Hallam
Junior Member
Posts: 94
|
Post by Hallam on Jul 19, 2005 11:53:19 GMT -5
<<Liberal fascists, conservative fascists--both end up as Stalinists with too much power.>> Droop,that doesnt even make sense... Fascism can never be Liberal or Stalinist,hahaha....thats hilarious! Fascism is reacting against the far left which it hates Socialism/Communists/marxists/Liberals! Read up on real Fascism! The faux-Fascism your using is the media's B.S spin on it.Its meaningless and wrong..Far to often does Fascism gets thrown around and equated with Socialism,Communism,Conservatism,Nationialism, Patriotism and various forms of totalitarian/Authorarian regimes ..this is done as slander and propaganda value by both the modern Left & Right against one another. fascism is neither inherently rightwing nor left. However, I will say this; historically, the vast majority of fascist supporters during the early stages of fascism have been rightwing nutcases.
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Jul 19, 2005 14:51:40 GMT -5
Flowin Prose, You asked if I got my statistics from Henry Ford. No, I didn't. I cited Winston Churchill as a source. (I hope that I won't be labeled an antisemite for quoting Churchill.) But here's the article from Winston Churchill from the Illustrated Sunday Herald of February 8, 1920:
"Zionism versus Bolshevism. A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People"
By the Rt. Hon. Winston S. Churchill.
SOME people like Jews and some do not; but no thoughtful man can doubt the fact that they are beyond all question the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has ever appeared in the world.
And it may well be that this same astounding race may at the present time be in the actual process of producing another system of morals and philosophy, as malevolent as Christianity was benevolent, which, if not arrested would shatter irretrievably all that Christianity has rendered possible. It would almost seem as if the gospel of Christ and the gospel of Antichrist were destined to originate among the same people; and that this mystic and mysterious race had been chosen for the supreme manifestations, both of the divine and the diabolical.
The National Russian Jews, in spite of the disabilities under which they have suffered, have managed to play an honourable and successful part in the national life even of Russia. As bankers and industrialists they have strenuously promoted the development of Russia's economic resources, and they were foremost in the creation of those remarkable organisations, the Russian Co-operative Societies. In politics their support has been given, for the most part, to liberal and progressive movements, and they have been among the staunchest upholders of friendship with France and Great Britain.
International Jews.
In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus--Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.
Terrorist Jews.
There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and an the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution: by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordi-nate Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek -- all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses.
The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.
"Protector of the Jews."
Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people. Wherever General Denikin's authority could reach, protection was always accorded to the Jewish population, and strenuous efforts were made by his officers to prevent reprisals and to punish those guilty of them. So much was this the case that the Petlurist propaganda against General Denikin denounced him as the Protector of the Jews. The Misses Healy, nieces of Mr. Tim Healy, relating their personal experiences in Kieff, have declared that to their knowledge on more than one occasion officers who committed offences against Jews were reduced to the ranks and sent out of the city to the front. But the hordes of brigands by whom the whole vast expanse of the Russian Empire is becoming infested do not hesitate. to gratify their lust for blood and for revenge at the expense of the innocent Jewish population whenever an opportunity occurs. The brigand Makhno, the hordes of Petlura and of Gregorieff, who signalised their every success by the most brutal massacres, everywhere found among the half-stupefied, half-infuriated population an eager response to anti-Semitism in its worst and foulest forms. The fact that in many cases Jewish interests and Jewish places of worship are excepted by the Bolsheviks from their universal hostility has tended more and more to associate the Jewish race in Russia with the villainies which are now being perpetrated.
A Home for the Jews.
Zionism offers the third sphere to the political conceptions of the Jewish race. In violent contrast to international communism.
