Would there be Nazi university student activist groups instead ?

Although i agree with you that too much stock should not be put into labels and anyone referenced in the OP do not know how simple they really are. Be that as it may, we shall not clamor to be a people ruled by the imbicilic.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But that is the whole point. What is real socialism? And they were at war with Russia mainly de to it's proximity and that they were opposed to them...and rightfully so.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think there's alot of truth in it. It's a legal form of slavery, sometimes literally so. Some Asian workers aren't allowed to leave the factory, they can get fired for any reason, there is little to no safety regulation, they get extremely long hours and no vacation.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But that is not because another country is sending jobs there.

 

It is. Those people wouldn't be working there in virtual slavery if we were committed to paying a living wage. We didn't make slaves because we liked to oppress people, we wanted cheap labor.

 

like i said, under ideal circumstance all workers would be treated fairly but the corporations outsource based on the good faith agreement that they will be treated fairly even if the cost of living in some countries is much cheaper.

countries outsource work to U.S and do you think we have slave labor here? obviously there is an imbalance of jobs sent overseas from U.S but many of these workers get treated very fairly. your grievance is misplaced.

 

Even if it were true that outsourcing always helped another nation and its inhabitants (it isn't), I don't see how that would contradict nationalism. Altruism is not involved.

If the NAZIs weren't fascist, who was?

And how would that be relevant, except to drop another rock on Cazzo's odd worldview?

The first true masters of propaganda and inventors of the Big Lie are not to be labeled according to their own claims, if accuracy is the goal.

 

I do not defend communism. I am as strong an anti-communist as you will ever meet.

This has been responded to many times and you have simply chosen to ignore every single fact presented to you. I'm going over it one more time. If you once again refuse to address all of these points (for that matter, any, you haven't responded to a single point except about movies - and I proved you wrong on that), then I will exit this thread, because it's becoming obvious you have no interest in actually getting answers.

Your premise is wrong.

1. People are not taught in school to support Communism. I attended public school and a great university and was never taught this way. If you wish to make this claim, you would need to prove it. So far you have done nothing of the sort. (Ironically, this is a rather communist trait you've picked up - asserting things without proving them at all.)

2. Nowhere is there brainwashing to support communism. Even if Hollywood does not condemn it in film as often as condemning the Nazis, there are very few popular movies out there that argue in favour of communist government.

3. There are very, very few pro-communist student groups. Again, this is a claim that you would need to prove before anyone with a 10th-grade education could accept it as part of a premise.

-----

Finally, you have already been given the answer to your question. Even IF all of your premises were true (and they're not), and even IF you had proven them (and you haven't), the answer to your question is still "probably not".

Communism does not necessarily require killings, authoritarianism or anything of the sort seen in Russia, China and elsewhere. What you are talking about is Bolshevism, Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism or some other such sect.

To say communism necessitates killing and democide is like saying Christianity necessitates taking communion. It doesn't. Only one division of Christianity does. Catholicism may be a rather large group, but it is not synonymous with Christianity.

Nowhere in the fundamentals of communism is it necessary to kill large fields of people. Nazism, on the other hand, is very openly a racist ideology.

Communism is stupid and unworkable (in my opinion), but it is not inherently a racist evil. It may become that through it's supposed leaders. But it is not a foregone conclusion. With Nazism, it is a foregone conclusion.

More people are naturally averse to racist ideologies. Though, certainly, many people fall prey to them every day.

----------------

Your question has been answered by me for the third time now. If you still refuse to respond to any of the answers, well, then you're as bad as the communists.

 

Tyler,

with 4k ish posts I'm surprised you haven't crossed paths with Cazzo before and become familiar with her modus operandi.

Basically she has only 2 types of thread and posts multiple variations of these in short flurries of activity.

The "all communists are murderers but leftie teachers/the media/hollywood hide that fact and indoctrinate students/the general public that it's ok" thread

and the "scientists blame everything on global warming" thread

Because she has never been able to post any evidence that supports her view (indeed in the global warming threads her very own links often either flat out contradict her assertions or simply don't say what they think she says because she never reads beyond the headline) she then dissappears after a week or two after being throughly owned, only to resurface a month or two with a slightly different variation on the same themes.

