• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 36.8%

  • No

    Votes: 22 57.9%

  • No opinion

    Votes: 2 5.3%
  • Total voters
    38
German guy said:
If this was true, why has the Supreme Court not ruled it unconstitutional?
Click to expand...

Because the courts are made up of men, woman, people with talking vaginas, all sorts of flawed critters.

Your question is a form of the Argument by Authority, a logical error. It presumes that the courts are infallible, something demonstrably false. The courts haven't ruled the unconstitutional excesses invalid because the court is a political body.

Welcome to the real world.

Exactly. That's why there *must* be AA: In order to balance the existing racism against blacks.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Being racist is not the means to end racism.

Violating the rights of one set of individuals because another group had suffered opression in the past.

Welcome to the real world, where today's white people aren't responsible for the actions yeserday's white people committed.

That's your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But you have no right to smear those who disagree -- with good arguments -- as "racists" or authoritarians.
Click to expand...

Again, the Mayor refers you to the First Amendment. And telling the truth is never a "smear".


The difference is that this party assumed blacks can't do that, because they're racially inferior. I argue they can't, because they are disadvantaged by white racism against blacks. The former is racism, the latter is the opposite.
Click to expand...

That's racism without direct reference. The Mayor has known far too many blacks (and why did you select just one particular minority) who are succesful and self-reliant to buy into the nonsensical The Man is Holding The Brothers Down theory.
 
kaya'08 said:
We have to be careful when it comes to condemning non-violent ideologies because we set an intolerant precident which cannot work in a modern society.
Click to expand...

Socialism will cease being a violent ideology when it stops using the machines guns of government to enforce the laws it uses to enslave the people.

Just in case you haven't noticed, a nation's tax laws are um....laws, and every nation uses police to enforce it's..um..laws, and those cops have guns, often machine guns.

When the socialist stop demaning illegal programs funded by taxes taken under threat of violence and imprisonment from people who do not agree with the socialist policies, then you can start claiming socialsim is non-violent.

In the meantime, socialism has over 150,000,000 bodies to explain away.

Good luck with that.
 
American said:
Start explaining the mass murder boy!
Click to expand...

Socialists, and their cousins the ecofreaks, are responsible for the deaths of millions in Africa and the world from malaria.

The phrase StalinMaoPot should be StalinHitlerMaoCheCastroAminGorbachevPotAminMubarakHussianGhadhaffi....just to mention a short list of the killers socialism has helped to install in seats of power.
 
Mayor Snorkum said:
Socialism will cease being a violent ideology when it stops using the machines guns of government to enforce the laws it uses to enslave the people.

Just in case you haven't noticed, a nation's tax laws are um....laws, and every nation uses police to enforce it's..um..laws, and those cops have guns, often machine guns.

When the socialist stop demaning illegal programs funded by taxes taken under threat of violence and imprisonment from people who do not agree with the socialist policies, then you can start claiming socialsim is non-violent.

In the meantime, socialism has over 150,000,000 bodies to explain away.

Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

You have totally missed the point. The nazi ideology by nature is evil because it preaches violence to achieve its stated goal of ethnic purity. It discriminates man by birth right and is therefore a horrible and inexcusable ideology.

Socialism is not inherintly evil, as in it does not require the violence and opression many socialist leaders decide to use to achieve it's stated goal. Socialism can work better within democratic confines, violence is not an ideological prerequsite for it to work.

Although the Mao's and Stalins of this world may have made socialism appear to be inherintly destructive and evil, it is not and cannot be comparable to Nazism in anyway.
 
Last edited:
The Nazis were a Socialist / Fascist / Corporatist (depending on who you talk to) government with strong political beliefs that included antisemitism. You can have dictators with extremist followers in any type of government. Just look at the news coming from the countries in the middle east who Democratically elected their leaders. Democracy is not to be blamed for the killings and suppression... only those in charge are to be blamed. So too are Hitler and his followers to be blamed for the murder of millions and the massive war, not their Socialist political system at the time. Most government types are not inherently bad... but bad people can come to power and cause pain and suffering for those they rule over. So no, Socialism and Communism should not be compared to the Nazi belief system.


And lets not forget that Hitler and his followers SEIZED power at the time. That is NOT what Socialism is about.
 
