S
silentwitness
Guest
Look I think what you say is incorrect. I am happy to speak about specifics rather than quoting poems. Socialism is a comprehensive political ideology. You can’t really have a little bit of socialism. You can have steps towards socialism but it is not socialism until it is comprehensive across all of society.
At it’s heart it is a Godless ideology believing in a centralized bureaucracy with a right to it’s citizens wealth in order to create a more “fair” distribution of wealth. Mussolini (an avowed atheist socialist) and Hitler followed this philosophy and listed these goals in their party platforms.
Saying this is propaganda is just nonsense. It is truth and once understood it is clear that the great horrors of last century, excluding the first world war, was of socialists bringing their redefined ‘good’ and ‘progress’ to the world.
Going offline now, if you wish to discuss specifics please list them as you see fit for discussion tomorrow.
You might be interested in the following : Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt
At it’s heart it is a Godless ideology believing in a centralized bureaucracy with a right to it’s citizens wealth in order to create a more “fair” distribution of wealth. Mussolini (an avowed atheist socialist) and Hitler followed this philosophy and listed these goals in their party platforms.
Saying this is propaganda is just nonsense. It is truth and once understood it is clear that the great horrors of last century, excluding the first world war, was of socialists bringing their redefined ‘good’ and ‘progress’ to the world.
Going offline now, if you wish to discuss specifics please list them as you see fit for discussion tomorrow.
You might be interested in the following : Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt
and(In fact, it seems clear in Schivelbusch’s source — Arthur Schlesinger’s The Age of Roosevelt — that FDR was saying communism and fascism were blood brothers to each other , not to him .)
andRoosevelt himself called Mussolini “admirable” and professed that he was “deeply impressed by what he has accomplished.” The admiration was mutual. In a laudatory review of Roosevelt’s 1933 book Looking Forward, Mussolini wrote, “Reminiscent of Fascism is the principle that the state no longer leaves the economy to its own devices.… Without question, the mood accompanying this sea change resembles that of Fascism.” The chief Nazi newspaper, Volkischer Beobachter , repeatedly praised “Roosevelt’s adoption of National Socialist strains of thought in his economic and social policies” and “the development toward an authoritarian state” based on the “demand that collective good be put before individual self‐interest.”
andSchivelbusch is not the first to have noticed such similarities. B.C. Forbes, the founder of the eponymous magazine, denounced “rampant Fascism” in 1933. In 1935 former President Herbert Hoover was using phrases like “Fascist regimentation” in discussing the New Deal. A decade later, he wrote in his memoirs that “the New Deal introduced to Americans the spectacle of Fascist dictation to business, labor and agriculture,” and that measures such as the Agricultural Adjustment Act, “in their consequences of control of products and markets, set up an uncanny Americanized parallel with the agricultural regime of Mussolini and Hitler.”
And in 1976, presidential candidate Ronald Reagan incurred the ire of Sen. Edward Kennedy (D‐Mass.), pro‐Roosevelt historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., and The New York Times when he told reporters that “fascism was really the basis of the New Deal.”
Last edited: