Communism; Nazism and US politics. Aldeth.

Remove all ads!

Ok. Considering the fact I don't live in the US, it would be interesting to debate this, and maybe you could enlighten me a bit on this regard.
What is the typical rightist agenda? Why is it that Bush did not do something about the things I have said? Why are some Republicans dissatisfied with his lack of actions on some instances such as illegal immigration?

Sorry, but even not living in the US I can not comply with it.
Holocaust museums; mass production of movies dealing with mazism and holocaust; etc. There was a nazi rally in Toledo couple months ago, and it ended up in a riot.
I am not saying a commie is viewed in a positive light in the US, but someone who is a self proclaimed nazi is totally disregarded by non-nazis.
I could concede that point during the Cold War, for some very obvious reasons, but I doubt to the average Joe being a commie means much these days. Now being a nazi is a total different story.

True. However, for starters, as I have said, that was during the Cold War, wherein I admit anti-commie hysteria was much higher, which I dont think it is nowadays.
Second of all, during both Korea and Vietnam, we could see how the US left is "small and oppressed". Since these wars they gain even more ground. In the other hand, what kind of anti-War demonstrations did you have during the WWII?
Another point to be considered, look how many openly leftist - and I mean people clearly socialist and with commie inclinations, not simply leftists - like More and Chomsky. You might say they are looked down or whatever, but that is not what the numbers say, mainly considered how Moor's movies made money for him.
In the other hand, what about people who are in the exact opposite end of Chomsky and Moore? People like David Duke, Dr. William Pierce - RIP? I am sure most of you have never ever heard about them, or the ones who do, think they are just human trash.
Furthermore, are commie crimes as advertised as nazi ones? I dont think so. Is the Ukrainian famine remembered daily, as the holocaust is? No, it is not - actually, the famine was hidden by the "ultra rightist" New York Times during decades, till the day the info finally leaked into the West.
I could go on, but you get the idea.

I dont quite get it. Did I not say I view the commies as worse than the nazis - or at least as bad as?
The rest of your post assumes I think the commies are more palatable, so I would rather wait that you explain yourself before I go any further.

Same as above.

[ November 20, 2005, 22:36: Message edited by: Taluntain ]

 

I think that before you compare nazism and communism, you should remember that a communist system never existied. They were and are all merely socialist systems in diverse forms: USSR -> Leninism/Stalinism, China -> Maoism, and so forth.

 

Only two reasons I can think of:
</font>

1. WWII. The Russians fought against Germany with the Allies; if you've ever been in a fox-hole with someone, you know how much that means. Germany was also the "bad guy" in both WWI and WWII, IIRC.
2. Ideology. Most Americans think of (true) communism as a pipe dream. Socialist carries a little bit of a sting, but communist sounds a bit like hippy. Nazi, on the other hand, has a strong tie to the attempted genocide in the concentration camps; I don't think that stigma is going away any time soon.

A little anecdote for y'all:
When I was in primary school, we had a haunted house and I was one of the kids picked to help "illustrate". I tried to think of the scariest thing possible to put on a tombstone, and the hammer & scythe never even came to mind; I was, however, chastised for putting a swasticka on it. At the time I didn't know any better (I just figured it'd be scary), and I got off with a warning and a requirement to redo it without the swasticka.

 

And Bla bla bla.
----------------------------------------------------

As silly as it may seem - being a childhood story and everything - this illustrates my point somewhat.
It is in the mind of people, since they are children.

 

@Svy:
Just to make sure I come across clearly, the hammer & scythe didn't come to mind because they weren't scary (i.e. weren't bad enough), but the swasticka was. At that age I couldn't think of anything worse; I just didn't realize how bad.

 

Obviously, you don't care about precision. *shrug* Suit yourself.

 

I don't care for ideological apologism.

 

A major factor in why many people (in Europe at least) perceive nazis worse than communists is indeed that the nazis lost the war. They were open prey to be demonized everywhere, while the communists were somewhat spared from such for diplomatic reasons, since they still existed when the war was over.

My reading on this subject hasn't been extensive, but I've been under the impression that the "original" idea of communism (or rather, socialism which it was derided from) is a more of a peaceful one, not world domination and such, and that the path the Soviet Union took would have been quite an atrocity to Marx. The idea of nazism was from the start strongly racist, and aggressively taking action to achieve racial purity quickly followed.

"Original" ideas aside and considering the actual deeds, I think it's unfortunate that the deeds of Stalin aren't as well known as those of Hitler. I've read he actually had more people killed than Hitler did.

What kind of an argument is *that?*

 

I believe that would be the main thing that made the difference. World War II was a highly documented event - we have many video slides, and pictures from, not only when the Allied forces entered the camps, but from when the Nazi's controlled them. In comparison (from what I've read) most 'communist' nations were kept in isolation from the rest of the world - and as Susipaisti said, they were never at the loosing side of a major war, so there have been no great public knowledge of the events.