Last edited:
kaya'08 said:
You have totally missed the point. The nazi ideology by nature is evil because it preaches violence to achieve its stated goal of ethnic purity. It discriminates man by birth right and is therefore a horrible and inexcusable ideology.

Socialism is not inherintly evil, as in it does not require the violence and opression many socialist leaders decide to use to achieve it's stated goal. Socialism can work better within democratic confines, violence is not an ideological prerequsite for it to work.

Although the Mao's and Stalins of this world may have made socialism appear to be inherintly destructive and evil, it is not and cannot be comparable to Nazism in anyway.
Click to expand...

The National Socialist idea was evil by nature because it was a form of socialism. The details of the perversion merely accented that initial flaw.

Socialism robs every man who produces more than his neighbors, and that's as evil as evil gets.
 
Mayor Snorkum said:
The National Socialist idea was evil by nature because it was a form of socialism. The details of the perversion merely accented that initial flaw.
Click to expand...

The term "socialism" in National Socialism is to be used very loosely to describe some of the idea's on the economy by Hitler that shared some similarities with other socialist movements, like being fundamentally against international finance capitalism and providing extensive welfare programmes for the worker.

Other than that typical socialism or communism as we define it share nothing in common with National Socialism, because national socialism was commanded by the principles of fascism, biological supremacy, imperialism and anti-semetism and is generally classed as being far right which is argueably the anti-thesis of how we define a typical socialist.

Socialism robs every man who produces more than his neighbors, and that's as evil as evil gets.
Click to expand...

Not neccessarily.


and that's as evil as evil gets.
Click to expand...

Then you have no idea what evil is.
 
Last edited:
Mayor Snorkum said:
The National Socialist idea was evil by nature because it was a form of socialism. The details of the perversion merely accented that initial flaw.

Socialism robs every man who produces more than his neighbors, and that's as evil as evil gets.
Click to expand...


And that must be why Hitler imprisoned Marxist.

...The Jewish doctrine of Marxism rejects the aristocratic principle of Nature and replaces the eternal privilege of power and strength by the mass of numbers and their dead weight. Thus it denies the value of personality in man, contests the significance of nationality and race, and thereby withdraws from humanity the premise of its existence and its culture. As a foundation of the universe, this doctrine would bring about the end of any order intellectually conceivable to man. And as, in this greatest of all recognizable organisms, the result of an application of such a law could only be chaos, on earth it could only be destruction for the inhabitants of this planet.


Mein Kampf
 
I'm not inclined to let my guard down vs socialism. Answer why there's been so many dictators and deaths.

Think I think it can't happen again? The concepts haven't lead to death?

Perplexing it is to see convoluted reasoning.
 
Wake said:
I'm not inclined to let my guard down vs socialism. Answer why there's been so many dictators and deaths.

Think I think it can't happen again? The concepts haven't lead to death?

Perplexing it is to see convoluted reasoning.
Click to expand...

Socialism does not lead to dictatorship, people do.

You think one day youll wake up and it'll be just like soviet Russia...

Well my friend, its not quite that simple, and if ou knew anything about history you'd see that, pol pot, Lenin, Mou... They all came to power in civil wars and replaced already totalitarian regimes...

It wasn't that they got elected and went BOOM socialism!
 
Jetboogieman said:
Socialism does not lead to dictatorship, people do.

You think one day youll wake up and it'll be just like soviet Russia...

Well my friend, its not quite that simple, and if ou knew anything about history you'd see that, pol pot, Lenin, Mou... They all came to power in civil wars and replaced already totalitarian regimes...

It wasn't that they got elected and went BOOM socialism!
Click to expand...

People under the concept of socialism has lead to dictatorship more than once. Jetboogieman, how many socialistic and communists nations are there? Would you be able to rank good examples and bad examples? What is consistent among the bloody nations? What will you say if more people die? Would your mind change if it were a loved one? Is it not true that if people ate dishes with the intangible ingredients of socialism or communism, and some died during their meal, should not that ingredient be removed or substituted?

You should not percieve what I think, Jetboogieman. Why call me your friend if you do not even know me? Nothing is quite that simple, I'm afraid. I do know my history about those bloody revolutions, Jetboogieman. The point is that millions have died under them. Bolsheviks, the Red Scare, etc.

Of course not, Jetboogieman.

