Which are worse for you? Nazis or Communists?

Still blaming "today's" Democrats with what "yesterday's" Southern conservatives did I see.

Wayno said:

60,000 Americans were sterilized by socialist and progressive "future thinking" idiots.

And led to the "future thinking" Hitler, who deeply agreed with you, to the tune of millions dead.

That will always be relevant.

Click to expand...

NIMBY said:

Still blaming "today's" Democrats with what "yesterday's" Southern conservatives did I see.

Click to expand...

If it weren't for the fact that PROGRESSIVE Democrats created the Eugenics they used in the south, you MIGHT have a point......

I KNEW you were fixated on that word NIMBY.......

Nice to see you here.

You'll learn to like that "quick links" tab on the top of the page.

NIMBY perfectly describes what is wrong with every level and aspect of this government and country.
Noone is willing to give on anything, period.

Wayno said:

If it weren't for the fact that PROGRESSIVE Democrats created the Eugenics they used in the south, you MIGHT have a point......

I KNEW you were fixated on that word NIMBY.......

Nice to see you here.

You'll learn to like that "quick links" tab on the top of the page.

Click to expand...

Some what surprised with the poll results so far, 69.57 % saying the Nazis.

The number of non combatants civilians murdered by Germany's Nazis is around 11 million.

The number of non combatants civilians murdered under Communism is approximately 100 million. < The Black Book of Communism : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive >

I've talked too and interviewed many who have lived under both the Nazi occupation and later on under Soviet occupation. Everyone said the Soviets were way worse than the Nazis.

Adolph Hitler was only interviewed by one English reporter in his life time. I believe the interview was done for Time magazine just before the Germans invaded Poland.

It's interesting when Hitler was asked about Stalin and the Soviet Union and Hitler said that National Socialism ( Nazism) was the true socialism not Communism.

When Stalin was interviewed he admired what Hitler had accomplished in Germany but claimed that Communism was a better form of socialism.

Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union were allies until June of 1941.

If you look back at newspapers and magazines published before 1941 you'll notice that many Communist and labor unions in America supported Nazi Germany until Hitler attacked the Soviet Union in June of 1941. "How could a socialist attack another socialist comrade" ?

One incident that the liberal revisionist refuse to tell or deny was during the "Battle of Britain" when Great Britain was fighting for it's life, many of the labor unions in America organized wild cat strikes on the docks and war plants to prevent war materials from reaching England. The CIO (Congress of Industrial Organizations) today part of the AFL-CIO was behind most of these strikes in America. The wildcat strike at North American Aviation getting most of the coverage and FDR had to send in the troops to keep the war production lines open.

As for those Germans who lived in Germany during the era of Hitler, except for the Jews and some others, most Germans still had personal freedoms unlike those living in the Soviet Union. The propaganda of the "lassen Sie mich Ihre Papiere sehen" (Let me see your papers) was no different than what went on in America during W W ll or even during the Vietnam war.

How many were around during the Vietnam war ? Remember the MP's and Shore Patrol especially in airports and if you had a military haircut and wearing civilian clothing you were approached and asked for either your liberty pass, leave papers or your draft registration card. You better have come up with one of them.

From 1965 - 1969 is was common with most law enforcement agencies in America if you were a male of military age and got pulled over by the cops they asked for more than your drivers license, they also asked to see your draft registration card.

When you look at the 100 million non combatants civilians murdered by Communist, the Vietnamese Boat People, Cambodian genocide, Mao's "Cultural Revolution" in China, Che Guevara ramming a knife in to the stomach of a young pregnant woman because her brother wasn't a Communist, the Communist terrorist of Rhodesia and South Africa during the 70's and 80's. Did I for get to mention Stalin ?

The Communist tip the scale as being worse than the Nazis.

Even Chairman Mao said "Revolution is not a dinner party."

Wayno said:

The State of North Carolina was still sterilizing people into the late 1970's,

Click to expand...

So it's not in their platform today?

Wayno said:

but since the focus of the article is how AMERICAN PROGRESSIVES were the people Hitler GOT his ideas of "The Master Race" from,

Click to expand...

Hitler got his ideas from a great deal of pseudo-science peddled during the late nineteenth century. Many progressives may have adopted these beliefs, but to say that progressivism and racism are inextricably linked is to ignore history.

Wayno said:

and in fact they FINANCED people like Mengele and his warped experiments, I'd say early to mid 20th century.....

Click to expand...

Americans from all over the spectrum had financial ties to the Nazi regime.

DrunkenAsparagus said:

Hitler got his ideas from a great deal of pseudo-science peddled during the late nineteenth century. Many progressives may have adopted these beliefs, but to say that progressivism and racism are inextricably linked is to ignore history.

Click to expand...

Obviously, you know little about the roots of American Progressivism.

One of it's largest advocates, Woodrow Wilson, was an avid racist, and eugenics was ALL ABOUT sterilizing "inferior folks" like the Irish and the Italians.............

While you're at it, maybe you should do some research on Margaret Sanger, the "mother" of birth control, and her views on race.....

Another "sterling" progressive.

Wayno said:

Obviously, you know little about the roots of American Progressivism.

One of it's largest advocates, Woodrow Wilson, was an avid racist, and eugenics was ALL ABOUT sterilizing "inferior folks" like the Irish and the Italians.............

While you're at it, maybe you should do some research on Margaret Sanger, the "mother" of birth control, and her views on race.....

Another "sterling" progressive.

Click to expand...

You're being facetious. I know a lot about American Progressivism, and I am well aware of the racist views held by many of these people. I also know that this racism did shape many progressives' views. However, to link that immediately with racism does not implicate all progressives or modern progressives. If you don't like progressivism, cool, I'm not a fan either, but you're grasping at straws here.

All ideologies have evolved, some to positions completely anti-thetical to former positions. Arguing what a progressive was 100 years, or a conservative for that matter, has very little bearing on what each are today.

On the fascism/communism question, I don't think there is a hair of difference between them. In either case, if the government doesn't like you, they'll kill you. The rest of it is just details. I don't think of a left right spectrum, but rather a circle, find the exact top of the circle and that would be perfect individual liberty (not that this is a good thing humna nature being what it is) and at the very bottom, you would have complete totalitarian control over aspect of human life. The ideal can be be in either direction, left or right, but closer to the East/West points on the circle. The East point version of Communism is democratic socialism, which can work out alright, and on the West point, you'd have a more capitalistic democracy, but being in the center, they would likely share many traits.

The problem is when you go to far in ANY direction. Unfettered capitalism doesn't create free markets with consumer voting at the retail ballot box, it creates government captured by moneyed interests. On the other side, if the workers hold too much sway over industry, they will crush it with demands. Balance is the key.

This is such a fail poll.

If more movies would come out of holywood depicting the communists as the bad guys instead of having every other year a big nazi film awarded with countless prizes for no good reason, more people would vote communist.

My grand dad used to say hitler was the best thing PR-wise to happen to the far left.

Anyway you're comparing a specific brand of fascism to the entire spectrum of communism. Mussolini and Franco weren't as bad as Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot. Hitler was. Castro isnt as bad as any of the afore mentioned guys.

It's not really a fair comparison, you should compare specific kinds of ideology. but thanks to Hitler communism had a greater opportunity to wreck people's lives worldwide.

Dr. Chuckles said:

Though I will say your argument above does read like the no true Scottsman fallacy. And regardless if you agree with their interp of communism (I don't), or not, that is how they still defined themselves

Click to expand...

It's not a No True Scotsman argument. Communists are all capable of behaving badly, as are followers of any ideology. My point is more that, unlike Nazism, communism is a very broad, woolly concept. those that may call themselves communist might be applying theories from a very wide range of philosophers, not just Marx and Engels. They all have their own theories and remedies and some of those will be, and have been, wildly destructive. Some others will not be.

Compare this situation with, for example, The Crusades. people did horrific acts in the name of Christ. Did that mean that Christianity as a philosophy is evil? Is pointing out that the acts of those crusaders is not compatible with 'true' Christianity engaging in a No True Scotsman argument? I'd argue it isn't, even though there were many, many Christian leaders providing apologia for the slaughter.

Fascism > Communism

Both are simply competing versions of socialism, but I'll take the one that at least featured some ability of the individual to "own" property.

Mind you, both are evil and deserve rebellion and overthrow.

