(04-15-2019, 07:06 PM)Brutus Buckeye Wrote: You'd definitely wind up on some sorta watch list.

Biggest terror threat on the planet.  Just ask Don Lemon.  I mean if less than one percent of the total of all Islamic terror is the biggest terror threat on the planet, then yeah...  "white nationalists" are clearly the biggest threat.

(04-15-2019, 07:42 AM)stxbuck Wrote: World's largest online racist/Nazi/KKK/race realist community.

I woulda thought you would have given that title to the Nuthouse.

I'm particularly curious as to their ideals regarding democracy and the role of government in managing a nation's economy, healthcare, education, etc.  

We've always been told that these folks are "right wing".  However, I've encountered numerous white supremacists whose philosophy on the aforementioned align perfectly with leftist thought. 

One example of the white supremacists aligning with leftist thought is Israel and "Palestine".  David Duke, for example, advocates on behalf of the "Palestinians".  That is certainly NOT a position of the GOP or the conservative right.  

I found this meme (see below) on their site and, if representative of the views there, would suggest that they oppose free-market capitalism and favor state-controlled industry.  Such ideology is, unsurprisingly, fascist ideology.  Fascist ideology lines up squarely on the left side of the political aisle and I welcome anyone to challenge me on this statement. 

What I'm most curious about is finding out what percentage of these folks are truly leftists and how many actually support democracy and free-market capitalism.

Dutchman Povl Riis-Knudsen (hereafter referred to as "PRK" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Povl_Riis-Knudsen) seems to have been (and perhaps remains) a leading philosopher of the post, WW2 Nazi movement.  In 1984 he wrote a 12-page manifesto that he titled "National Socialism A Left-wing Movement".  https://www.solargeneral.org/wp-content/...nudsen.pdf

I won't paste his manifesto here because it is quite lengthy.  I can tell you that it was a thread-starter on Stormfront https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t617746/ in July of 2009.  It's now up to 123 pages of posts.  

PRK characterizes the Nazi/White Supremacist (hereafter referred to as "WS") movement as "left wing".   However, I think it would be intellectually lazy and disingenuous to accept that WS is left-wing based only on his statement.  After all, Benito Mussolini actually described fascism as being "right wing" but, when Italian fascism is compared and contrasted to the modern left, it aligns with them.  


Here is an excerpt from page 1 of PRK's "manifesto" (my term).  

They (the right wing) are willing to go to war against any other nation to assert the greatness of their own—even if it means waging a nuclear war against another White country if they think its system of government threatens their own domestic order, no matter how corrupt and degenerate it may be. 

They are for an economy based on unrestricted free enterprise, regardless of the .consequences, but they resent the Liberal trend in politics as well as immigration and racial integration, because they fear any changes that could upset the order to which they are accustomed. 

Where National Socialists are to be found in this spectrum seems quite clear: We are leftwingers—no doubt about it! We do not want to preserve the present system or any part thereof. We do not believe in the foundations of a system that has led our people into the misery of the present time! We do not want to support any institution which is responsible for two world wars between White nations as well as countless minor wars; nuclear rearmament; the pollution of the environment; unemployment; the total disillusionment of young people, who have lost all faith in the future; drug abuse; pornography; and all the other forms of complete degeneracy which are displayed today. We National Socialists want the most radical change of all: we want the complete overthrow of the entire Old Order!

Folks want POWER, left, right, whatever, they want power. Power means in the hands of those in DC obviously.

A free market is a significant deviation from power concentration. The opposite of that is a "planned economy". Planned by who? People in DC.

That forum is HUGE and it goes back a good number of years.  There is a LOT of material to be had there.  

Anyway, as I stated above, the article that was linked was met with a lot of disagreement.  That's not surprising in that everyone has their own ideology, right?  Anyway, I'm going to paste a response by a guy (who stopped posting there in 2011) who was refuting the claim that NS (national socialism" is NOT a "left-wing" movement.  It's a good read, actually.  

So nationalizing corporations, profit sharing, the confiscation of war profits and unearned wealth, expanded insurance, communalizing department stores, the state guaranteeing work for every citizen, and agrarian reform, is "right-wing" in your mind?!  


Mind you, that was what the party officially promised the German people and it was precisely what the people understood National Socialism to be. The reason the NSDAP gained such popular support among the population was due to that programme. 

