Sometimes a scream is better than a thesis.
Ralph Waldo Emerson, 'Journals,' 1836
Why is it that the Bush administration takes its cues from regimes like the Nazis and the Soviets? "Show me your papers..."
As much as it pains me to admit it. I am on the same page as you guys on this issue. Sometimes big brother causes the oddest sorts of people to team up. I don't think you guys get it though. This kind of thing is because of big government. Bush is a big government guy just like the Dems. Remember that the Soviets and Nazis (national socialists) were both socialist.
Glen Dean, you know better than that! You've got a political science degree... you know that the Soviets and the Nazis only called themselves socialist because it was the hip thing to be in the 20's-30's.The Soviets were a dictatorship. They used elements of socialism in their attempts to mimic it, but they were a dictatorship cloaked in a phony socialist skin, just like the alien inside Vincent D'Onofrio's skin in "Men In Black". Even if you stretched the terminology to call them a socialist dictatorship, the two terms really don't go together ideologically.And the Nazis were not socialist, they were fascist. They admitted that they relied on propaganda and part of it was calling themselves socialist to inspire patriotism at the time (socialism in those days sounded like "we the people").
I do believe that everybody in washington with the exception of Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are big government people. I also believe that bushco inc. has made the demos efforts at expanding the size and power of govt look pititful. I cracks me up that all these red staters (idiots?) think that geeboy is conservative, he is anything but a conservative president.
That's true, and since he's neither liberal nor conservative, he's wide open for redefinition as the neocon poster-boy.
SheaNC, socialism, capitalism, and communism are all economic philosophys. Facsism, representative democracy, and totalitarianism are political terms. To say that something was not socialist but a dictatorship does not make sense. You are right that the Soviet empire was a dictatorship, but they were also socialist. The government owned everthing. There was no free market. Surely, you do not think that they were capitalist. In Nazi Germany, there was limited private ownership but the State had taken over most businesses. The point is that when economic freedom is taken away, political freedom will soon follow. The only way you can sustain socialism is by force. This is basically the view of Milton Friedman who is the father of Monetarism. Friedman's main proteges are guys like Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan.
Well, Glen Dean, usually it's me who is telling people about the difference between political and economic terms! I agree that I should not have blended the two concepts. But over the years some terms like socialism and communism have come to be recognized as describing political systems by the right-, the left-, and the center, so the disctinctions between economic and political have become quite blurred. As popular definitions change with time, communism especially was recognized as a political system. No, I'm not silly enough to say that they were capitalist. So, while I'll stand corrected regarding the soviets, I stand by my statement concerning the nazis. My research indicates that they were violently opposed to real socialism, but usurped the term to inspire national unity (kind of like the way Bush uses "democracy"). Also, Hitler rose to power in a party that was already had the word socialist in it, so he went with it, but they really weren't socialist.
Post a Comment