It is interesting to see how people cling to their beliefs while not realizing the bloody trail behind them. I suppose those were mere errors. Let us continue our bloody dance.
 
I have voted No.Not too sure I understand what the OP is on about as socialism and communism are two different things to me and claiming that socialism has killed so many people and therefore is bad I do not agree with.Socialism never killed any people, people kill people.
 
Che said:
I have voted No.Not too sure I understand what the OP is on about as socialism and communism are two different things to me and claiming that socialism has killed so many people and therefore is bad I do not agree with.Socialism never killed any people, people kill people.
Click to expand...

I do not care if you scream for Godwin (damn cellphone function) By your belief, Naziism never killed people, because only people kill people. The including of genocide in Naziism becomes irrelevant because it is the people that kill people.
 
Last edited:
Wake said:
I do not care if you scream for Gordon. By your belief, Naziism never killed people, because only people kill people. The including of genocide in Naziism becomes irrelevant because it is the people that kill people.
Click to expand...

Who is Gordon?The Nazis were not socialist, far from it.They killed all the left wing of their party in 1934.As I said people kill people and the Nazis were people and not socialists.The Nazis were as far to the right as it goes.
 
What an odd poll.

First off, fascism is probably the most ill-defined term in political theory. When most people today protest something like "fascism," what they're really condemning is general totalitarianism or racism/antisemitism. Fascism as preached by Adolph Hitler had several contradictions, mostly because the man was...unbalanced. The same can be said for Il Ducé. Matthew Feldman and Roger Griffin wrote an interesting book on the misconception that fascism is an actual ideology.

Second of all, debates about "which system has killed more" seem pointless to me.

Third of all, if you were to ask me "Should the USSR be condemned like Nazi Germany?" I would most definitely say yes. I can't stand people who wear hammer-and-sickle shirts, and it's really not something to glorify even if you're being ironic. But just "socialism?" The governments of Europe could (and are) defined as democratic socialists, and it's not worth condemning them as Nazis.
 
Che said:
Who is Gordon?The Nazis were not socialist, far from it.They killed all the left wing of their party in 1934.As I said people kill people and the Nazis were people and not socialists.The Nazis were as far to the right as it goes.
Click to expand...

They were socialist. They killed conservatism as well. Even though Hitler later regretted adding "socialist" to "NAZI" does not negate that they were socialist.
 
Last edited:
Wake said:
They were socialist. They killed conservatism as well. Even though Hitler later regretted adding "socialist" to "NAZI" does not negate that they weren't socialist.
Click to expand...

Well I see we are not going to agree on this point, so you can believe that they were socialists and I will not.OK.
 
Wake said:
They were socialist. They killed conservatism as well. Even though Hitler later regretted adding "socialist" to "NAZI" does not negate that they weren't socialist.
Click to expand...


Uhmmm which was it, they were or they weren't?
 
winston53660 said:
Uhmmm which was it, they were or they weren't?
Click to expand...

*Unwanted typo. Borrowed cellphone keeps posting words I don't want to post. I meant "were",
 
Wake said:
They were socialist. They killed conservatism as well. Even though Hitler later regretted adding "socialist" to "NAZI" does not negate that they weren't socialist.
Click to expand...

Debatable. Or at least debatable until 1936, when Hjalmar Schacht was no longer head of the Reichsbank. Besides, a "true" socialist economy wouldn't ban trade unions, collective bargaining, and the right to strike. And it also wouldn't have a leader obsessed with protecting the property rights of the middle class. I'm not saying there isn't an argument to be made for Nazi Germany being socialist. Only that the waters are far too murky to just throw one word out there and call it a day.

"The basic feature of our economic theory is that we have no theory at all." --- Adolph Hitler.
 
Ignoring the myriad untruths and misconceptions plaguing this discussion, the fact remains that if we indict capitalism in the same sense, by the same loose criteria, the bodycount is drastically higher. Were our resident specialists in fake outrage actually serious in their convictions, they couldn't possibly support it.
 
NGNM85 said:
Ignoring the myriad untruths and misconceptions plaguing this discussion, the fact remains that if we indict capitalism in the same sense, by the same loose criteria, the bodycount is drastically higher. Were our resident specialists in fake outrage actually serious in their convictions, they couldn't possibly support it.
Click to expand...

What counts as "drastically higher", NGNM85?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom