Nazi Party

I agree to that, when my Grandma on my fathers side, of my family was alive. She told me that, as a little girl in Wisconsin, there was a chance she and her family could have been deported back to Germany, because of two things: 1) her parents had immigrated from germany, to Wisconsin, and 2) Because her parents spoke German as their first language. I think what you are saying has a hidden truth to it. It would be more mild than recounquering Korea, or China, or Taiwan.

I admit, Naziism scares me, I have been called a Nazi, because Im German, through my dad. I have also been called a Neo-Nazi, because I think that Nazi regimes are a joke, in their belief systems.
 
Martialartsnovice ~ That's terrible. Calling all Germans "Nazis" and all Japanese other hurtful terms "like Japs" is really ignorant and racist.

I am in no way denoting deportation. It is a horrible thing - but it is less horrible than conquering nations and having pogroms and massacres (like what Japan first did when it conquered the Republic on the Mainland, Taiwan Island, and Korea).
 
NOOO!, I not saying I agree with it. Im saying, that because Im german from my dad, that I have been, called a Nazi. I didnmt mean to say, that deportation was right, I meant was that, the truth in it, was that its a less noticible means of govt. control.

I agree, that deport. is less horrible than conquest of say the chinese mainland. But still I think its a crime of war.
 
Prejudice is so human. Remeber the line in Men in Black: "People are stupid...a person may be smart, but people are stupid.

It all starts with fear. Scared people look for solutions-- any solution. Even if the answer they find was considered extreme in other times, sometimes decisiveness looks good. They start to act tribally, to group up for protection, to dehumanize strangers and foreigners. People trade freedom for security. If they can blame someone else or something for their situation it's a bonus.
 
sabro said:
The fact that I'm a liberal probably has not escaped you. The fact that my party is inept and lost in space and time is not surprising. To let the other guys control not only the agenda, but also the debate and the rhetoric is more than sad. Meanwhile big business gets whatever they want, the rich get tax cuts, soldiers get killed, schools get nothing, and we all get--- well that's the angry yellow guy comming out.
Well at least you're not one of those "angry white Liberals" who is still living on the 'Gore won 2000' planet. If you're an angry yellow Liberal, I guess you'll have to start your own voting block. Good luck on that. And yes, I do consider Liberal to be a bad word, just as many Liberals think Conservative is a bad word. I'll explain later.

I agree that your party is lost in space. Maybe we'll get to discuss that on another thread.

But if anyone still thinks that fascism is completely aligned with the right wing of politics, then how do you explain Janet Reno?
 
I thought Janet Reno was John Goodman in drag.

I'm a teacher, so "conservative" is not a bad word, just bad policy.

A few reasons why I'm a liberal: Federal power over states rights. Social programs. Education. An activist policy that tries to solve problems. The environment. Human rights. Health care, nutrition, head start programs, after school programs...Much of this costs money so I want to tax you and spend it. I think this is more honest than borrow and spend.

My voting block tends to be the "Democrats will take you for granted" block, because they know that for now, they don't have to do anything for our votes. The South used to belong, but started quitting it way back with Reagan. Anger can be healthy. Maybe my party will wake up?

Fascism still belongs on the right of the political spectrum. This doesn't measure totalitarianism, insanity, or incompetence (which have no politics). I think I'm going to have to agree with Bossel (RE economic control by the government) and Eyseneck who place locus of control on a separate axis, in discussing Nazi fascism. Hitler's goals place him on the right. His methods make him a totalitarian dictator. Dictators can exist on both ends of the spectrum.
 
maybe it's just me, but that image maciamo showed actually does look like the nazi flag and not the japanese symbol for life. Isn't the life symbol archaic or is that current kanji?
 
Censport said:
Jeepers.
For now, let me say that the term "narrow minded angry white males", or any nuanced variation is offensive to me. I don't use racial or intellectual stereotypes for blacks, hispanics or Asians, so I think anyone who truly believes in equality shouldn't use such terms to describe people he hasn't met. .

Gomen Nasai, I let this one pass. I originally used "narrow minded white guys" to describe members of the KKK. Again, I'm making assumptions that the membership of the Klan continues to be overwhelming white, mostly male, and driven by narrow minded hatred. Although I don't know these guys (the primary racist organization in my area is Aryan Nation and some kind of Christian Identity movement-- I have met some of those people.), I feel quite confident using this term to describe them. I don't think they would be terribly offended.