Andalublue said:

It's not a No True Scotsman argument. Communists are all capable of behaving badly, as are followers of any ideology. My point is more that, unlike Nazism, communism is a very broad, woolly concept. those that may call themselves communist might be applying theories from a very wide range of philosophers, not just Marx and Engels. They all have their own theories and remedies and some of those will be, and have been, wildly destructive. Some others will not be.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree that communism is a pretty broad political philosophy. And as I said, my original intent was to point out the rather large percentage of the population liquidated by the KM

Andalublue said:

Compare this situation with, for example, The Crusades. people did horrific acts in the name of Christ. Did that mean that Christianity as a philosophy is evil?

Click to expand...

Again, I think you are misinterpreting the intent of my post. Someone mentioned the numbers of individual killed by Hilter, the KM, and Stalin. My point was that the KM killed a much higher percentage of the cambodian population than both those individuals and movements, and never tried to associate that number with communists in general.

basically, it wasn't a dig at communism, but an attempt to highlight the immense scale of killing in Cambodia

Andalublue said:

Is pointing out that the acts of those crusaders is not compatible with 'true' Christianity engaging in a No True Scotsman argument? I'd argue it isn't, even though there were many, many Christian leaders providing apologia for the slaughter.

Click to expand...

In a sense, yes. Because Christianity seems rather broadly interpreted, and there isn't really a "true" Christianity.

MaggieD said:

I agree. Nazis. The Nazis were led by an insane man whose goals were anathema to civilized society throughout the world: anti-Semitism and Aryan Supremacy.

Click to expand...

Sometimes I just don't get you.

all of you forget the wild capitalism which seems so democratic to us .......

Andalublue said:

It makes far-righties feel better to believe that it is, Medusa, even though they share a lot of beliefs with the Nazis.

Click to expand...

Now hold on a second there buster.

The only reason national socialism is considered a RIGHT wing thing is because in comparison to the communists in the USSR, the nazis allowed for some degree of free enterprise to exist as opposed to the commies who nationalized everything that was worth something important and respected, to some degree, private property. And hence, on the economical policy, they were a bit more liberal in free enterprise. But the nazis and fascists in general have nationalized a LOT of things in their country. From industry to news papers to imposing draconian laws of all kinds and having secret police to instill terror in the inhabitants to make sure they be quiet and submissive.

That's the only real difference, the economic policy between commies and nazis. Politically it was the same single party rulership, no real elections, no freedom of the press and hence, no free speech. No nothing. They were both autocratic, totalitarian regimes and both indulged in the same brutal crimes. Commies hate anti-ethnic policies. Tons of moldavians for instance have been "asked nicely" to move from their homeland to other parts of the USSR and stay there. Same with numerous other ethnic groups like Ukrainians, poles and many more.

So don't go about saying how the nazis weren't lefties. They were pretty lefty. They were just a bit more to the right of the communists.
The reason the far right stuck is mostly PR reasons. You needed a quick way to refer to something, and not that is the mainstream name for such people. Even though in certain perspectives, they are as far left as far left goes.

Surtr said:

Nah, we're much closer to fascism than communism. We just cut out the nasty bits that are most commonly associated with people like Hitler, Franco, and Mussolini.

Click to expand...

Franco wasn't a real fascist, especially once WW2 ended, he was more socialist than ever.

Rainman05 said:

Now hold on a second there buster.

The only reason national socialism is considered a RIGHT wing thing is because in comparison to the communists in the USSR, the nazis allowed for some degree of free enterprise to exist as opposed to the commies who nationalized everything that was worth something important and respected, to some degree, private property. And hence, on the economical policy, they were a bit more liberal in free enterprise. But the nazis and fascists in general have nationalized a LOT of things in their country. From industry to news papers to imposing draconian laws of all kinds and having secret police to instill terror in the inhabitants to make sure they be quiet and submissive.

That's the only real difference, the economic policy between commies and nazis. Politically it was the same single party rulership, no real elections, no freedom of the press and hence, no free speech. No nothing. They were both autocratic, totalitarian regimes and both indulged in the same brutal crimes. Commies hate anti-ethnic policies. Tons of moldavians for instance have been "asked nicely" to move from their homeland to other parts of the USSR and stay there. Same with numerous other ethnic groups like Ukrainians, poles and many more.

