Germany's neo-Nazi underground

[Darryl1958]

I never once in Bush’s 8 years heard him blame anything on Clinton.

That would have been beneath the dignity that goes with the POTUS.

Bush respected the office of the President way too much to ever engage in such antics.

 

[Darryl1958]

We did have slavery. Britain played a major part in the US slave trade.

Slavery was never big in the domestic history of Western Europe. Feudal manors were mainly composed of serfs.

British played the major part in ending the slave trade globally, and Christianity, through Britain played a major role in de-ligitimizing it globally to where it is now limited to the arena of criminals and the dregs of society, rather than being the province of the elites and the caliphs and emperors and the respected members of society that it once was.

Any historian of Europe would say as much.

 

[Darryl1958]

You are a socialist, Jharek.
And you know what I am saying is true, so please drop the pompous snivelling about how anyone that says anything about Europe must be some kind of knuckle dragging, slobbering rube that can be dismissed with a snort and a guffaw, over and over and over again. What I have learned from you over the years we have shared here is less than I would forget in any given week anway.
You have nothing to add here again this time, and that is exactly what you have added to the conversation.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Indeed, we do. Although in Socialist Britain we prefer the term peasants, not serfs. Apart from that a completely accurate view of slavery in Britain/Europe (interchange as appropriate, we’re all the same pretty much.)

 

[Darryl1958]

 

[estesbob]

But pretty colorfull, nonetheless!

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Europe never had slavery. They had serfs, who worked for their masters in the summer, but were responsible for getting themselves through the winter on their own.

There was much unfairness and plenty fo uprisings and revolutions and bloodshed there too, not the least of which was the rise of communist and socialists states in the name of the proletariat and a workers paradise.

Mainly though, slavery ended by Britain deciding on religious grounds that it was immoral and un-Christian, and deciding to do something about it through the power that they wielded as masters of the High Seas.

Ummm, Britain had slavery (why else would they need the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833?) and Portugal was the world largest facilitator of slavery, even though they abolished it in 1761. In fact, Britain used the Irish as chattel slaves and shipped many of them here. Irish slaves were about 1/10th the cost of an Africa slave. Slavery was abolished in France during the French Revolution in 1789. Slavery continued in Norway and Denmark until the mid 1800s. Napoleon re-introduced slavery to French colonies engaged in the sugar industry in the early 1800s.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Scottsmen too. Alot of people don’t realize that the Scotch and Irish slaves were treated as completely disposable. African slaves were property…but considered valuable property, commodities even. Irish were used up and given the most dangerous, dirtiest, God-aweful work imaginable.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Interesting…

 

[LemonAndLime]

You are a socialist, Jharek.
And you know what I am saying is true, so please drop the pompous snivelling about how anyone that says anything about Europe must be some kind of knuckle dragging, slobbering rube that can be dismissed with a snort and a guffaw, over and over and over again. What I have learned from you over the years we have shared here is less than I would forget in any given week anway.
You have nothing to add here again this time, and that is exactly what you have added to the conversation.

Jharek is my socialist brethern. Therefore if you attack him, you attack me.

Post reported anyway.

Also, just for your information - between the serfs and today is at least 1000 years. Some stuff happened in Britain between then and now.

Agreed. I think if I looked at all my posts, a good portion of them are spent denying things I never thought I would have to disprove about my country. Communism is the most common one, although interestingly class warfare (which seems to co-exist in my commune) as well as enforced healthcare are common themes.

 

[Semper_Zelare]

Which is why I say, as having :shamrock2:Scotch-Irish :shamrock2:blood in me, affirmative action is a descriminatory policy. The Irish and Scottish should get affirmative action too. Especially according to the definition of affirmative action. The definition settles the matter. But, it’s all about the fact that the definition is applied with only certain groups in mind already. It’s not actually meant to be read literally… bc then it would necessarily have to be given to Irishmen.

