Discussions on my writing, my books, related activities, and where I respond to questions.
No, there isn't much here on Lion Taming, unless of course you ask.
Okay. I can't really describe how wrong you are. Seriously.Do you have any clue where the designators left and right comes from?To my knowledge it was based on the seating in the parliament.The nationalists and fascist were seated on the right.The communists and socialists were seated on left.The moderate parties were seated in the center.The parties on the left and the right hated each otherSo they did this to prevent scuffles. Because when the most violent groups are separated from each other, it easier to prevent brawls. To claim that Hitler was a leftist and a socialist is so absurd that it blows my mind.Please read about what Hitler have done with communists and socialists. (Hint: They have been gassed like the Jews.)And even today our German parliament is separated like that (just without the extremists)It's not that Google rewrites history. It's more like you only now learned that the history is different from your believes.
It was called the 'National Socialist Workers Party'. That's what NAZI stands for. Hitler was a socialist.In other countries, the designations may be different, but in America, Left means democrat/socialist/communist ie more central government control. Right means less central government control, smaller government/limited government with Anarchy being the extreme right.
Trust me, HITLER WAS NOT A LEFTY NOR A SOCIALIST!!!Hitler and his cronies hijacked the NSDAP.(Which stands for 'Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei' or 'National Socialist German Workers' Party')But the name of a Party doesn't define their actual politics.And putting 'Social' into a party name doesn't make them Socialists or lefties.The NSDAP WERE NOT SOCIALISTS (at least since around 1925)It was actually more like that the socialists(SPD,SAP) and communists(KPD) the were the arch-enemies of the Nazies.SPD and KPD members were the first victims/occupants of the KZs (since 1933)(Jews fell victim to these camps only since 1937)Really, telling that 'Hitler was a leftist and socialist' is so absurd like telling that 'Senator Joseph McCarthy was a communist'.So please J stop claiming things you have obviously no clue off.
Sorry Hauke, but youre pretty off base. Hitler banned the Socialists and communists because they were his competition in the anti capitalist, anti democracy sweepstakes. They were all controlled economy, anti capitalist, anti borguoisie parties, his just used jews as a scapegoat and was nationalist, as opposed to internationalist, in nature. Mussolini was very much a socialist and progressive darling, especially of the Roosevelt administration, up until he invaded Abyssinia, and even then, he still had support in the American left.
I'll let someone else handle it. But really, whoever taught you that was lying to you.http://monsterhunternation.com/2012/05/09/hate-mail-response-to-my-hate-mail-and-i-godwin-the-hell-out-of-this-post/
Ok. I was not talking about Italy. I'm not Italien, so I don't claim anything about them.But I'm German.Ant please trust me, if you ask a German if Fascism is considered 'left wing' or 'right wing', the answer will be to 99% 'right wing'.All the illegitimate offspring of the NSDAP which often barely skirt the border between legal and illigal are considered 'far right wing'as example the NPD, see here: (Political position: far right)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Democratic_Party_of_GermanyMaybe the NSDAP started as a 'socialist like' party. I wasn't already born back then.But all ideology the 3rd Reich was (in)famous for, is considered ultra right in Germany today. (and for the last 40 years)And if you don't believe me, please ask a German if Nazis are considered left or right.
Wow, talk about your revisionist history.
The thing is, you can't sort parties on just a single dimension. To disentangle all the different goals a single party can have, you would need a multidimensional matrix. And that would just be cumbersome.So we sort the left and right more or less by just how likely the parties would form a coalition.And putting the NPD and 'die Linke' into a single room would most likely end up in bloodshed.The Nazi are seen primary as Nationalists and not so much as Socialists. And Nationalists are considered right wing. But please ask some other German if you don't believe me.
What does that official definition of fascism has to do with right or left wing? The definition never mentions it for a reason. Right and left wing are are vague terms, the exact meaning constantly changing over time and between countries. The fact that you John call anarchy a right wing party makes that clear, since most anarchists here in Europe consider themselves left wing.John, you also focus on control as the important aspect of their political ideologies. Likely because for you that is important. In that regards communism and fascism are not different. There are more dimensions to political philosophies though and it are those other dimensions that differ communists from fascists at least on paper*.In the end though, you can complain what you want, but the term fascist was what Mussolini called himself and hence why his way of government is used as the definition for the word. Mind you, the term 'fascism' is vague since Mussolini himself did not truly define his political philosophy beyond strong control and a charismatic leader. Hence why now a days people tend to differ a bit on when something is called fascism and not. The political philosophies behind communism are much better definied.* Ultimately we are all human, and dictatorships tend to end the same regardless of whether they started as fascists, communists or capatalists.
The official definition has everything to do with right or left. Google changed the definition not for the reasons of clarity, but for reasons of politics. Now that we are seeing actual fascists in America, who are wounding and attempting to murder people solely for having differing opinions, the left, which has always loved violence, is scared. Because Americans, historically, do not like political violence.So they attempt to blame it on the republicans, rather than the democrats who have been caught funding the protesters with money to go out and assault people.I focus on control, because that IS the way you define political right versus political left, when you put it all on a scale. Left wing ideologies (Socialism, Communism, Fascism, Dictatorships, Monarchies) are all about a few people controlling everything in a country. They control all aspects of the economy and your life. Individual rights are non-existent. And fascism is not 'vague' the whole fascis, the bundle of rods around an axe is a direct representation of what it is, rule by violence by a few elite over the masses. Lots of laws and rules, and if you break them, you're dead.As for the 'anarchists' in Europe, well the plain truth is, they're lying, they're NOT anarchists! They're either socialists or communists. As soon as you join together in an organization, by -definition- you are NOT an anarchist! Those people are solely seeking to destroy the current 'order' so they can bring about a new 'order'. They want to use some form of 'anarchy' to create their new world order, but they are not anarchists at all, don't believe their lies for a moment. We have that same group of assholes here in America. They just think the word sounds cool and they like wearing black masks as they go around in trained groups attacking people and property. They defy the definition of 'anarchist' at every turn. Because they're not.And last of all, dictatorships are usually taken over by either NEW dictatorships, or by some form of oligarchy (communism, socialism, fascism, etc) which then eventually devolves right back into a dictatorship. Just as democracies always devolve into oligarchies and then into dictatorships.
Just for the sake of stirring the pot. I find the second definition given here is hysterical. It essentially defines fascism as fascism. We are in serious trouble. On a related note, you can only argue definitions for the current time frame. As noted in many historical documents, definitions change over time. The current trend is "Democrats". It used to be Democrats were considered either left wing or liberal. Over the course of the last decade many liberals have felt that the Democratic Party is no longer liberal or representing liberals. It's gotten so bad the true liberals are attempting to gain traction with a new political party.Time marches on. Remember when "Retarded" was nothing more than a technical term relating to a persons physical or mental inability to expand beyond a certain point? Retarded is simply a technical term. Then people said it was hateful so we moved to "Special". Now Special is hateful and we are moving on. Apply terms to the time frame they are related to.
Please try to keep the comments clean and civil.