Fascism vs. Marxism (a side by side comparison)

[paulim]

The large part of the problem is the State. No state, no IMF, no retarded govt policies, no coercion, no inflation, yada yada.

In terms of some African cultures and tribes, the problem lies with traditionalism, based on primitivism. i.e this is how they did it, so we will mindlessly do it this way as well.

Traditionalism? = Primitivism? Thats a message for conservatives!
How about corporations stirring up conflicts. De Beers, Exxon, Shell, (also foreign governments) ... to ruin their way of living in the first place. Then they can go for the resources.

Beyond your narrow philosophy you are unable to grasp how human behaviour works. If you think that by reading human action you got more than a fragment, you are a decadent man with a pastoral demeanor that would be well suited for a christian missionary.

 

[Conza88]

Traditionalism? = Primitivism? Thats a message for conservatives!
How about corporations stirring up conflicts. De Beers, Exxon, Shell, (also foreign governments) ... to ruin their way of living in the first place. Then they can go for the resources.

Yeah, that is a message for them, what exactly is worth conserving? Aye? When do you start the "conserve"-ation time line? Eh? Conserve the political institutions? How retarded.

OH WOW, corporations aye? Stir up conflicts... how? Special Interests, ala THE STATE.

Couldn't do it without it.

Nexttttt.........

Beyond your narrow philosophy you are unable to grasp how human behaviour works. If you think that by reading human action you got more than a fragment, you are a decadent man with a pastoral demeanor that would be well suited for a christian missionary.

Haha... ok, were you trying to make some kind of argument? Eh?

Could you go ahead and try refute the human action axiom?

OH LULZ, you're now in a performative contradiction. You are choosing an end and using means to achieve it... purposeful behavior.

 

[acptulsa]

I'm just playing devils advocate, and showing how there are good and bad elements in every system. Nothing wrong with investigating the various systems and choosing what aspects of them work and are good, and what portions are not.

As far as Africa, it is a resource rich country, but yes trade policies and banking manipulation are large parts of the problem.

Do you have to advocate for the devil by further insulting our intelligence? The msm keeps busy enough using misnomers and misusing words in a deliberate attempt to obfuscate the issue. Some of us here value clarity.

And Africa isn't a country. We told Miss Teen South Carolina that, and we'll happily tell you.

 

[Conza88]

Beyond your narrow philosophy you are unable to grasp how human behaviour works. If you think that by reading human action you got more than a fragment, you are a decadent man with a pastoral demeanor that would be well suited for a christian missionary.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/032929.html

In defense of Peter Schiff’s critics
...
...

"So just remember this the next time you are watching Peter Schiff (or Ron Paul or Jim Rogers, for that matter) being interviewed by an economically-ignorant person or persons. Instead of feeling angry, or shocked, or frustrated, or perhaps even laughing at them, try to feel some sympathy for them. And be grateful that you are not one of them."

I pity you.

 

[paulim]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/032929.html

I pity you.

Thank you. Appreciated.

Seriously, you will get an answer, but it will take a few hours because I have no time at the moment. One thing now: It wasn't meant as an ad hominem, therefore there wouldn't be the need to be angry. I'm just baffled what you do with Natives. A further note: I don't think its a waste of time to read human action, it simply does not satisfy me. We will see.

 

[Conza88]

Thank you. Appreciated.

Seriously, you will get an answer, but it will take a few hours because I have no time at the moment.

No worries, take all the time you need.

One thing now: It wasn't meant as an ad hominem, therefore there wouldn't be the need to be angry. I'm just baffled what you do with Natives. A further note: I don't think its a waste of time to read human action, it simply does not satisfy me. We will see.

I know it wasn't an ad hominem, but there were fallacies. Fallacies make me angry. Lies and half truths do. Justice and the truth soothe my soul.

What did I do to natives? And I mean specifically me, because I am an individual and YOU (paulim) said "you", i.e me. And if not me, who else are you referring to? Eh?

So you read Human Action by Ludwig Von Mises, did you? Why did it not satisfy?

What other books have you read on Austrian Economics?

 

[acptulsa]

What have you read what have you read what have you read?

Conza, some of us like formulating our own arguments and refuting points ourselves. We aren't all looking to have discussions by referencing footnotes.

