade unionist

    Then they came for the Jews
    And I did not speak out
    Because I was not a Jew

    Then they came for me
    And there was no one left
    To speak out for me

    Why would they come for the socialists/communists if they were left wing?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,636 ✭✭✭Cordell


    I salute you my fellow right winger. Classical liberalism aka English liberalism is the only way to go indeed, it's the only ideology that's really progressive.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,422 ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    There's nothing liberal about the whiny victimhood, censorship, hatred, racism, entitlement and corruption that is the modern right.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,636 ✭✭✭Cordell


    They don't get to claim the right wing and they really don't. It's the left who's spreading this lie, that the racists are right wing. They aren't, they are just racist, and more likely to be on the dole than on a well paid job enjoying the opportunities of liberalism and capitalism.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,422 ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Sounds like someone doesn't like free speech.

    The thing is, you keep spouting hysterical nonsense. You never back anything up or offer specifics. You just repeat the same vapid maxims from your social media here and move the goalposts whenever challenged.

    I'd ask for evidence but you never did get round to that scoreboard you mentioned.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,636 ✭✭✭Cordell


    And now you're just being contrarian just for the craic my fellow right winger.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 41,950 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    "Deregulation" and "free markets" just means the ordinary Joe gets screwed so the City can make extraordinary profits. See: electricity privatisation, gas privatisation, water privatisation, rail privatisation… essentials of life run for private profit and usually with massive taxpayer subsidy thrown in. Regulation is always inadequate and usually captured.

    Nothing progressive about that

    I'm partial to your abracadabra
    I'm raptured by the joy of it all



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,422 ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Depends on the context. I think the EU deregulating air travel made almost everyone better off. Privatising utilities on the other hand has been a disaster.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,422 ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Nobody under 18 should own a smartphone. There's no justification or reason for it. A dumbphone, maybe but I think we've made a very serious mistake by allowing widespread proliferation of these devices among younger people.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



Advertisement
Advertisement