Providing her with facts that contradict her warped little world view have no effect - that just proves to her that you are either a radical socialist, an environmental extremist, or both, and that you are bent on the extermination of the human race.

I find that simply highlighting her clopsed mindedness by demanding evidence of her claims is enough to make her squirm sufficiently for her to
very quickly slither back to sites like mouthfrothingswiveleyedcommiehaters.com or criticalthinkingnothanks.com where she has an audience who will not critically examine her ideas.

 

The short answer is yes. This is due to the nature of the upbringing of children in public schools, from a very young age. They will regard themselves to be children of the state, and uphold the patriotic qualities of hardworking citizens. Or at least, in theory. Hitler modelled his Nazism after Lenin's communism, and there are many similarities on paper. It emphasizes a strong government. The typical portrayal on opposite sides of the political spectrum is just that: one-dimensional, and not necessarily correct.

Fascism in general is intertwined with the culture of racism, and so naturally, you would tend to see racist groups at universities as well. But this isn't essential to the definition of fascist ideology. The problem is that racism is all too associated with fascism, more tightly than communism to labor camps, executions, or famine. And once the people are tricked into thinking of racism as an essential part of their ideology, they will fail to be nearly as robust as capitalism, which in turn is less robust than communism.

 

Addendum: Communism is not upheld in schools, and neither is Nazism.

The schools teach what they are as objectively as possible, in order to facilitate the freedom of political choice. Of course many times reality tends to side with the left.

 

Do you have any examples? any at all?

 

Nice, a 2nd person to honestly and realistically answer the question.

And for those of you who act like "there's no such thing as pro-Communist university professors". I've seen them myself, even self declare their support for Communism, and demonize America. I've met other people from other campuses that have seen the same thing.
Some indirect proof of Communist support across the nation is the case of Ward Churchill, the Colorado pro-Communist "professor" who was sympathetic to the 9-11 attacts and called the victims "Nazi's" (typical left-wing propoganda).
An example of Churchill's literature

After this pro-Communist was exposed, Communists sympathizers from academia came to his support by the thousands : http://www.coloradoaim.org/wardpetition.htm
http://www.petitiononline.com/churchil/petition.html

They say it's in the "name of democracy" that they support this Communist, but in fact, if these people had their way, the U.S. would no longer be a free democracy, but a Socialist/Communist State. They USE democracy to reach a different goal.

Additionally, some colleges and universities sent petitions around in support of Communist Ward Churchill.

If Ward Churchill was the opposite, and praised the victims of 9-11, and demonized the terrorists as "islamo-fascists", do you think he would have gotten all this outpouring of support from these college/university left-wing groups ?? of course not, he probably would have been demonized as a "fascist American" and isolated by far left-wingers in his own school.

 

As usual Cazzo gets her facts wrong - Ward Churchill is a critic of Marxism.

Here's a partial review of the book you referenced:

Sounds like a dreadful commie to me

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Futhermore there is no reference to communism, communists, socialism, socialists either directly or indirectly in the online petition referenced, no direct connection to the website that hosts it, or with regards to the writer of the petition - so equating the two is deeply disengenuous - but hey - this is Cazzo - the mistress of dishonesty.


Yet another case of Cazzo not reading beyond the title of the publication to find out what it is actually about.

Seriously Cazzo - given the number of times you have been caught out for either not checking your sources, misrepresenting them, or flat out lying about them - did you not think that someone might check up of the "facts" you posted?

 

Here's a piece from Ward Churchill's book (from the preface vi) :

"Marxism, it must be said, offers a coherent and unifying system of critical analysis within which to "peg" a wide variety of lines of action. Further, it offers at least an implicit range of plausible options and alternatives to the status-quo. The details of a Marxist society may be forged in the struggle to overthrow the existing order.
The Marxian scenerio is rather neat. It seams all but ready-made for application to our current dilemma." ....etc...

