Thread: How do we wake up Liberals?
09-02-2023, 08:31 PM
-
#121
- XterraRob
- Pattern Recognizer
-
- XterraRob
- Pattern Recognizer
- Join Date: Jun 2008
- Location: Tempe, Arizona, United States
- Posts: 40,898
- Rep Power: 400768
-
-
How do we wake up GNCPOV?
The Era of Great Noticing has begun.
Modern liberalism is morally bankrupt and demonic.
Right wing politics is the new counter-culture.
Wincel: "I'm saying even the govt of China, while brutal at times, is NOT our enemy. Period."
Has Beowulf10 ever experienced true love? Where did he go?
Education is humanity's key to salvation.
The 2nd Cold War has begun.
09-02-2023, 08:56 PM
-
#122
The internet is filled with so much bad information, one has to go to the books written during the time the extremist regimes were on the rise.
Todays democrats have more in common with Hitler than conservatives and "right wingers" of today.
Remember when Obama said "you didn't build that!"? Hitler said the same thing, and they meant the same thing. Obama was spitting Nazi propaganda and the leftists ate it up.
More; Politics and state first…
Todays democrats have more in common with Hitler than conservatives and "right wingers" of today.
Remember when Obama said "you didn't build that!"? Hitler said the same thing, and they meant the same thing. Obama was spitting Nazi propaganda and the leftists ate it up.
“Therefore wealth in particular does not only have greater possibilities for enjoyment, but above all greater obligations. The view that the utilization of a fortune no matter of what size is solely the private affair of the individual requires to be corrected all the more in the National Socialist state, because without the contribution of the community no individual would have been able to enjoy such an advantage.”
This isn’t the first time this happened. I remember reading about a young man that went to leftist Universities and read Hitler quotes and they all applauded and raved about it.More; Politics and state first…
This question was raised specifically by circles who think purely in terms of capitalism and who do not like to see companies developing which are public, or at least of a public character. The age of the liberal system of business demanded the primacy of business, in other words business comes first, and then the state. As opposed to this, National Socialism takes the position: the state directs the economy, the state is not there for business, business is there for the state.
Who controls the money? Who regulates? Who tells businesses what to pay? Who wants to tell businesses how much they can profit and tax based on profits?One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
09-03-2023, 11:01 AM
-
#123
Originally Posted By GNCPOV⏩
More evidence. Government fixes everything. They have been trained to give up everything to the government. The trade-offs, the corruption, and the cost is all worth it. Nothing can go wrong... no advocation for freedom at all, and strongly opposing those who speak for freedomWhy would anyone bother accepting your "truths" when right out the gate you state fascism is actually a left-wing ideology. And you provided exactly zero argument to back that up. In before "nAzIs HAd socchulism in their party title!". I already laid out the actualtenets of fascism in real life in an earlier post, to which none of you tried to contend with conveniently.
Ah yes, of course, women's rights and the end to slavery those were all actually right-wing! Why did the government have to force those things to happen in real life then, brother? Why didn't the private sector release them without threat of violence from the government? Is it because your political philosophy doesn't comport with how it plays out in real life?
You can't claim that because right-wing ideology in a vacuum supports individual rights that you can take credit for things like ending slavery or giving women rights. Why is it when we apply the favored economic system of the right - capitalism - to real life, all of the rights of the individual from your political theory falls apart? Capitalists sure weren't happy letting those slaves go. The hierarchical structure of capitalism would have preferred voting to stay only within the ruling class - wealthy white men for the rest of time had the government not intervened. What you mean to say is, all your political theory x economic theory does is protect the rights of the in-group, with exploitation for everyone else.
Allowing corporations to influence government by injecting money in politics is what leads to corporatism - not the very existence of government.
Having monopolies now says that the government hasn't used their anti-trust powers in any meaningful fashion in decades.
Basically everything you just listed is at odds with every credible source anyone can find on the internet (just lmao at discounting all of the diverse information on the internet what you need is BOOKS). It only exists in your delusional non-practical application of theory.
Oh good a Mercatus study, I'm sure that will be a very fair and unbiased view of how regulations have impacted business. It's definitely not just a libertarian think tank who will back into the results they want. Hey I thought the internet was all lies bud, why doesn't this link count?
Ah yes, of course, women's rights and the end to slavery those were all actually right-wing! Why did the government have to force those things to happen in real life then, brother? Why didn't the private sector release them without threat of violence from the government? Is it because your political philosophy doesn't comport with how it plays out in real life?
You can't claim that because right-wing ideology in a vacuum supports individual rights that you can take credit for things like ending slavery or giving women rights. Why is it when we apply the favored economic system of the right - capitalism - to real life, all of the rights of the individual from your political theory falls apart? Capitalists sure weren't happy letting those slaves go. The hierarchical structure of capitalism would have preferred voting to stay only within the ruling class - wealthy white men for the rest of time had the government not intervened. What you mean to say is, all your political theory x economic theory does is protect the rights of the in-group, with exploitation for everyone else.
Allowing corporations to influence government by injecting money in politics is what leads to corporatism - not the very existence of government.
Having monopolies now says that the government hasn't used their anti-trust powers in any meaningful fashion in decades.
Basically everything you just listed is at odds with every credible source anyone can find on the internet (just lmao at discounting all of the diverse information on the internet what you need is BOOKS). It only exists in your delusional non-practical application of theory.
Oh good a Mercatus study, I'm sure that will be a very fair and unbiased view of how regulations have impacted business. It's definitely not just a libertarian think tank who will back into the results they want. Hey I thought the internet was all lies bud, why doesn't this link count?
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts