52
53

Yes, Hitler was a Liberal Socialist... | Louder With Crowder (youtu.be)

chabanaisStronger than derp が 投稿

全 69 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]S0ckHeaven 16ポイント17ポイント  (7子コメント)

At times I think we can look at the political spectrum in too much of a binary way. Hitler was a good example of how polar extremes on the spectrum can seemingly overlap.

[–]Zongz 19ポイント20ポイント  (25子コメント)

Actual socialists in the Nazi party were ordered to be executed by Hitler.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives

Hitler was also against the collective ownership of property, which is by definition against the core principles of Socialism.

"Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxist Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true Socialism is not." -Hitler.

[–]ultimisConstitutionalist 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

And the Church of England and Catholics killed each other and their only difference was sacrament. Just because one group kills another does not mean they are opposites (Sunni and Shiite kill each other all the time).

Fascism was coined and started by Mussolini and he was a socialist all the way up until he started fascism. He stated in his manifesto that fascism was an "evolution" of socialism.

[–]swifty12345 -4ポイント-3ポイント  (4子コメント)

so a socialist never ever ever ever ever kills another socialist? wow! thats your reasoning as to why he is not a socialist?

hmm if a man kills another man is he still a man, or does he get to use the ladies room?

[–]Zongz 12ポイント13ポイント  (3子コメント)

No, because he stood completely against the core principle of Socialism and because the Nazis put both Socialists and Communists into concentration camps.

[–]FarsideSCConservative -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

You disproved yourself in your own quote. I'll let you try to figure it out.

[–]johndeer89Moderate Conservative -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

NATIONAL SOCIALISTS!

[–]100dylan99 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF NORTH KOREA

[–]TheAmazingGamerNA 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Such a stupid video with almost zero truth

[–]chabanaisStronger than derp[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why?

[–]JebsScrotumCrease 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

there's a lot more to it than that...

But it is fair to say a lot of nationalist parties are generally socialist in nature. Plaid Cymru for example

[–]zachHu1 -1ポイント0ポイント  (23子コメント)

And white Southerners supported segregation. Most white Southerners today don't hate blacks, just like most liberal socialists don't support Hitler policies.

[–]This-Is-My-Moment 9ポイント10ポイント  (11子コメント)

I think the point of the video was that Hitler wasn't right wing.

[–]N3bu89 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

Fascism and Nazism are commonly put on the right-wing for a matter of simplification because it's massively overarching nationalist narrative.

Greater accuracy would show that Fascism and Nazism don't particularly fit within our understanding of the old left-right dichotomy, since while fascists we're fond of defending traditional institutions, they also sought to supplant the preexisting aristocracy or status-quo with one of their making.

[–]combatmedic82 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

I would argue Crowder's point was meant to go even further; that those that believe in bigger government will always tend toward fascism. The whole "left wing = communism" "right wing = fascism" is an absolute lie. That paradigm does not exist within our U.S. political structure.

In this country, right wing is conservative, smaller, more local governmnet, greater individual liberty. Left wing is more government programs, greater federal control versus states, and various forms of wealth redistribution.

Crowder's entire point is that big government people created Hitler, just as they created Mao, Stalin, and Kim Jung. It wasn't small government people. So regarding the U.S., it won't be small government conservatives that will lead to fascism.

[–]S0ckHeaven 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The whole "left wing = communism" "right wing = fascism" is an absolute lie.

and that is a great point. they can call it statism, but the left can be just as fascist.

[–]zachHu1 1ポイント2ポイント  (7子コメント)

No, I understand that. My point was that where he stood on the spectrum is irrelevant to today's issues. Just because Hitler liked gun confiscation, doesn't mean someone who also likes it is comparable. Likewise, someone who doesn't like abortions isn't comparable to Hitler.

[–]This-Is-My-Moment 6ポイント7ポイント  (6子コメント)

I know but I don't think Crowder was trying to imply Bernie=Hitler

[–]swifty12345 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

go ahead i dear you read mein kampf en bernies book. come back and tell me if it isn't conceptually the same

[–]zachHu1 -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

I know. All I was saying is that this doesn't really matter, and just contributes to divisiveness.

[–]chabanaisStronger than derp[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

Bernie "contributes to divisiveness."

This is just pushback.

[–]zachHu1 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Good thing I never said that.

[–]chabanaisStronger than derp[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Never said you did.

;-)

[–]zachHu1 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Okay. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[–]chabanaisStronger than derp[S] 3ポイント4ポイント  (10子コメント)

Except for the whole gun confiscation thing and over regulating businesses right?

[–]yeezyforpresident 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Socialist want guns to overthrow the bourgeoisie.

[–]zachHu1 2ポイント3ポイント  (6子コメント)

No. Just because liberal socialists agreed with Hitler on some issues, it doesn't make something like this anymore relevant. Hitler and conservatives both hated abortion. Does that mean you can legitimately compare conservatives to Hitler? Of course not. You should examine policies individually, not disagree with it because a dictator agreed with it. Besides, if a brutal dictator agreeing with it automatically disqualified a policy, all policies would be terrible. By the way, I am not making any political stance here. I am not advocating for gun confiscation or over-regulation; I am just pointing out that you shouldn't disagree with something because a bad person agreed with it.

[–]chabanaisStronger than derp[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (5子コメント)

just like most liberal socialists don't support Hitler policies.

I listed two big policies.

So should I point out other aspects like nationalization of re-education education?

I am just pointing out that you shouldn't disagree with something because a bad person agreed with it.

I haven't done that... I simply pointed out how your earlier "statement" was factually incorrect!

;-)

[–]zachHu1 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

I know you're not saying they are Hitler. All I am saying is that stuff like this doesn't move the discussion forward. Also, wasn't it Bush that began the nationalization with Common Core and No Child Left Behind?

[–]chabanaisStronger than derp[S] -4ポイント-3ポイント  (3子コメント)

Common Core and No Child Left Behind simply tried to establish minimum standards for schools has nothing to do with nationalization or establishing how students are taught.

So you're wrong a second time.

Drawing parallels to other leaders can be useful if it's accurate.

[–]brettpilkington07#HamiltonRule [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Common Core and No Child Left Behind simply tried to establish minimum standards for schools has nothing to do with nationalization or establishing how students are taught.

This is so true. I wonder if our candidate for president is going to take time out of his busy schedule of admiring his hands and tweeting about Elizabeth Warren to learn this distinction.

[–]zachHu1 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

First, I'm Canadian, so this isn't a topic I'm very familiar with. All I was doing was throwing ideas around. I do see how the comparison is accurate, but I don't see how it is helpful. Is this a narrative that is really pushed? If yes, then I can understand why this is necessary. If not, then I feel all stuff like this does in burn bridges and make compromising harder.

[–]chabanaisStronger than derp[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

There is no need to compromise with evil.

[–]hujfun [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Hitler actually expanded gun rights for the German people. He confiscated guns specifically from members of the communist party and of the participants of the earlier German uprising, many of whom where Jews. But to say that Hitler confiscated guns en masse is a total lie.

[–]chabanaisStronger than derp[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yeah...he only had the Gun Control Act of 1938 passed which confiscated guns and any Jews caught with them went to the camps for 20 years.

A real supporter of rights...

[–]free-minded 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

And yet single every republican president since World War II has been compared to Hitler in an uninterrupted stream. Cognitive dissonance makes a great defense!

[–]swifty12345 -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

meanwhile, bernie saunders is literally using speeches Hitler did. Hitler blamed jews for everything, which where about 1% of the population. and bernie blames the 1%. other then that their marxist inspired speeches are the same contextually.

[–]brettpilkington07#HamiltonRule [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Not a Bernie fan here but come on. Your comment is a mess. The first sentence accuses him of "literally" using Hitler speeches. "Literally" means that something is not figurative or metaphorical--- you then speak figuratively and metaphorically to back up your claim. 2nd and 3rd sentence try to link an entire ethnoreligious group in a country to a group of people who are really rich in another. Hitler thought Jews were subhuman and should all be killed-- I am guessing Sanders doesn't believe that the 1% is subhuman or wants them dead, he just feels they are ripping us off and has misguided solutions for the problem he sees. 4th sentence is the closest to true but that's subjective.

[–]tbybs -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

"Go edit it." Exactly why Wikipedia isn't a good source.

[–]chabanaisStronger than derp[S] 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's fine... you can read this book and get back to me.

Wikipedia is fine for conversations.

;-)

[–]TotallyNotBergdahl [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You guys should read "The anatomy of Fascism" for a better understanding of 'what' fascism is. It's not simple. It takes from both sides.