So don't go about saying how the nazis weren't lefties. They were pretty lefty. They were just a bit more to the right of the communists.
The reason the far right stuck is mostly PR reasons. You needed a quick way to refer to something, and not that is the mainstream name for such people. Even though in certain perspectives, they are as far left as far left goes.

Click to expand...

true ,ahiska turks were one of those ethnic groups

but at least they werent killed by poison gas and burned in crematoriums .........

maybe many of those jews were burned alive.........god knows......

but it must be easy to prefer nazis while you share similar tendencies with them

I see we wandered into American right-wing bizarroworld, where up is down, in is out, and Nazi's are leftwing. This viewoint is a relatively recent revision of history unique to the US right. Curiously it tends to be the far right who subscribe to this view, which if the Nazis were indeed left of centre, leaves themselves as the extremist right position.

Juiposa said:

Which of the two listed above are worse for you?

Me? Nazis without a doubt.

Click to expand...

That's like asking, if I prefer a dry broom handle or a knife, in the butt.
Either way, I'm not gonna like it at all.

Surtr said:

Joseph Stalin's regime persecuted, ostracized, and killed far more people during his reign than the Germans. Milosevic was another genocidal bastard most don't even remember, and then there's Pol Pot, Mao, Castro, and many others like them. Communism is worse simply because it proliferated, whereas fascism was snuffed out for the most part with the end of the Second World War.

Click to expand...

Many elements of fascism were adopted by developed countries.
We just don't call it fascism today.

I feel this is a false choice, it is sort of like having to choose between the devil and satan. Sure Hitler killed 6 million Jews and had his aryan nation notions, but Stalin killed as estimate 20 million of his own people to remain in power. Pol Pot 3 million of his own people, I think we all know of North Korea and what they are doing to their own people just so the commie stays in power.

Even if I believe this is a false choice, I think I would choose Nazi, just because it is no more. Nazism is on the scrap heap of history, hopefully never to surface again. Communism is still alive in some places with it draconian suppression of their own people where it still exists.

This is a bit like asking what's worse, bubonic plague or ebola, but Communists actually were more virulent, and more deadly.

As we have discussed just recently on another thread, the Nazis had some rudimentary morality: they needed their twisted anthropology to declare their victims - the Jews, the Gypsies, us Poles, etc - subhuman, some kinds of other species. The Marxist-Leninist did not bother with such justifications. The enemy is exactly the same species - sometimes the same family. He just dares to think in a different way.

Also, while both totalitarian socialst twins did operate by turning real, living people into abstract groups, the Nazi's emphasis on genetic closeness at least has some link to reality; the Commies' "social classes" are as abstract as it gets. When the Soviet Communists ran out of the "class enemy" called "kulaks" (rich peasants, meaning anyone whose horse had not starved to death yet), they went after "podkulachniks" (peasants that could not be declared rich by any stretch of imagination, but needed to be killed or sent to Siberia anyway....)

And, of course, Communists have murdered more people - more than 100 million, comparing to about 20 million (they had much more time, though).

after reading all of these posts ,l can expect you to believe that che was not a satan :lol:

Dr. Chuckles said:

I don't disagree that communism is a pretty broad political philosophy. And as I said, my original intent was to point out the rather large percentage of the population liquidated by the KM

Again, I think you are misinterpreting the intent of my post. Someone mentioned the numbers of individual killed by Hilter, the KM, and Stalin. My point was that the KM killed a much higher percentage of the cambodian population than both those individuals and movements, and never tried to associate that number with communists in general.

basically, it wasn't a dig at communism, but an attempt to highlight the immense scale of killing in Cambodia

In a sense, yes. Because Christianity seems rather broadly interpreted, and there isn't really a "true" Christianity.

Click to expand...

I take your points and I wasn't under the impression that you were attacking communism, per se. There isn't a 'true' communism either. My point in making the comments about the crusades is to highlight that there's a pretty big difference between a term such as communism which, like Christianity, has a myriad of interpretations, sects, forms and features to the point that saying 'communism is this' is meaningless. Nazism is and was always much more monolithic. It is possible to say that 'Nazism is that' because it has only been imposed in one case and its theory is clearly expressed, easily distinguishing it from related ideological forms such as Fascism or Syndicalist Nationalism.