Why we must remrmber the past

[southwest88]

A bridge too far

Hilter's racism has nothing to do with it either way. Socialism and capitalism are economic systems, there are racist socialists and racist capitalists. Pol Pot leading the Khmer Rouge attempted the purest implementation of Marxism ever tried, and he was just as racist as Hitler. Furthermore, Mussolini was definitely not a racist.

Uh, yea they do. For just one example of many, Lenin:

Oh wait, you wrote "socialism @ its best", so the endless atrocities committed by socialists don't count, right?

Yah. These two & Stalin & Mao were Communists, implementing a very heavy-handed dictatorship.

As far as I know, Socialism isn't tied to dictatorship as a form of government. I assume that the Communists mentioned here felt some justification for their methods. I think they went much too far - @ the point that a society is consuming segments of itself for the greater good, their leadership needs to make absolutely certain that that is the goal, & that the nation is making substantial progress in that direction.

Otherwise, the entire nation unravels - as witness the late USSR & the Warsaw Pact nations.

 

[aociswundumho]

Re: Call the question

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Well, I made an argument and you didn't dispute any of it except for one small detail. I'll let the reader decide for himself whether or not I'm wrong. But if you can't rebut any of the assertions, or show why they don't follow one another, then that's evidence in itself that you agree with it.

And no, Mussolini never left socialism, as there are many variants, and fascism is just one of them. Socialism is public ownership/control of the means of production, and Italy's economy over his 20 years ended up under very tight public control.

From here:

By 1939, Fascist Italy attained the highest rate of state ownership of an economy in the world other than the Soviet Union,[42] where the Italian state "controlled over four-fifths of Italy's shipping and shipbuilding, three-quarters of its pig iron production and almost half that of steel".

 

[snakestretcher]

Re: Call the question

Well, I made an argument and you didn't dispute any of it except for one small detail. I'll let the reader decide for himself whether or not I'm wrong. But if you can't rebut any of the assertions, or show why they don't follow one another, then that's evidence in itself that you agree with it.

And no, Mussolini never left socialism, as there are many variants, and fascism is just one of them. Socialism is public ownership/control of the means of production, and Italy's economy over his 20 years ended up under very tight public control.

From here:

I rebutted your assertion with Mussolinis's own words. Try reading them. Your interpretation is whatever you want it to be-and to repeat; the vast majority of bona fide, educated, historians agree that fascism and socialism are polar opposites.

 

[PirateMk1]

Re: Call the question

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, regardless of the fact that it is a function of SCOTUS to interpret the (often broad) language of our Constitution.

We know what many of the founders wanted in and from our Constitution, but not all. And not all wanted the same things.

Removing the militia requirement from the 2nd Amendment would eliminate any argument from NRA and others who want to be able to any weapon they want, from pistols to cruise missiles.

OMG.

The courts job is not to interpret jack ****. Its to insure the law is applied correctly. Period. They are diviners or soothsayers.

We know exactly what was wanted because it was placed to a vote and passed, by 100% of the states I might add.

Removing the militia statement does exactly nothing. The command remains the same. Thou shall not infringe the right to keep and bear ARMS. Hell I am for removing the statement so it is made utterly and starkly clear that the RTKABA is iron clad.