Yeah… I just went ahead and got that definition:
"Affirmative action is the process of a business or governmental agency in which it gives special rights of hiring or advancement to ethnic minorities to make up for past discrimination against that minority."

There it is black and white, clear as crystal… it looks like Irishmen should at least get something, at least if affirmative action were actually applied fairly? Shouldn’t we get at least something?

youtube.com/watch?v=M5QGkOGZubQ

Oh… :crying: :bighanky:

Though we are a ways off of neo-nazis in Germany aren’t we? Ah well.

 

[Warrenton]

Some people confuse Volksgemeinschaft with socialism.

There was an excellent book published about 15 years ago called something like “The Agricultural Origins of the Frist World War.”

The book is difficult to find (I wish I purchased it at the time, but alas). The basic premise is that the disruption of European agriculture made numbers of people available for armies, and desperate enough to undergo the torments of war.

The generations of displaced countrymen were still struggling for existence after WWI, and the Nazis successfully held out to them the prospect of turning the clock back. This could explain the support they had in rural areas.

Whether the promise of volk culture was legitimate or cynical is harder to say. It probably existed across a spectrum - it is difficult to imagine a person like Goebbels taking it seriously, while Hitler himself could well have believed a rejuvenated German peasantry would provide the soldiers needed for perpetual conflict.

In any case, that vision of society seems more right wing than left wing, especially compared to the leftists of the 1920s and 1930s, who wanted to “industrialize” the countryside, as exemplified in Stalin’s “Dizzy With Success.”

 

[ringil]

Scottsmen too. Alot of people don’t realize that the Scotch and Irish slaves were treated as completely disposable. African slaves were property…but considered valuable property, commodities even. Irish were used up and given the most dangerous, dirtiest, God-aweful work imaginable.

Indentured servants not slaves.

One of the great canard of the Southern apologist- “the Irish were treated as bad as slaves.” “it wasn’t just black people, everybody always talks about the black people.”

 

[Sonic]

But, just so that we can move this thread on, here is a dictionary definition -

fas·cism/ˈfaSHizəm/
Noun:

An authoritarian and nationalistic **right-wing** system of government and social organization.
(in general use) Extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

Interesting… My hard copy Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary doesn’t say anything about fascism being right-wing or left-wing in it’s definition… pg 422

Fascism 1: A political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. 2: A tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control.

Are you sure about your source?

 

[bbarrick8383]

Indentured servants not slaves.

One of the great canard of the Southern apologist- “the Irish were treated as bad as slaves.” “it wasn’t just black people, everybody always talks about the black people.”

A slave by any other name is still a slave.

Do you deny that there were hundreds of thousands of white slaves as well?

 

[ringil]

A slave by any other name is still a slave.

Do you deny that there were hundreds of thousands of white slaves as well?

Actually the Church doesn’t define “indentured Servitude” as an intrinsic evil as chattle slavery is, so I would say that these irish “slaves” were indeed different from Afriscan slaves, who were the property of their masters.

Why are some southern people with a hint of irish anscestory so obsessed with this notion. Wait that’s me, being Southern and of mixed German and Irish background.

Anyway, my incredibly racist mother-in-law is the same way. . . . . . . She’s always going on about how “Blacks didn’t have it so bad in the south.” It’s really maddening and I have to hold my tongue. I hate getting into this. . . . . .

I have to decide when to speak up and when to take deep breaths . . . . . . I’m just happy I’m in NY now and not hearing this stuff all the time. I am from the South and I never want to live there again.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Actually the Church doesn’t define “indentured Servitude” as an intrinsic evil as chattle slavery is, so I would say that these irish “slaves” were indeed different from Afriscan slaves, who were the property of their masters.

Why are some southern people with a hint ofirih anscestory so obsessed with this. Wait that’s me.

My mother in law is the same way. . . . . . . She’s always going on about how “Blacks didn’t have it so bad in the south.” It’s really maddening and I have to hold my tongue. I hate getting into this. . . . . .

