Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: September 20 2015 at 14:13
darksinger wrote:
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
Svetonio wrote:
Nazism,reprehensible as it was,appeared after Russian revolution 1917 and nazism was an excessivereactionto the Communist threat on capitalism. Nazismreplaced theclass struggle withthe struggle between "Aryans" at one side, and Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and others "non-Aryans" on other side.
Nazismdisplaces the class struggle ontoracial struggle and indoing so, nazism obfuscates itstrue nature.Whatchanges in the passagefrom Communismto Nazismisa matter of form, andthat's where theNaziideologicalmystification resides: thepolitical struggleto the invasion ofa "foreign" (Jewish) body whichdisturbs that fantasized "harmony" of the "Aryan"community.
So thatneo-liberalattitude towards Communism and nazismthatthey are both bad - is a prioriwrong.
When,
in September 2003, Silvio Berlusconi provoked a violent outcry with his
observation that Mussolini, unlike Hitler, Stalin or Saddam Hussein,
never killed anyone, the true scandal was the fact that this statement
is far from the expression of a specific Berlusconi's view of reality,
was part
of an ongoing project to change the terms of a postwar European
identity, which until then had been based on anti-Fascist unity. This is the real context in which to understand the call of European conservatives in 2003 to ban communist symbols; it was a
group of proto-fascist members of the European Parliament in 2003, mostly from
ex-Communist countries, demanded that ban to the Communist
symbols: not only the hammer and sickle, but even the red star.
And why do countries of Western Europe and the United States did not open a second front during the Second World War until 1944? Is
the reason perhaps that it was selling weapons technology, products and
other goods on both sides during the conflict? Why would enter the war
conflict and lowered so great profits from both sides, and why the leaders
of Poland and other European countries had attitude
that, ''rather kneel in front of Hitler, but not to allow the
presence of the Red Army on its territory''?
Because they knew that
under Hitler's nazism, if they cooperate with him, they would preserve their
private industry and profits, while in real socialism it will never happen - all this would be under nationalization in the real socialism.
So
it was clear to the imperialists that communism was / is much more dangerous than nazism / fascism, because nazism /
fascism will always topreserve that big (private) business.
You need some clases of history
I concur, especially since fascism and national socialism ("Nazism") are not mutually inclusive. Fascism actually does not have a set definition but is more of a term to describe certain characteristics that may or may not exist as a whole. Also, pro-Aryan (which "Aryan" is a fictitious concept) is not mutually inclusive to fascism. For example, Mussolini's Fascist party included Jews early on before his entanglement into Hitler's National Socialism.
I'm afraid that you don't now anything about policy which the Italian fascist authorities were carried against the Slovenian minority. It will forever remain a symbol of crime and barbarism of Italian fascists, who sadly didn't get their Nurnberg. The abolition of Slovenian schools, the Slovenian language in schools and churches, the prohibition of cultural and even sporting clubs, burn Slovene newspaper and the books, the elimination of all cultural activities of Slovenians, the gradual elimination of surnames and geographical names in Slovenian language, ranging from the names of rivers to everything, represents some of the most heinous and the most insidious form of denial culture of a community.
Pretty openly in violation of international agreements, the Italian fascists authorities have not sanctioned physical violence committed against the Slovenian minority in Mussolini's Italy. On the contrary, while the strengthening of fascism, violence was legitimized and led to the burning of many Slovenian homes and the (Slovenian) National House in Trieste.
These dramatic events, so tragic for the Slovenian victims, today should be viewed not only as a problem of the oppression of minorities, but they should be seen broader symbolic value. Recognition and taking of full responsibility for these acts of "ethnic reclamation" now is ought to be duty and not to be something forgotten. Those Slovenian heroes are universal because they found the strength to oppose the fascism as the Partisans to make sacrifices in the name of the values of human and civil rights.
Nazism,reprehensible as it was,appeared after Russian revolution 1917 and nazism was an excessivereactionto the Communist threat on capitalism. Nazismreplaced theclass struggle withthe struggle between "Aryans" at one side, and Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and others "non-Aryans" on other side.
Nazismdisplaces the class struggle ontoracial struggle and indoing so, nazism obfuscates itstrue nature.Whatchanges in the passagefrom Communismto Nazismisa matter of form, andthat's where theNaziideologicalmystification resides: thepolitical struggleto the invasion ofa "foreign" (Jewish) body whichdisturbs that fantasized "harmony" of the "Aryan"community.
So thatneo-liberalattitude towards Communism and nazismthatthey are both bad - is a prioriwrong.
When,
in September 2003, Silvio Berlusconi provoked a violent outcry with his
observation that Mussolini, unlike Hitler, Stalin or Saddam Hussein,
never killed anyone, the true scandal was the fact that this statement
is far from the expression of a specific Berlusconi's view of reality,
was part
of an ongoing project to change the terms of a postwar European
identity, which until then had been based on anti-Fascist unity. This is the real context in which to understand the call of European conservatives in 2003 to ban communist symbols; it was a
group of proto-fascist members of the European Parliament in 2003, mostly from
ex-Communist countries, demanded that ban to the Communist
symbols: not only the hammer and sickle, but even the red star.
And why do countries of Western Europe and the United States did not open a second front during the Second World War until 1944? Is
the reason perhaps that it was selling weapons technology, products and
other goods on both sides during the conflict? Why would enter the war
conflict and lowered so great profits from both sides, and why the leaders
of Poland and other European countries had attitude
that, ''rather kneel in front of Hitler, but not to allow the
presence of the Red Army on its territory''?
Because they knew that
under Hitler's nazism, if they cooperate with him, they would preserve their
private industry and profits, while in real socialism it will never happen - all this would be under nationalization in the real socialism.
So
it was clear to the imperialists that communism was / is much more dangerous than nazism / fascism, because nazism /
fascism will always topreserve that big (private) business.
You need some clases of history
I concur, especially since fascism and national socialism ("Nazism") are not mutually inclusive. Fascism actually does not have a set definition but is more of a term to describe certain characteristics that may or may not exist as a whole. Also, pro-Aryan (which "Aryan" is a fictitious concept) is not mutually inclusive to fascism. For example, Mussolini's Fascist party included Jews early on before his entanglement into Hitler's National Socialism.
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: September 20 2015 at 13:39
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
Svetonio wrote:
Nazism,reprehensible as it was,appeared after Russian revolution 1917 and nazism was an excessivereactionto the Communist threat on capitalism. Nazismreplaced theclass struggle withthe struggle between "Aryans" at one side, and Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and others "non-Aryans" on other side.
Nazismdisplaces the class struggle ontoracial struggle and indoing so, nazism obfuscates itstrue nature.Whatchanges in the passagefrom Communismto Nazismisa matter of form, andthat's where theNaziideologicalmystification resides: thepolitical struggleto the invasion ofa "foreign" (Jewish) body whichdisturbs that fantasized "harmony" of the "Aryan"community.
So thatneo-liberalattitude towards Communism and nazismthatthey are both bad - is a prioriwrong.
When,
in September 2003, Silvio Berlusconi provoked a violent outcry with his
observation that Mussolini, unlike Hitler, Stalin or Saddam Hussein,
never killed anyone, the true scandal was the fact that this statement
is far from the expression of a specific Berlusconi's view of reality,
was part
of an ongoing project to change the terms of a postwar European
identity, which until then had been based on anti-Fascist unity. This is the real context in which to understand the call of European conservatives in 2003 to ban communist symbols; it was a
group of proto-fascist members of the European Parliament in 2003, mostly from
ex-Communist countries, demanded that ban to the Communist
symbols: not only the hammer and sickle, but even the red star.
And why do countries of Western Europe and the United States did not open a second front during the Second World War until 1944? Is
the reason perhaps that it was selling weapons technology, products and
other goods on both sides during the conflict? Why would enter the war
conflict and lowered so great profits from both sides, and why the leaders
of Poland and other European countries had attitude
that, ''rather kneel in front of Hitler, but not to allow the
presence of the Red Army on its territory''?
Because they knew that
under Hitler's nazism, if they cooperate with him, they would preserve their
private industry and profits, while in real socialism it will never happen - all this would be under nationalization in the real socialism.
So
it was clear to the imperialists that communism was / is much more dangerous than nazism / fascism, because nazism /
fascism will always topreserve that big (private) business.
You need some clases of history
Is stormfront.org enough good place for learning "the true history"?
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Posted: September 20 2015 at 13:34
Svetonio wrote:
Nazism,reprehensible as it was,appeared after Russian revolution 1917 and nazism was an excessivereactionto the Communist threat on capitalism. Nazismreplaced theclass struggle withthe struggle between "Aryans" at one side, and Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and others "non-Aryans" on other side.
Nazismdisplaces the class struggle ontoracial struggle and indoing so, nazism obfuscates itstrue nature.Whatchanges in the passagefrom Communismto Nazismisa matter of form, andthat's where theNaziideologicalmystification resides: thepolitical struggleto the invasion ofa "foreign" (Jewish) body whichdisturbs that fantasized "harmony" of the "Aryan"community.
So thatneo-liberalattitude towards Communism and nazismthatthey are both bad - is a prioriwrong.
When,
in September 2003, Silvio Berlusconi provoked a violent outcry with his
observation that Mussolini, unlike Hitler, Stalin or Saddam Hussein,
never killed anyone, the true scandal was the fact that this statement
is far from the expression of a specific Berlusconi's view of reality,
was part
of an ongoing project to change the terms of a postwar European
identity, which until then had been based on anti-Fascist unity. This is the real context in which to understand the call of European conservatives in 2003 to ban communist symbols; it was a
group of proto-fascist members of the European Parliament in 2003, mostly from
ex-Communist countries, demanded that ban to the Communist
symbols: not only the hammer and sickle, but even the red star.
And why do countries of Western Europe and the United States did not open a second front during the Second World War until 1944? Is
the reason perhaps that it was selling weapons technology, products and
other goods on both sides during the conflict? Why would enter the war
conflict and lowered so great profits from both sides, and why the leaders
of Poland and other European countries had attitude
that, ''rather kneel in front of Hitler, but not to allow the
presence of the Red Army on its territory''?
Because they knew that
under Hitler's nazism, if they cooperate with him, they would preserve their
private industry and profits, while in real socialism it will never happen - all this would be under nationalization in the real socialism.
So
it was clear to the imperialists that communism was / is much more dangerous than nazism / fascism, because nazism /
fascism will always topreserve that big (private) business.
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838
Posted: September 20 2015 at 07:19
Dean wrote:
A Person wrote:
I thought svetonio would be a redshirt
I'm not overly thrilled about being cast as The Keeper, a Talosian with the ability to distort reality. I guess that my three years aboard the Starship Art Rock (TNG) was just another illusion.
critics!
you were a beloved member of the Crossdressers.. more a club of deviants with the ultimate goal of corrupting PA's and its musical elitism by introducing pop bands in the guise of prog bands.
More socially acceptable than the forum terrorists that were the old AR team whose main goal was ridding this site of DT fans, shooting down those that stood in our way of promoting forum anarchy, along with getting drunk, teaching Rico his birds and bees, and blowing up subgenres and piecing them back together.
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: September 20 2015 at 03:48
A Person wrote:
I thought svetonio would be a redshirt
I'm not overly thrilled about being cast as The Keeper, a Talosian with the ability to distort reality. I guess that my three years aboard the Starship Art Rock (TNG) was just another illusion.
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: September 20 2015 at 02:03
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
Svetonio wrote:
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
(...)
The last ones are the only dangerous.
Les mascotas del Capitalismo?
We are pets of nobody
We have some lunatics as anywhere.
BTW: Since when is Nazism related with capitalism?
I have proved here that Nazism is a left wing movement.
Here you can read some of the 25-point Program of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei
10. The
first obligation of every citizen must be to work both spiritually and
physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the interests of
the universality, but must have its result within the framework of the whole
for the benefit of all. Consequently we demand:
11.
Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of debt
(interest)-slavery.
12. In
consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war
demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as
a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all
war profits.
13. We
demand theNationalization of all
(previous) associated industries (trusts)
14. We
demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
17. We
demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free
expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on
land and prevention of all speculation in land.
20. The
state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole
national education program, to enable every capable and industrious German to
obtain higher education and subsequently introduction into leading positions.
The plans of instruction of all educational institutions are to conform with
the experiences of practical life. The comprehension of the concept of the
State must be striven for by the school [Staatsbürgerkunde] as early as the
beginning of understanding. We demand the education at the expense of the State
of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without
consideration of position or profession.
