German neo-Nazis: We're pro-Israel, condemn anti-Semitism - Polidicks

[QUOTE=ErectorBeast;17115376]You're so wrong it's funny. Let's go through our list: Nazi = National Socialist Nationalism =/= Racist Ideals Socialist =/= Racist Ideals Oh, wow, if neither of those terms automatically imply racist ideals, then how did they get there? Oh wait, that's right, racist ideals were [I]combined[/I] with national socialism. They frequently make a pair, because the nature of nationalism leaves a lot of room for racism to be paired with it. Does that mean nationalism automatically implies racism? No, just means it is often combined with racism because they're easy terms to combine.[/QUOTE] National Socialism is not a socialist ideology. This already completely ruins your argument.

[QUOTE=ErectorBeast;17115376]You're so wrong it's funny. Let's go through our list: Nazi = National Socialist Nationalism =/= Racist Ideals Socialist =/= Racist Ideals Oh, wow, if neither of those terms automatically imply racist ideals, then how did they get there? Oh wait, that's right, racist ideals were [I]combined[/I] with national socialism. They frequently make a pair, because the nature of nationalism leaves a lot of room for racism to be paired with it. Does that mean nationalism automatically implies racism? No, just means it is often combined with racism because they're easy terms to combine.[/QUOTE] lol

[QUOTE=Lankist;17115322]All Nazis are Nazis.[/QUOTE] Hitler was a Nazi, and Nazis are Nazis, so all Nazis must be Hitler! I believe this is a logical fallacy. [QUOTE=thisispain;17115343] The definition of National Socialism as created was anti-semitic, and throughout history was used against the jewish communities where ever.[/quote] Anti-Semitism is anti-Semitic, but national socialism doesn't have to be. This is the same fallacy that Lankist is using. [QUOTE=thisispain;17115343]I don't know what you have against Jewish people, but it's disgustingly retarded.[/QUOTE] I have nothing against Jewish people unless they're taking a blatant joke such as "jews run wikipedia" and twisting it into some kind of personal attack.

You are going in circles.

[QUOTE=thisispain;17115394]National Socialism is not a socialist ideology. This already completely ruins your argument.[/QUOTE] [quote=Wikipedia]National Socialism is a political term that is both vague and ambiguous. As the name suggests, features of nationalism and socialism are combined[/quote] oh shit

[QUOTE=thisispain;17115394]National Socialism is not a socialist ideology. This already completely ruins your argument.[/QUOTE] This. The 'socialism' in national socialist GWP was simply there to attract the support of german workers and rally them behind an impoverished german state. Quite disgusting actually.

[QUOTE=TH89;17115355]Which is probably why we no longer vote for Whigs and Federalists. And why Germany is no longer run by fucking Nazis[/QUOTE] Right. But couldn't you agree that the founding fathers of America fit into the conservative ideology? Do conservatives today think slavery is okay? Probably not. [editline]10:42PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Lankist;17115426]You are going in circles.[/QUOTE] All debates are cyclical if nobody's opinion changes.

[QUOTE=Conscript;17115429]This. The 'socialism' in national socialist GWP was simply there to attract the support of german workers and rally them behind an impoverished german state. Quite disgusting actually.[/QUOTE] Correct. In the NSGWP it didn't involve socialism. But I don't want to have to write that "NSGWP =/= National Socialism" deal again, so just think about that. [editline]08:44PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Zeke129;17115439]Right. But couldn't you agree that the founding fathers of America fit into the conservative ideology? Do conservatives today think slavery is okay? Probably not.[/QUOTE] You do realize it was the democratic party that was pro-slavery in the 1800's?

[QUOTE=Zeke129;17115412] Anti-Semitism is anti-Semitic, but national socialism doesn't have to be. This is the same fallacy that Lankist is using.[/QUOTE] But national socialism is anti-semitic. The creator of National Socialism stated it as a tenant of it. [QUOTE=Zeke129;17115412]I have nothing against Jewish people unless they're taking a blatant joke such as "jews run wikipedia" and twisting it into some kind of personal attack.[/QUOTE] It's not funny in any way. Maybe you should learn to make jokes that aren't painfully insipid.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;17115439]Right. But couldn't you agree that the founding fathers of America fit into the conservative ideology? Do conservatives today think slavery is okay?[/QUOTE] Uhh, the founding fathers were extremely Liberal. Most of them, like T Jeff, released their slaves. They were followers of John Locke's philosophy of government, which was an extremely left-wing ideology in the age of kings.