Now, you can easily come back to me and say "that was National Socialism in theory, but its practice was undoubtedly right-wing." But let's have a look at what the NSDAP actually enacted while in power:

While it's true that Hitler did not nationalize every corporation upon assuming power, the economy was, nonetheless, heavily regulated and managed.

*Public Work programs were initiated in 1934 with the Reich Labour Service, and subsequently in the (Keyesnian) Four-Year Plan.

*In one year, the National Socialist government doubled the corporate tax rate from that which was previously established during the period of social-democratic rule; in 1941 increased it by an additional 10%, in 1942 by an additional 5%, and in 1943 by another 10%. The eventual corporate tax rate ended up being 65%. 

In 1942 a German company in Altona taxes amounted to "55 percent corporate tax, plus 30 percent commercial tax and 13 percent excise tax". This amounted to 98% of the business' profits. 

J.F. Lehman, owner of a mid-size publishing house, stated the following with respect to how his business had been taxed: 

"Doing more business is a double-edged sword. Ultimately it decreases your earnings since all the profits in excess of peacetime levels have to be appropriated and the warehouses gradually become empty."

As it turns out, he was paying 40%, not of his company's profits, but of its annual turnover of 5.7 million reichsmarks.

The current corporate tax rate in the U.S. for those companies with the highest reported profits is only 35% and during the period of National Socialist rule, the average level of profits reported by a large industry was nowhere near the unparalleled levels of corporate profits reported today. -How many times have Obama and the Democrats been called "radical Socialists" for suggesting even the most modest of an increase in corporate taxes?

And don't get started on the whole 'well it was a time of war, so obviously the state was going to increase taxes' line because it just doesn't stand up to serious scrutiny. 

Hitler, a leftist, made sure that the burden of war was paid by the privileged members of society (business owners, landlords, etc.), whereas a right-wing/Capitalist contemporary in the same war (Britain) made the lowest sections of society pay the lion's share of the war debt, having 85% of taxes being derived from those earning 500 pounds or less a year.

*Prince controls were enacted.

*Production quotas were set.

*The German Labour Front's Strength Thru Joy project gave workers benefits they never before had (paid vacations, the possibility of owning a decent car, etc.)

*The Third Reich established one of Europe's earliest socialized health care programs.

How much more "conservative" could you possibly get, right?

I think trying to paint Hitler as a Leftist or Right winger is just something done to tarnish the image of those groups.

It's akin to finding some Michigan fan doing something stupid to imply that Michigan fans are of that ilk.

(04-16-2019, 06:45 AM)cincydawg Wrote: Folks want POWER, left, right, whatever, they want power.  Power means in the hands of those in DC obviously.

A free market is a significant deviation from power concentration.  The opposite of that is a "planned economy".  Planned by who?  People in DC.

We can define "left" and "right" in a myriad of ways.  For me, I believe the greatest litmus as how far right or left an ideology is, is how much freedom do individuals have, is it democratic and how much control does government have over the economy, healthcare, education, etc.  

Therefore, for me, the example of the most leftist regime would be a place like North Korea.  Zero democracy practiced.  Zero freedom for citizens.  Government has 100% control of EVERY aspect of life from cradle to grave.  

Conversely, the most right-wing state would have virtually no government and little to no control over most aspects of the nation.  A great example of this may have been the founding of the U.S.  The federal government had little control, the states had more control and individuals and businesses were mostly left unregulated and free to do whatever they liked.  Since then, the U.S. has moved much further to the left with regard to the growth of government, government regulation and the loss of rights and freedoms by its citizens.  

Anyway, I presume there are WS that SUPPORT a democratic system along with a free-market, capitalistic economy.  They may differ from the rest of the modern, American, conservative movement in that they may support segregating certain classes of people (Jews, blacks, brown-skinned people, etc.) from them.  

I'm curious how many of WS lean to the left as opposed to leaning to the right.  There is a misnomer that WS are all "right wing" in their political ideals.  Upon closer examination, one will discover that many of them actually align with the modern, American left on political ideology.

(04-16-2019, 06:58 AM)cincydawg Wrote: I think trying to paint Hitler as a Leftist or Right winger is just something done to tarnish the image of those groups.

With all due respect, cincy, I'm not "painting" Hitler to be anything.  I'm simply sharing his own words as well as the words of other, leading Nazis along with, most importantly, their actual actions and comparing and contrasting that with the modern versions of the American left and right.  