That was in Ward Churchill's book in question.
Sounds like he's rather supportive of Marxist-Communism, hmmm

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You can try blowing all the smoke up our asses you like SP, but the proof is in the pudding, not in people's "reviews".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Ward Churchill is the editor of the book - neither the author nor the sole contributor - the book debates view the viewpoints of several contributors the viability of marxism for native americans - his viewpoint is critical of marxism - other contributors are in favour of it.
However he did not write the preface you cite - therefore attributing it to him is typically dishonest of you Winona LaDuke wrote the preface you cite - not Ward Churchill.

If you had a ny further doubt of Wc's stance on marxism, here's a page from a genuine lefty criticising WC's critique of marxism:

http://bermudaradical.blogspot.com/2008/10/marxism-vs-indigenism-anti-critique-of.html

I also notice that you have not attempted to make any attemp to defend your statement about the communisty content or intent of the pretition - does this mean you now retract that statement? Are you woman enough to admit you were wrong?

Cazzo - as long as you continue to be dishonest, I will continue to reveal your dishonesty.
Why not just try being honest instead?

 

Let me remind you, I am strongly a capitalist. I also just happen to have a brain.

This is both true and not an endorsement of Marxism.

This is also true and not an endorsement.

This is also true and not an endorsement.
[/quote]
The Marxian scenerio is rather neat. It seams all but ready-made for application to our current dilemma.
[/quote]
This is shockingly true today (given the crash and fall of the market recently), and not really an endorsement either.

Similar to how one could easily say certain European countries look primed for fascism in the coming years. Nationalism has been on the rise, racial violence has increased, new laws protecting ethnic groups that many harbor resentment against are being enacted, there's been the inevitable struggle against super-statehood (the EU), economic markets have crashed and burned much like (though not to the degree of) Germany and Italy in the thirties, a backlash against markets is being carried out in an alarming way by protectionist measures....

I think - and I assume I don't need to prove I'm not a Nazi - I could fairly say: The Fascist rise (as occured in the 1930s) seams all but ready-made for application to our current dilemma.

I would not be endorsing fascism. I'm scared to death of it. But I'd need to be pretty stupid not to notice the parallels.

----------------

But, frankly, this is all pointless. Even if this guy was a raving Marxist it wouldn't prove anything. Cazzo, we've asked you to prove a significant number (something approaching a majority would be nice) of University Arts profs are communists or communist sympathizers. Showing that one guy is does not count as showing that a huge number are.

You must have been bad at math in school.

1 < Many.

 

I don't have to admit anything, you can spin all you like, I stand by what I said; Ward Churchill (like many, not all, liberal arts "professors") is pro-Marxist/Communist.
If you read the portion of Ward Churchill's book (with contributing Marxist editors/authors) starting on page 184, he goes on to praise the Marxist contributors.
He doesn't downplay Marxism either, he merely goes on to state how the industrial aspects of Marxism can not be applied to the pre-industrial American Indians.

How many democrats (or anyone politically right of democrats) would call victims of 9-11 "facists" as Ward Churchill did ?
I doubt anyone would, but an anti-American pro-Socialist/Communist would.
And as I've already shown, he has many people in education (students, teachers, "professors") that back-up his anti-American propoganda (http://www.petitiononline.com/churchil/petition.html).

 

Signing a petition to try and prevent someone with controversial ideas from losing his livelihood because of them? Don't these people realize the First Amendment just enables Marxist propagandists?

BTW, thinking that Ward Churchill shouldn't lose his job over his personal beliefs doesn't necessarily mean that you agree with him about any of them.

 

Like I said before, if Ward Churchill had said something the opposite of his 9-11 fascist rhetoric, I highly doubt those same people would have signed that petition.
Suppose instead Ward Churchill had praised the victims of 9-11 instead, and called the terrorists "islamo-fascist terrorists". You can't honestly say those same leftists would have signed that petition.
Instead, he would have been isolated and condemned by other leftist "professors" and far left-wing student groups.

Additionally, it's one thing when a professor professionally conducts their jobs and teaches without bias.
It's whole different story when a professor ABUSES his/her position to try brainwash students with radical propoganda.