More bad things for Lefties to think about!

Contrast one with the other:

Maoist guerillas, on the brink of achieving effective government power in the Himalayan kingdom, have turned their attention to so-called "social pollutants" and denounced homosexuals

and

Former senior Pentagon officials suggest revisit of DADT

Note that socialists will align with anyone to get what they want... and once they do, will 'impose' propriety for the good of the masses.

- while- the decadent western way of doing things is to take it slow and allow people to acclimate.

Now... think Islamists and Sharia.

It's obvious to me, but evidently not a lot of 'your type', that leftists think they can let society go to hell then ride in to the rescue... that's how they've generally done it everywhere.

But it aint gonna happen... because the islamo-fascists dont believe in 'Siberia', they just lop off heads.

Have a nice day you leftist idiots!

 

Interesting you dont see the connection.

So.... tell me... do you consider yourself a 'lefty' or socialist, then?


How about taking the two separately... got a comment on either of them?

 

Well, I'm right handed - so I cannot be a leftist, I must be a rightest. Does that mean I must be right all the time?

Joking apart - no seriously - nope I didn't get the link in the original post.

But one thing that does play on my mind is this simplistic Left and Right bit.
It seems that most commentators like to divide the world into two opposite sides. If I am a Socilaist, I am a Leftie, if I am not a Socialist, then I must be a Fascist, Ooops, Conservative. If I am then on the right, as - from what I hear in the States are the GoP - then they must agree with the Fascist party of Germany in the 30's. Now I'm really stumped with this simplistic model, because this line means that the Current administration of the UK and the US align themselves with Hitler, and dislikes all the Democrats, who they call Lefties. BUT. The ruling Labor party in the UK are, generally considered, a Lefty party, so does that mean, as the UK and US administrations work so closely together in democracizing other Countries, that either the Labor Party is now Right wing, or the GoP is Left wing. Or do you think, just possibly, that all the left/right, Socialist/Fascist divides are not really so present in this world as we live today and therefore, spouting about lefties or left-wingers is simply covering up the fact the writer actually doesn't have any real idea as to what he/she is writing about and further has no suggestions either as to how to improve it.

Just a musing from a leftie-bearing, pseudo-Fascist conservative Socialist, who has even less undeertsanding of the political world than he did 5 minutes ago.

 

If you have ADD, skip to the next post
Sigh.....

And you call me confusing!

Another issue you make, I'll query it and you all wont ever answer:

Leftist and Socialist are in the same wing... YES or NO?!!!!

Now if you actually admit that... then I have to bend your minds a little and point out that governmental Politics is a circle, not a one-dimensional BAR.

Can you see that?

What I am saying is that Fascists want control of the whole of society. They are the opposite of what might be called Libertarian. Extreme Socialists want the same..THEY would ALSO be the opposite of 'libertarian' would they not?

I suppose, though, the difference is that most fascists dont bother lying about being so 'by the will of the masses'

What I am saying is that Communism, which is the neatest label to use, never gets installed unless a nation is in chaos. It's the left's agenda to put the worst face on any issue, and continually beat the drums on it, in order to make the public think everything is in chaos.
Of COURSE the right does the same... but unless you go to the extreme ends, you dont find the absolutist mantras.

Now... here's the point: Pure Libertarianism will not work, it relies on personal self-interest coinciding with societal self-interest and that lends to chaos, right?

On the apposite, Fascism and Communism - both anti free-market and free-expression- dont work either because they control all aspects of society.

And you dont prove that by 'theory' you prove that by looking at where it has applied in history.

IOW, if there is no autocracy, then society is in flux, politically, and that's more healthy than absolutism, right?

Can we agree on those points?


Go out slightly from center you'll find factual stuff which can be debated.

Go out farther, you get stuff like ..oh.. BusHitler.. Bush Lied ... Bush is ruining the country with his border policies**

And as far as Bush and Blair being the 'Odd Couple' I dont think that's exactly factual.
It's become increasingly clear that Bush is NO conservative, no matter where the Press wants to put him.

That doesnt mean he's a fascist, either.... no matter where he puts the national security priority.
- on the similar subject-
I keep trying to point out what is to me the OPTOMISTIC view of the Democratic win in 06 but none of you seem to get it...WHY IS THAT!

Have any of you noticed I dont rant and rail about China's growing influence?

Why do you think that is? After all, they are 'communist'.. so why aint I anti-China?!!

Because of the DIRECTION they are going in.. they're no longer Maoist in case you havent noticed. And the middle class there are growing in such a fashion they'll never be turned back.
Contrast that with the last bastions of Stalinistic nationalism, North Korea and Cuba.

What do those two have in common with Fascist governemnt?

{BTW does anyone KNOW whether Pinochet had his mug and Party symbols plastered all over every common area in Chile?}

I know that's rambling a lot... but some of you guys wont address the simple stuff either; if you want to quibble over whether leftist can be equated with socialist, there's no hope!

** I think I know why that is, but I dont suppose you are interested in why Dubya REALLY wants a lot of hispanics in the US, long-run.
Sorta related to this!

 

Now...let me back to the original point I was making.

Gays in the military will soon be allowed to be OPENLY GAY because those who have to deal with the issue on a daily basis will be comfortable with it.

Opposed to being forced into acceptance by judicial or legislative 'fiat': "We know what's best for you!"
On the second reference:
Marxist types, who are absolutist/fascist, who gain control THEN turn on their former 'free-thinking' allies, in this case homosexuals, because of 'Social Ideals'

Does that or does that not happen EVERY TIME?