The "Angry White Male" thing wasn't something that I came up with. Sociologists and media pundits coined it to describe the faction of mostly white, mostly males who are dissastified with the seeming moral slide and liberal politics in the US. It was a response to movements that alienated some white males such as civil rights, women's rights, gay rights, affirmative action, and political correctness. The "Angry White Male" played a pivotal role in the election of the last four presidents, the rise of right wing talk radio, and the resurgence of the GOP. The term was never meant to be offensive.

Interestingle enough however, the term doesn't hold up well to scrutiny. (You can check out Rush's "The Myth of the Angry White Male" for statistical support). Four out of Five "swing democrats" (Dems who voted for Bush) from the South don't identify with the term. They cite specific issues when asked about their choice including values, the War in Iraq and concerns about terrorism. It's not like there is a large homogeneous block of scowling European-American males. The group is far more diverse and shifting than previosly assumed, with many females, latinos (esp. conservative cubanos) and asian in the ranks. The media continues to hold on to it for the same reason I do, for effect-- it is descriptive, and it does function. ☝
 
sabro said:
I thought Janet Reno was John Goodman in drag.

*coughcough* Nice one! But geez, you really oughta apologize to John Goodman! You still didn't explain Reno's militant fascism during the Clinton administration.

sabro said:
I'm a teacher, so "conservative" is not a bad word, just bad policy.

A few reasons why I'm a liberal: Federal power over states rights. Social programs. Education. An activist policy that tries to solve problems. The environment. Human rights. Health care, nutrition, head start programs, after school programs...Much of this costs money so I want to tax you and spend it. I think this is more honest than borrow and spend.

At least you're honest about it. That's kinda refreshing, actually.

I'm more for states rights instead of a centralized federal government (what works in Maine won't necessarily work in Monatana). Remember the national 55-mph speed limit?

As for social programs, I agree that we have a moral obligation to care for those who truly cannot care for themselves. However, I believe that those who can take care of themselves have an equal moral obligation to do just that. Lacking a work ethic isn't a disability. Hang around any government benefits office and you will mostly see perfectly able-bodied people who know how to play 'the system'. I'm not against social programs, but I am against bloated vote-buying schemes masquerading as social programs.

But then you simply said "social programs". Perhaps you could add some context?

Do the same for "Education". After all, who isn't for educating kids and adults?

I've yet to see an activist policy that solved anything. Milked problems for everything they were worth (Araft, Jesse Jackson), but solved a problem?

Human rights? Again, you need to expand on that. You'll have a tough time finding anyone in the Republican party who isn't for human rights. We're the party of Linclon, remember? In 1964, it was 94% of Republicans and 64% of Democrats who passed Johnson's Civil Rights Act. But organizations like NOW aren't about equal rights, they're about revenge.

But at least you admitted that you want to tax ME but said nothing of taxing yourself. (reminds me of an old joke). Why does everything have to be forced charity by the federal government. Isn't that fasicism? Or have you not seen the reports of how "red" counties donate more to charity than "blue" counties?

And since you're a teacher, haven't you ever wondered why you have the most powerful labor union in the US, but you still make less than some guy working an assembly line building your Chrysler? Your union wouldn't be taking you and your money for a ride would they?

sabro said:
My voting block tends to be the "Democrats will take you for granted" block, because they know that for now, they don't have to do anything for our votes. The South used to belong, but started quitting it way back with Reagan. Anger can be healthy. Maybe my party will wake up?
You make a good point there. Will they? Sure, they need to listen, but you also have to speak up. If your party isn't listening to you, aren't you just wasting your vote? After Nader's run in 2000, you would think that would've done for the DNC what Perot did for the GOP in '92. But the only thing the DNC had going for them was how their voters felt about Bush. What were the survey results? 70% anti-Bush and only 30% were pro-Kerry? What the heck are you gonna do in '08? The GOP is fired up and Hillary will only strengthen them.