Oh yeah? Well, Mises On Lemonade Stands chapter six, footnote seven to you!! Whatever, dude...

 

[Conza88]

What have you read what have you read what have you read?

Conza, some of us like formulating our own arguments and refuting points ourselves. We aren't all looking to have discussions by referencing footnotes.

Oh yeah? Well, Mises On Lemonade Stands chapter six, footnote seven to you!! Whatever, dude...

And arguing against a position, you know nothing about, nor actually understand makes you a demented idiot no better than any statist / socialist scum out there.

I think for myself thanks champ, if only YOU could say the same. You folks always seem to forget I didn't start out as an anarcho-capitalist. Tsk tsk tsk...

By all means use any arguments you want, but at least present one. I've refuted all your "arguments". I don't appeal to authority, I just go to the best source that outlines what I agree with, the arguments I think have been logically proofed and destroy yours. So why re-write what has been outlined perfectly? Why bother with the trolls? They spend a good 10 min writing some bs pile of crap and I know exactly what their fallicious argument is, BECAUSE I USED TO BELIEVE IT.... I KNOW WHAT HELPED ME SHRED THE FALLACY, so I paste the argument that convinced me I was wrong...

I had an open mind, I weighed the cases and I discarded the bullshit fallacies. The reason I ask what books have you read on anarcho-capitalism is to help distinguish the minarchists who are open minded from those who are closed minded fools who resemble a cultard.

There is hope for the open minded one, who uses reason. There isn't for the close minded bafoon.

All I am interested in is intellectual honesty, and if my "opponents" / "devils advocates" have any.

What books have you read on anarcho-capitalism Acptulsa?​

Just say it mate... "NONE."

Is it really that hard to do?

“It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.” ~ Murray N. Rothbard​

 

[acptulsa]

I had an open mind, I weighed the cases and I discarded the bullshit fallacies. The reason I ask what books have you read on anarcho-capitalism is to help distinguish the minarchists who are open minded from those who are closed minded fools who resemble a cultard.

You're so convinced that principle will cover every practical contingency and so completely sold on this new thing you've found. Yet you show over and over you have no patience for practical details at all and you don't consider anyone who does to be principled no matter who they are or why they're doing what they're doing.

And I've read enough Rothbard over the decades, despite what you avow (in ignorance, just because I can't quote the title of every essay I've read in thirty years' of libertarianism doesn't mean I haven't read anything, or that it must be between the hard covers of a book to count) to know that even Rothbard acknowledges that practicality must be addressed...

I would get specific but the more detail oriented a person gets the more you scream and curse. Well, you don't need my help for that.

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Wow this is all definitely not bias.
There's a big difference from the Soviet Communists than the idiot liberals we live with today in the U.S.
A BIG difference.

 

[acptulsa]

Wow this is all definitely not bias.
There's a big difference from the Soviet Communists than the idiot liberals we live with today in the U.S.
A BIG difference.

Hell, there was a pretty big difference between German fascism and Spanish fascism, for that matter.

But, hey, let's not get into shades of gray. Too complicated, right?

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Hell, there was a pretty big difference between German fascism and Spanish fascism, for that matter.

But, hey, let's not get into shades of gray. Too complicated, right?

COMMUNISM: Hates religion and morality. Promotes pornography, easy divorce, and garbage "art" of all forms.

you agree with this?

 

[Conza88]

You're so convinced that principle will cover every practical contingency and so completely sold on this new thing you've found. Yet you show over and over you have no patience for practical details at all and you don't consider anyone who does to be principled no matter who they are or why they're doing what they're doing.

And I've read enough Rothbard over the decades, despite what you avow (in ignorance, just because I can't quote the title of every essay I've read in thirty years' of libertarianism doesn't mean I haven't read anything, or that it must be between the hard covers of a book to count) to know that even Rothbard acknowledges that practicality must be addressed...

I would get specific but the more detail oriented a person gets the more you scream and curse. Well, you don't need my help for that.