Zionism has already become a factor in the political convulsions of Russia, as a powerful competing influence in Bolshevik circles with the international communistic system. Nothing could be more significant than the fury with which Trotsky has attacked the Zionists generally, and Dr. Weissmann in particular. The cruel penetration of his mind leaves him in no doubt that his schemes of a world-wide communistic State under Jewish domination are directly thwarted and hindered by this new ideal, which directs the energies and the hopes of Jews in every land towards a simpler, a truer, and a far more attainable goal. The struggle which is now beginning between the Zionist and Bolshevik Jews is little less than a struggle for the soul of the Jewish people.
|
|
Rockstar135
Full Member
Brown Goddess/Ivy Leaguer/Lover of All Things Domestic
Posts: 214
|
Post by Rockstar135 on Jul 19, 2005 14:55:27 GMT -5
I think the problem with conceiving of the far right as fascist is that there are two distinct elements of the far right with regards to personal freedom, authoritarianism and libertarianism. If we are using a classical definition of conservatism, we would ascribe libertarianism as opposed to authoritarianism to the far right.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Jul 19, 2005 18:00:59 GMT -5
Italian Fascism shared some element with Communism and more with National Socialism (Nazism). Under ideological point of view they are all collectivist movements with the consequences that: 1) interest of collective considered prevalent on the individual 2) interest of the collective considered known by a limited group of persons, 3) totalitarian ideology, meaning that every aspect of life is detemined and disciplined by the ideology. Under the sociological point of view they were all 1) movements of young people, 2) that proposed a revolution, in the original sense of going back to an immaginary state of perfection, where everything fits, heaven on heart, 3) which used propaganda massively 4) which used and justified unlimited violence. Finally from an implementation in a state point of view, they are all boureocratised, militarised, aggressive toward other states, deprived completely than the rule of law and an independent judiciary, with state dictating every decision of the citizens, in a word totalitarian. Differences are that Communism was internationalist and rooted in the enlightement and rationalism, while Nazism was nationalist, racist, and rooted in Romanticism. Fascim is a totalitarianism with compromises, a la Italian, where the state advocated the power to dictate every aspect of the life of the citizens as in the other totalitarianisms, but didn't (couldn't) actually exert such power. From an ideological point of view is very akin to Nazism, only it was implemented in a much more lax and less coherent way. Libertarianism has nothing to share with any of the a.m. revolting ideologies, never was a mass movement or even a credible political movement, but is just a truth known and treasured by few enlightened fellows who, when the world will finally go to the dogs will say we told you.
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Jul 19, 2005 18:09:51 GMT -5
Nockwasright, I disagree with some very minor semantical points [e.g., I think you overlook the West's early backing of fascism because Italy and Germany were business-friendly, and were thus "corporatist," as Mussolini termed fascism), but I cheer your championing of libertarianism. If only we could take America back from the brink of hysteria and militarization. Oh, well.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Jul 19, 2005 18:23:39 GMT -5
Nockwasright, I disagree with some very minor semantical points [e.g., I think you overlook the West's early backing of fascism because Italy and Germany were business-friendly, and were thus "corporatist," as Mussolini termed fascism) Yes you are right, actually this is important as they both aimed keeping in power the existent elites (businesses), although under the State control, and not to wipe them off as communism did. This had a lot of importance historically, and is also the reason why they could be labelled more conservative as opposed to communism.
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Jul 19, 2005 18:38:13 GMT -5
Being honest, I see no real difference between the fascist states and what America is becoming. Nockwasright said that an element of fascism was "racism". But that seems like cant added after the fact to distance the fallen countries from the victors. In reality, "racism" wasn't really an element of Mussolini's government or appeal. And, as for Germany--- Yes, there were nationalist overtones that led to segregation of certain ethnic minorities [most notably Gypsies and Jews]. But remember: The US had racial segregation that stretched back centuries. Germany's Nuremberg laws were in effect for a few years. So which country had the longer history of racism? --Be honest. Jews were treated badly for the 12 short years of the Nazi regime, but they were never made to pick cotton or wear neck-chains like blacks in the US. Furthermore, during the same time-period hundreds of blacks were lynched in the US while the greatest German act of racial tension was Krystallnacht where a few shops had their windows broken. That pales in comparison to lynchings. Furthermore, we know now--after the Tuskeegee Experiment scandal--that the US government was sterilizing and experimenting on its black populace, injecting them with syphilis. So to pretend that the US wasn't racist is an act of historical revisionism. The US didn't enter WWII to save Jews, or to prevent racism. Our own troops were segregated. Blacks would be arrested for drinking from a "white" water-fountain.
So, though I agree that Nazi-ism was evil, I can't pretend that "racism" was integral to fascism [since fascist Italy had no racist overtones], nor that the Allies were non-racist while the fascists were. The truth is: There is very little to separate the victors from the vanquished. That's why the Holocaust is important. If it really didn't happen in the manner and to the extent that is claimed by certain lobby groups, then---- Well, let's just say in that event: WWII would be like all other history--a fight between economic and political competitors where victory was won by brutality not by moral rectitude [as we can pretend to ourselves after the fact].
"History is that pack of lies that people agree to." --Napoleon
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on Jul 19, 2005 20:51:40 GMT -5
Flowin Prose, I hope you're not missing the whole point of what I was saying: I have to keep repeating it, because everyone seems to ignore it--but I wrote that 99.9% of Jews are normal, ordinary people with no ties to extremists. But that .1% are evil--just like in all other nations and races. No one addressed that part of your post because -- I think this goes without saying -- it's a ruse. If 99.9% of Jews are 'normal', then why is (for example) Aldwinckle's supposed Jewish heritage relevant? The fact that he isn't even Jewish speaks volumes about the way you think. Besides, 'normal' and 'ordinary' are two adjectives that should never be used to describe the Jewish people. I wasn't challenging the fact that Jews played a large roll in Communism. The problem is that the figures are generally inflated when used in that context. Henry Ford's book International Jewry, often cited by anti-Semites, is a good example of this. Hence the reason I asked about the 85% figures, which isn't mentioned in the Churchill essay, btw.
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Jul 19, 2005 22:40:47 GMT -5
Flowin Prose, That nuissance Aldwinckle was mentioned as being Jewish in the Yahoo News article I read on the subject. I didn't read the article and imagine. Nor did I assume. I looked at the story and winced. Because if he *is* Jewish [as many different sources allege] then it's just one more person giving the skinheads a reason to hate "trouble-making" Jews. My observation was one of sympathy, not neo-Nazi zeal. And as to Henry Ford's The International Jew, I've never read it. I know that Ford himself renounced it later and that the book was almost wholly slapped together by an editor at one of the dozens of newspapers owned by the auto magnate. So, despite its bearing his name, he had very little to do with it--and later disowned it. My opinions are usually formed by legitimate historians. Like that article from Winston Churchill. That wasn't some neo-Nazi thing. It appeared in a book I read, whose theme was "little-known history". And the author was--coincidentally--Jewish. So not all stuff that reflects badly on Jews is from neo-Nazis. The most damning stuff I've ever read on the subject comes from the father of Zionism, Theodor Herzl. That guy was antisemitic as hell. His quotes about Jews are scathing and--if coming from anyone else--would [justifiably] place him among the ranks of the most infamous scoundrels. Karl Marx, too. In his essay on "The Jewish Question," he calls the God of Jews money and echoes all the same rhetoric about Jewish parasitism that would later appear in hate literature.
Not being Jewish--or a neo-Nazi myself--I stand outside these questions. I don't unquestioningly love or hate either group. Gentile Germany amazes me: They invented synthetic rubber, the jet engine, the earliest version of the helicopter, aspirin, and were the Europe's philosophical and cultural center. And as for Jews, they've given the world (out of all proportion with their numbers) great scientists, intellectuals, art critics, etc. I could no more hate Jews for the aberration of Bolshevism than I could Germans the aberration of Nazi-ism. They're two great peoples--and neither should bear the burden of their lesser lapses. Picasso once said that all genius has its shadow-zone. "The genius of Einstein led to the deaths at Hiroshima". I look at all greatness like that.
P.S.--As to the 85% figure for Jewish representation among the Bolsheviks, I believe that that figure [or one very close to it] was drawn from Aleksander Solzhenitsn, on the one hand, and Professor Kevin MacDonald on the other. Hardly anyone's idea of antisemites.