If you're really passionate about your party, you have to become proactive within the party, or it will only continue to take you for granted and not represent you. God forbid you guys end up with your own Hitler. Of course, if you get the party on a cohesive message with a candidate that doesn't come off as an elitist hypocrite (Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry, H. Clinton) and you're still losing elections, you may have to consider that the voters are deciding that they don't need your agenda. But at least you could stop wondering "what if..."
 
sabro said:
Gomen Nasai, I let this one pass. I originally used "narrow minded white guys" to describe members of the KKK. Again, I'm making assumptions that the membership of the Klan continues to be overwhelming white, mostly male, and driven by narrow minded hatred.
Ah. I was under the impression that you were using the term for Southern white males in general, especially if they voted Republican. Glad you cleared that up.
 
Wow thanks for the quick reply.

Lets take the American political discussion over to the Serious Discussions: American Issues sub-forum. I'll post something over there.

Back to the issue at hand- That flag picture does seem to be a Nazi emblem (A vintage era flag for draping) and not just the normal everyday buddhist symbol.
 
Just remembered...

sabro, you guys could always try a Zell Miller/Joe Lieberman ticket.


Sorry, I just couldn't help myself! :-)

But seriously, I'm glad that you've realized your party is taking you for granted. I recognized that about the Democratic Party when I was 8 years old. I'm 37 now.
 
Yeah - the picture is the Nazi flag. The Buddhist one will usually be found engraved in stone at temples.

Okay - how do I jump into this certain debate?
 
Left vs. Right: Political Discussion
Members Lounge: Serious Discussions: American Issues
 
I have heard, of KKK groups, still active today. I personally will say this to the world. The KKK, was and is run by a bunch of racist, disgruntled people, who are just backward. The KKK, was founded by a bunch of disgruntled whites, from hte North and South. In this day, and age, I say they are a throwback to the slavery era.
 
Wasnt the Swaztika, originally a hebrew symbol, used to adorn their synagogues, in Eastern Europe.
 
I'm not sure but if it is then this swastika seems to be a very universal Buddhist symbol.
 
Martialartsnovice said:
I have heard, of KKK groups, still active today. I personally will say this to the world. The KKK, was and is run by a bunch of racist, disgruntled people, who are just backward. The KKK, was founded by a bunch of disgruntled whites, from hte North and South. In this day, and age, I say they are a throwback to the slavery era.
Finally, an accurate summation of the KKK! Well said, laddie!
 
I was surprised when I walked into the first gallery of the National Auto Museum in Reno, NV and saw an American car from the 1920's with a swastika in its emblem. Here was this beautiful piece of early detroit steel with that nazi logo on its radiator cap, grill and hubcaps.

Check out this postcard from 1907:
The Swastika
The text on the card back reads:


GOOD LUCK EMBLEM

"The Swastika" is the oldest cross and emblem in the world. It forms a combination of four "L's" standing for Luck, Light, Love and Life. It has been found in ancient Rome, excavations in Grecian cities, on Buddhist idols, on Chinese coins dated 315 B.C., and our own Southwest Indians use it as an amulet.

Like the word "gay" the meaning of it has changed and it has acquired a strong connotation that is difficult to get past.
 
I had seen, it in, pictures of Ancient Greecian archaeological digs, I was told by a practicing Hebrew, that they had a plaque if you will, with the Swaztika, on it. Thats my I say it was a Hebrew symbol.
 
Yes - it seems to be another version of the cross - once a religious symbol - now it seems to be a symbol of evil.
 
Speaking of early detroit steel, I like the older ford, and chey early model pickups. I saw a peach and creme colored 1930's ford roadster, not to long ago. It was sweet.

I saw a orginal mint condition Austin Hely, does anyone remember those.
 
Back on the topic, it seems that not only Japan has these minor Nazi parties - rather also Denmark, Holland, Sweden, and a bunch of other European nations.
 
I guess, people are forgetting the Nazi regime, and the last time it came to power. I dont fault, nayone for the regimes rise to power, becaue they did through legal channels. I think Nazi ideals, are the views, of a depressed person. Who even created the idea, of Naziism, anyway. I know Karl Marx, started the Communism regime as a utopia.
 
It was really Adolf Hitler who started the Nazi movement in 1923 in Bavaria. Prior to that, however, there were people who were anti-Weimar, but their names are unknown to me.
 
Back
Top Bottom