You did your very best to avoid the question.

http://lewrockwell.com/hoppe/hoppe5.html

The Ethics of Liberty
For A New Liberty
Power and Market
Egalitarianism As a Revolt Against Nature
Conceived in Liberty
An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought
The Irrepressible Rothbard

Democracy – The God That Failed - Hoppe
The Economics and Ethics of Private Property
The Myth of National Defense

The Structure of Liberty - Randy E. Barnett's
The Enterprise of Law - Bruce L. Benson's
To Serve and Protect

The Market for Liberty - Morris and Linda Tannehill's​

Fck it, I'm not going to list them all. FFS, read the list (click the link) and tell me what you've read... otherwise remain a liar.

It's still none, isn't it. LOL

 

[JAlli41]

Communism, to be fair, has never really existed as it implies people living mutually on a "commune." What we have seen are socialist states, authoritarian styled "people's republics ect. The real problem is that Marx was an economic critic, he never really painted a picture of how he thought a government should be set up, he just said he way it was working at the time exploited workers.
Fascism is sort of similar in that, it is best defined by what it opposes, globalism, communism, worker exploitation, exploitation of a workers' exploitation. The problem we run into is people trying to over-define what these words are and then calling our modern politicians these names. I dont think anyone here thinks Obama has any plans for doing what Hitler did. But when we call him a fascist it does sound like he wants to begin eradicating Jews. Fascism now has too many connotations aside from the political philosophy it started as.
The best thing to call our modern politicians are collectivists/globalists. They all seems to fit this description. Obama personally seems to be more in line with the academic worlds' love affair with empiricism, technocracy, and equality. I as an individual disagree with his philosophy on government.

 

[revolutionisnow]

Epic Fail.





Okay, students, where in this (see above) do you see state interference? (pause) nowhere.

Now, does our economic system look anything like this (see below)?


Fundamentally retarded = you.

Well technically communism and fascism are not totalitarian either. Also, what most people know as communism is not true communism, because in that there would be no use of money.


And Africa is both a continent and a country.

Definition of country

3. A region, territory, or large tract of land distinguishable by features of topography, biology, or culture: hill country; Bible country.

 

[acptulsa]

You did your very best to avoid the question.

But at least I don't avoid every question.

And I'm much too much of an anarchist to let you dictate my summer reading list.

Damn it, Conza, when will you awaken to the truth that most here sympathize with the anarcho-capitalist position, yet both those who self-identify with it and those who don't just don't see how it can be pulled off immediately?

Blackwater had to change its name because it was trying to lose its own reputation. The Marine Corps never has. Now, either the oath Marines swear to means something to them, or there's something fundamentally wrong with the whole idea of privatized defense. I personally think its both, and the fundamental problem with privatized defense is that the government will use them to do things that the government doesn't want to be directly identified with--a little plausible deniability. But, in the end, it raises a red flag, and that's a practical problem that must be addressed before anyone can take seriously the idea of getting rid of our government problem from the root up. Because, in the end, any rich bastard can become an oligarch if there's no Marine Corps to stop him. All he has to do is hire an army.

And that's the 'solution' anarcho-capitalist-voluntaryism provides to the need for defense. Pity that the 'defensive-only weapon' doesn't exist, isn't it?

In the end, we want to go the same place, but you're focused on the black and white core issues and I'm focused on the road. Think you don't need me, Conza? Then how are you going to get from here to there? By cussing people?


In the end, it's all useless without diligence. All of it.

 

[Vessol]

ON CULTURE
FASCISM: Defends traditional morality, the family, and classic art, music, and literature.
COMMUNISM: Hates religion and morality. Promotes pornography, easy divorce, and garbage "art" of all forms.

lolwut?

I smell a fundamentalist Christian here.

 

[revolutionisnow]

Pretty sure he is talking about the points covered in this video
YouTube - Yuri Bezmenov ex KGB Psycological Warfare Techniques. Subversion & Control of Western Society 1/7

 

[acptulsa]

lolwut?

I smell a fundamentalist Christian here.

I don't know what I smell, but it isn't that. So far as I can see, both use the arts as propaganda machines. Both equally.

 

[Vessol]

I don't know what I smell, but it isn't that. So far as I can see, both use the arts as propaganda machines. Both equally.

You sure? It's pretty rank. Them evil godless commies hate religion and morality! The Communists are absolutely crazy about divorcing all the time and pornography!