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on Jul 20, 2005 1:33:18 GMT -5
Ford was a raving anti-Semite, and had very much to do with the column (published in The Dearborn Independent, given to the public free of cost), and later book. He actually spent millions funding The International Jew. And, no, he didn't renounce it. Read up: In 1927, Ford finally had to cease publication and issue an apology to the American Jewish Committee. In the written statement, Ford claimed to have been unaware of the anti-semitic nature of his newspaper. The statement went on to say:
Had I appreciated even the general nature, to say nothing of the details of these utterances, I would have forbidden their circulation without a moment's hesitation . . .
What nobody knew at the time was Henry Ford never wrote that apology. He didn't even sign it. The letter had been composed by the chairman of the American Jewish Committee himself, and signed by one of Ford's aides. It was just part of a negotiated settlement for a libel lawsuit. The Dearborn Independent had accused a prominent labor organizer of being part of a conspiracy of "Jewish bankers" to seize control of national wheat production and turn it over to the Communists. The organizer filed a $1 million libel suit against Ford, who chose to settle rather than face another humiliating ordeal in the witness stand. www.rotten.com/library/bio/business/henry-ford/Well, I never questioned the Churchill article. I asked where you read that the Soviet Council was 85% Jewish, which turned out to be guesswork. As for Herzl being anti-Semitic... What the hell? Only you could misconstrue his words to such an extent. Marx is another story.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Jul 20, 2005 3:14:05 GMT -5
Ford was racist,who didnt know what the hell he was talking about...Winston Churchhill was a Warmonger and an opputunist,and saw only Britain as the World Leader/ World Power,he was a pathethic case... Here's an interesting site I had found a while back: globalfire.tv/nj/03en/history/whowasah.htm
|
|
|
Post by Ilmatar on Jul 20, 2005 5:28:14 GMT -5
P.S.--As to the 85% figure for Jewish representation among the Bolsheviks, I believe that that figure [or one very close to it] was drawn from Aleksander Solzhenitsn, on the one hand, and Professor Kevin MacDonald on the other. Hardly anyone's idea of antisemites. I don't know about Professor MacDonald, but there has been some controversy regarding the views of Solzhenitsyn. Most people agree that he could be labelled as a Pan-Slavist, Orthodox apologist. Some people say that while trying to justify the 19th century pogdoms, for instance, he is at least explicitly anti-semite. Here's a link to what I think is an illustrating article (regardless the source) on subject: www.reason.com/0405/co.cy.traditional.shtml
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Jul 20, 2005 7:02:16 GMT -5
Flowin Prose (an asset to this board, and a godsend to people discussing this subject) said that "only I" could perceive the founder of Zionism Theodor Herzl's comments as being "antisemitic". Judge for yourself. Here are a few quotes from him:"Anti-Semitism is an understandable reaction to Jewish defects."
"Each country can only absorb a limited number of Jews, if she doesn't want disorders in her stomach. Germany has already too many Jews."
In a private letter to Moritz Benedikt, written in the final days of 1892, he wrote: "I do not consider the anti-Semitic movement altogether harmful. It will inhibit the ostentatious flaunting of conspicuous wealth, curb the unscrupulous behavior of Jewish financiers, and contribute in many ways to the education of the Jews...In that respect we seem to be in agreement."
"It is essential that the sufferings of Jews become worse. . . this will assist in the realization of our plans. . . I have an excellent idea. . . I shall induce anti-Semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. . . The anti-Semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-Semites shall be our best friends". (From his Diary, Part I, p. 16)
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Jul 20, 2005 11:20:15 GMT -5
I wrote that 99.9% of Jews are normal, ordinary people with no ties to extremists. But that .1% are evil--just like in all other nations and races. That .1% was responsible for Communism, purges, the murders of millions. Considered that Jews were less than 2% of Russian population and that 0.1% of 2% is 0,0002 of population are you implying that 0,0002 of the population imposed communism on the rest?
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Jul 20, 2005 11:33:34 GMT -5
I think his point was more in the line that the progenitors of Socialism/Communism and most of the big wigs and political Officers of the Communist party in Russia where Jewish .
|
|