22. We
demand abolition of the mercenary troops and formation of a national army
But this one is eye opening
25. For the
execution of all of this we demand the formation of a strong central power in
the Reich. Unlimited authority of the central parliament over the whole Reich
and its organizations in general. The forming of state and profession chambers
for the execution of the laws made by the Reich within the Landers The leaders of the Party promise, if necessary by
sacrificing their own lives, to support by the execution of the points set
forth above without consideration.
Change Landers for Soviets, and you have the Communist manifesto
Nazism,reprehensible as it was,appeared after Russian revolution 1917 and nazism was an excessivereactionto the Communist threat on capitalism. Nazismreplaced theclass struggle withthe struggle between "Aryans" at one side, and Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and others "non-Aryans" on other side.
Nazism displaces the class struggle onto racial struggle and in doing so, nazism show its true nature. What changes in the passage from Communism to Nazism is a matter of form, but that where the Nazi ideological mystification resides actually is the political struggle to the invasion of a "foreign" (Jewish) body which disturbs that fantasized "harmony" of the "Aryan" community.
So thatneo-liberalattitude towards Communism and nazismthatthey are both bad - is a prioriwrong.
When,
in September 2003, Silvio Berlusconi provoked a violent outcry with his
observation that Mussolini, unlike Hitler, Stalin or Saddam Hussein,
never killed anyone, the true scandal was the fact that this statement
is far from the expression of a specific Berlusconi's view of reality,
was part
of an ongoing project to change the terms of a postwar European
identity, which until then had been based on anti-Fascist unity. This is the real context in which to understand the call of European conservatives in 2003 to ban communist symbols; it was a
group of proto-fascist members of the European Parliament in 2003, mostly from
ex-Communist countries, demanded that ban to the Communist
symbols: not only the hammer and sickle, but even the red star.
And why do countries of Western Europe and the United States did not open a second front during the Second World War until 1944? Is
the reason perhaps that it was selling weapons technology, products and
other goods on both sides during the conflict? Why would enter the war
conflict and lowered so great profits from both sides, and why the leaders
of Poland and other European countries had attitude
that, ''rather kneel in front of Hitler, but not to allow the
presence of the Red Army on its territory''?
Because they knew that
under Hitler's nazism, if they cooperate with him, they would preserve their
private industry and profits, while in real socialism it will never happen - all this would be under nationalization in the real socialism.
So
it was clear to the imperialists that communism was / is much more dangerous than nazism / fascism, because nazism /
fascism will always topreserve that big (private) business.
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Posted: September 19 2015 at 19:09
TGM: Orb wrote:
The US joined the war because Germany and Japan declared war on them. Prior to that they had been studiously maintaining neutrality while squeezing every last nickel out of the British Empire.
They didn't needed to enter to the Europe war theater, they could had focused in the Pacific and Japan and let France, United Kingdom and USSR deal with Hitler.
Hitler was no threat for USA, they were too busy dealing with all Europe and would eventually fall, but they took the risk and paid the cost.
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Posted: September 19 2015 at 19:02
Raff wrote:
Ivan, being left-wing does not mean being in support of totalitarianism, genocide and other such things. Remember that there are substantial differences between Europe (where I am from) and the Americas, especially South America. No left-wing movement in modern Europe (unless we are talking about minority outliers) is anywhere in favour of any of the things listed in the Nazi manifesto.
One thing, however, is true: far-right movements in Europe, in terms of economic policies, are much more similar to the far left than to laissez-faire capitalism (which they abhor). Where they diverge is in terms of social policies, especially regarding immigrants and gays - and, of course, in their ingrained anti-Semitism.
I know Raff, neither being right wing means being an insensitive criminal.
A person is a criminal independently of his ideology.
There is a Pinochet and there is a Pol Pot, there's a Hitler and there's a Stalin, there are criminals everywhere.
But people like Svetonio shout Capitalist Nazis, when as a fact they are closer to extreme communists than to whatever they call capitalists (If there's such thing today).
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 19 2015 at 19:12
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.322 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Who is your favourite revolutionary?
Topic Options
darksinger wrote:
more a club of deviants with the ultimate goal of corrupting PA's and its musical elitism by introducing pop bands in the guise of prog bands.
"communism isn't bad, it's only big business lying to you"