I have to decide when to speak up and when to take deep breaths . . . . . . I’m just happy I’m in NY now and not hearing this stuff all the time. I am from the South and I never want to live there again.

Your putting words into the conversation that aren’t there. I think, though I am not an expert, there is a huge difference between IS and slavery and that there were in fact white slaves who were treated just as badly as blacks.

electricscotland.com/history/other/white_slavery.htm

 

[ringil]

Your putting words into the conversation that aren’t there. I think, though I am not an expert, there is a huge difference between IS and slavery and that there were in fact white slaves who were treated just as badly as blacks.

electricscotland.com/history/other/white_slavery.htm

Well, yes, I am sure that some Irish or Scotish indentured servants as individuals were treated better than some other black slave individuals. On the other hand the institution faced by these perspective folks was qualitatively different and much, much worse for the black slave of the South.

For many, all?, indentured servants there could be a light at the end of the tunnel, even if they never reached it. Many, many did fulfill the rediculous demmands of their contracts and leave their perdicament. There were laws to protect them, though I imagine making use of such protections may have been difficult or impossible for some folks.

The Black slave was completely at the mercy of his master for his treatment so that perhaps he was treated “well” (I hate writing that because one without freedom isn’t treated well) or they could be beaten and mis-treated.

The Black slave didn’t have feet to stand on. They, and their family, lived as the winds of fate blew them and the pleasure of their owners took them.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Well, yes, I am sure that some Irish or Scotish indentured servants as individuals were treated better than some other black slave individuals. On the other hand the institution faced by these perspective folks was qualitatively different and much, much worse for the black slave of the South.

For many, all?, indentured servants there could be a light at the end of the tunnel, even if they never reached it. Many, many did fulfill the rediculous demmands of their contracts and leave their perdicament. There were laws to protect them, though I imagine making use of such protections may have been difficult or impossible for some folks.

The Black slave was completely at the mercy of his master for his treatment so that perhaps he was treated “well” (I hate writing that because one without freedom isn’t treated well) or they could be beaten and mis-treated.

The Black slave didn’t have feet to stand on. They, and their family, lived as the winds of fate blew them and the pleasure of their owners took them.

Knowing your disdain for southerners, and my lack of knowledge on history I have to question everything I read. Whether the argument is for the north or the south I at least take time and try and question what I’m being told. Usually common sense kicks in an tells me something is not right.

I dont know why but something tells me that no matter what evidence I provide you will not acknowledge the fact that whites were bought and sold as slaves, not indentured servants, and treated just as horribly as blacks.

This is not a north vs. south discussion.

revisionisthistory.org/forgottenslaves.html

 

[ringil]

Knowing your disdain for southerners, and my lack of knowledge on history I have to question everything I read. Whether the argument is for the north or the south I at least take time and try and question what I’m being told. Usually common sense kicks in an tells me something is not right.

I dont know why but something tells me that no matter what evidence I provide you will not acknowledge the fact that whites were bought and sold as slaves, not indentured servants, and treated just as horribly as blacks.

This is not a north vs. south discussion.

revisionisthistory.org/forgottenslaves.html

I read the link and have chosen to share this snipet to give others who may want to know what kind of sources are pushing this type of story.

Here we are from the above link.

"The Bible declares that the man who does not take care of his own family is “worse than an infidel.” This also applies to one’s racial kindred. The man who neglects his own children to care for yours has true love for neither.

White, self-hating liberals and greed-head conservatives who claim to care for the “civil rights” of Black and Third World people, discard the working class of their own people on the garbage heap of history. When they are finished with their own they shall surely turn on others.

Those who care for their own kind first are not practicing “hate” but kindness, which is the very root of the word."

Now I was kind of surprised to find this there but here we are. Perhaps there are other articles which could be linked to as well. I notice that the books section is closed to members only.

I have had some nice PM’s with you Bbarrick, but this stuff isn’t cool with me. I don’t like it. I find it distateful in the extreme, and I presume you don’t think in this way. Maybe you just take certain ideas out of this stuff.