Please read the Nazi "manifesto" and tell us which ideals most identify with the modern American left and which ideals most identify with the modern American right.  

The 25 Points of Hitler's Nazi Party

Quote:

Quote:1. We demand the union of all Germans in a Great Germany on the basis of the principle of self-determination of all peoples.
2. We demand that the German people have rights equal to those of other nations; and that the Peace Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain shall be abrogated.
3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the maintenance of our people and the settlement of our surplus population.
4. Only those who are our fellow countrymen can become citizens. Only those who have German blood, regardless of creed, can be our countrymen. Hence no Jew can be a countryman.
5. Those who are not citizens must live in Germany as foreigners and must be subject to the law of aliens.
6. The right to choose the government and determine the laws of the State shall belong only to citizens. We therefore demand that no public office, of whatever nature, whether in the central government, the province, or the municipality, shall be held by anyone who is not a citizen.
We wage war against the corrupt parliamentary administration whereby men are appointed to posts by favor of the party without regard to character and fitness.
7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich.
8. Any further immigration of non-Germans must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who have entered Germany since August 2, 1914, shall be compelled to leave the Reich immediately.
9. All citizens must possess equal rights and duties.
10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.
Therefore we demand:
11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.
12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.
14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.
15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.
16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.
17. We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.
18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.
19. We demand that Roman law, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by German common law.
20. In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.
21. The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.
22. We demand the abolition of the regular army and the creation of a national (folk) army.
23. We demand that there be a legal campaign against those who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the press. In order to make possible the creation of a German press, we demand:
(a) All editors and their assistants on newspapers published in the German language shall be German citizens.
(b) Non-German newspapers shall only be published with the express permission of the State. They must not be published in the German language.
© All financial interests in or in any way affecting German newspapers shall be forbidden to non-Germans by law, and we demand that the punishment for transgressing this law be the immediate suppression of the newspaper and the expulsion of the non-Germans from the Reich.
Newspapers transgressing against the common welfare shall be suppressed. We demand legal action against those tendencies in art and literature that have a disruptive influence upon the life of our folk, and that any organizations that offend against the foregoing demands shall be dissolved.
24. We demand freedom for all religious faiths in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of the Germanic race.
The party as such represents the point of view of a positive Christianity without binding itself to any one particular confession. It fights against the Jewish materialist spirit within and without, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our folk can only come about from within on the pinciple:

COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD

25. In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.
The formation of professional committees and of committees representing the several estates of the realm, to ensure that the laws promulgated by the central authority shall be carried out by the federal states.
The leaders of the party undertake to promote the execution of the foregoing points at all costs, if necessary at the sacrifice of their own lives.

For me:

Right wing = free market economics

Left wing = planned economy.

That isn't really different from yours, it's just distilled down to one thing, economics. I'd call a leader who is totalitarian but allows a free market (Singapore) to be Right wing. It is helpful to define one's terms of course, I despair of how socialism gets misused so often.

(04-16-2019, 07:09 AM)cincydawg Wrote: I despair of how socialism gets misused so often.

I agree.  That's why I'm sticking with "left wing" and "right wing".

If you have a "free" economy, that isn't technically socialist, but the government presides over a massive welfare state where wealth is taken from productive responsible people and given to unproductive irresponsible people, is it really any better?

(04-16-2019, 07:09 AM)cincydawg Wrote:  I'd call a leader who is totalitarian but allows a free market (Singapore) to be Right wing.  

I'm not an expert on Singapore.  This source designates Singapore as a "flawed democracy", just below the U.S. in that regard.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

(04-16-2019, 07:16 AM)Hightop77 Wrote: If you have a "free" economy, that isn't technically socialist, but the government presides over a massive welfare state where wealth is taken from productive responsible people and given to unproductive irresponsible people, is it really any better?

I think it can be said that the "welfare" states of the world have far outperformed the truly socialist states.  So, yes, I believe it would be fair to call them "better".

(04-16-2019, 07:21 AM)K9Buck Wrote:

(04-16-2019, 07:16 AM)Hightop77 Wrote: If you have a "free" economy, that isn't technically socialist, but the government presides over a massive welfare state where wealth is taken from productive responsible people and given to unproductive irresponsible people, is it really any better?

I think it can be said that the "welfare" states of the world have far outperformed the truly socialist states.  So, yes, I believe it would be fair to call them "better".

Better in that it is just a different and maybe slower form of death as you eventually drown in debt.