[QUOTE=ErectorBeast;17115466]Correct. In the NSGWP it didn't involve socialism. But I don't want to have to write that "NSGWP =/= National Socialism" deal again, so just think about that.[/QUOTE] But yet, what both the nazis did and do and what your 'national socialism' will do is lead to fascism.

[QUOTE=ErectorBeast;17115466]Correct. In the NSGWP it didn't involve socialism. But I don't want to have to write that "NSGWP =/= National Socialism" deal again, so just think about that.[/QUOTE] The only reason this debate exists is because people think national socialists are all a bunch of skinheads with posters of Hitler on their walls [editline]10:46PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Lankist;17115483]Uhh, the founding fathers were extremely Liberal.[/quote] How's that? They wanted the government to stay small and out of the people's lives.

[QUOTE=ErectorBeast;17115466]Correct. In the NSGWP it didn't involve socialism. But I don't want to have to write that "NSGWP =/= National Socialism" deal again, so just think about that.[/QUOTE] National Socialism is a Corporatist third-way ideology. [editline]08:47PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Zeke129;17115489] How's that? They wanted the government to stay small and out of the people's lives.[/QUOTE] Yeah, that's liberalism.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;17115489]How's that? They wanted the government to stay small and out of the people's lives.[/QUOTE] Today's liberals are very then different then those of the past. They didn't have keynesianism back then.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;17115489]The only reason this debate exists is because people think national socialists are all a bunch of skinheads with posters of Hitler on their walls [editline]10:46PM[/editline] How's that? They wanted the government to stay small and out of the people's lives.[/QUOTE] That isn't a right or left ideology, that is a libertarian/individualist ideology.

[QUOTE=thisispain;17115480]But national socialism is anti-semitic. The creator of National Socialism stated it as a tenant of it.[/QUOTE] I really, really, really wouldn't say Hitler was the creator of National Socialism, which is simply an ideology that anyone could have followed before Hitler brought it onto the scene. Sure, he popularized it, but that doesn't mean National Socialism (remember the definitions of these terms) automatically implies, ethnic purism, racism, anti-Semitism, or any of that.

[QUOTE=Conscript;17115514]Today's liberals are very then different then those of the past. They didn't have keynesianism back then.[/QUOTE] What liberal was back then was blue collar, not philanthropist

[QUOTE=Lankist;17115517]That isn't a right or left ideology, that is a libertarian/individualist ideology.[/QUOTE] Libertarianism/individualism isn't the same as liberalism. [editline]10:49PM[/editline] At least not as we know it.

[QUOTE=ErectorBeast;17115522]I really, really, really wouldn't say Hitler was the creator of National Socialism, which is simply an ideology that anyone could have followed before Hitler brought it onto the scene. Sure, he popularized it, but that doesn't mean National Socialism (remember the definitions of these terms) automatically implies, ethnic purism, racism, anti-Semitism, or any of that.[/QUOTE] Again, Maurice Barres was the creator of national socialism. He did imply ethnic purism, racism, and anti-Semitism. You are arguing against the actual definition that was set-up by its creator.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;17115534]Libertarianism/individualism isn't the same as liberalism.[/QUOTE] It was two hundred years ago before American Libertarianism existed. And individualism is an ideology that transcends political party.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;17115534]Libertarianism/individualism isn't the same as liberalism. [editline]10:49PM[/editline] At least not as we know it.[/QUOTE] No one said it was.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;17115534]Libertarianism/individualism isn't the same as liberalism. [/QUOTE] Libertarianism is liberalism. Today's liberals, as they are miss branded, are social democrats.

[QUOTE=Lankist;17115545]It was two hundred years ago before American Libertarianism existed. And individualism is an ideology that transcends political party.[/QUOTE] Not if you're part of the communist party.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17115555]Not if you're part of the communist party.[/QUOTE] Fuck them though

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17115555]Not if you're part of the communist party.[/QUOTE] Obama is a communist.

[QUOTE=JDK721v2;17115576]Obama is a communist.[/QUOTE] No he isn't, stupid He's a socialist

I fucking knew it wasn't just a skit! [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fe9R7jcMPp4[/media]

[QUOTE=Lankist;17115545] And individualism is an ideology that transcends political party.[/QUOTE] I love how you weasel your way through arguments like this. I'm not being sarcastic either. Do they teach you this at law school?

[QUOTE=JDK721v2;17115576]Obama is a communist.[/QUOTE] and reagan was a fascist :rolleye:

i knew it