The other reason, I think is touched briefly above somewhere. If you look at what Communism and Nazism actaully are, I believe the reason is quite clear. Quoted below is the rough definitions from Wikipedia.

As you can see, a large part (if not all) of Nazism revolved around a goal based on extremely racist beliefs - where as Communism is a political belief, which has nothing to do with descrimination of any kind. When you compare racism with political belief... well, you see quite a difference. One, atleast in New Zealand, would be illegal, where the other one is perfectly legal. I'll leave you to guess as to which is which.

 

Anyone who seriously advocates the over-throw of the US government could be charged with treason, and some were in the Cold War days. Those who were even suspected of being commies were cast out of their jobs, investigated and even tried for treason. Of course, with the end of the cold war this has changed a bit. But still one can ruin his career in certain positions if he is a suspected communist.

[ November 21, 2005, 02:10: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

 

I think the practicality of the two political evils is important as it reveals the potential for societal relapse. Speaking as an American, communism is seen as a form of government that is inherently unfeasible. A friend of mine described it as an ideology that was the product of opium dens. Nazism: different story; America could survive, and possibly even prosper, with the complete eradication of certain minority groups. That would, of course, be completely evil though. I am fairly certain, and happily so, that such a process will never occur here, at least in the foreseeable future.

Long story short:
Communism: evil but stupid.
Nazism: possible but evil.

Hence Nazism is more dangerous.

 

Hmm... I'm curious. How do you define evil? Particularly in line with the Communism part.

I agree with Nazism - and I believe most definitions of evil would agree. But Communism? I'm curious as how you see that as evil.

 

The reason that Nazism is "worse" than Communism is that the killing of entire big groups of humans is a cornerstone of the ideology. In Communism it is "just" an unhappy sideeffect which theoritically has nothing to do with hte ideology itself.

 

Communism is a theoretical political system which supposedly enhances the working population. The fact that it has been misused does not make it evil

Which Rotku has eloquently stated. Read his post, carefully.

Nazism's philosophy is inherently evil because of the statement that one 'race' is superior to others.

Again, please read Rotku's post.

 

Exactly.

 

No input, no output.
-----------------------------------------------------

So Chomsky is not a commie? His career is anything but ruined.
---------------------------------------------------

LOL! WTF is that supposed to mean? It is a side effect - logically one would assume a side effect is the indirect result of the action itself, but inherent to the action nonetheless - but still it has nothing to do with the ideology? Now that is a good one!!!

As for all the BS "communism is inherently good, but badly misused; nazism is evil in itself" I have heard all my life, and it is so fallacious it makes me laugh.
To begin with, all commie experiences have been utterly evil and ended up in bloodshed and destruction. When a system draws to itself so many negative and bad outcomes, we can only realise what is all about it. Something good does not produce evil, just like something evil can not produce good outcomes.
Regardless, that is not even the main point. All the commie crimes are well known and undeniable. Anyone who calls himself a commie knows all about those atrocities and yet feels comfortable of being part of it. He condones these crimes, because in his sick mind these are justifiable to end the "burgueouse capital dictatorship". If he does not condone, he just don't care either.

This is the worst defition of communism that I have heard.
Maybe nazim is a theoretical political system which supposedly enhances the indigenous Race. It was misused though.
The notion that a Race is superior to another one is not evil per see. It might be a wrong, prettentious perception, but evil? Nah.
Communism has no regard for personal freedom, because this is a "burgueous value". Communism's intent is to enforce the "dictatorship of the proletarian".
There is only one reason that commies are not viewed in the same light as the nazis are, and that is propaganda.

 

I'm not really familiar with this Chomsky fellow, but by "over-throwing the US goverment" people mean something outside the democratic voting process. If one discredits the sitting president and his policies, it's not an attempt to over-throw him. It's an attempt to get people to vote him out the next time around, and that's what democracy is all about. Inciting people to some kind of an armed rebellion would constitute as an attempted over-throwing.

What would be the definition then? The original idea was to share everything, eliminate class distinctions and therefore be equal and free, but it didn't work. It can't work if there is a political ruler in charge of the others. It probably can't ever work at all.

The notion of nazism, that one race is superior to all others qualifies as evil in my mind because it strives for unequality.

This is true in some places. In Finland, for quite some time after the war with the Soviet Union, the political rulers made a big effort not to offend their big neighbor in any way, and the result was that even mentions of areas lost in the war were, if not completely prohibited, heavily frowned upon and discouraged. While nazis were openly demonized everywhere.

But the reason for this was not that leftists were in charge and wished to deceive people for their own aggendas; rather that the politicians were scared of the Soviet Union.

 

Again, these were (and are) no communist systems, but socialist ones. Not one of the powerful people wanted a real communist system because they would have lost their privileges.

They misunderstood oder misused Marx' and Engels' theories because they stated that the development towards communism would be a natural process, not a forced one.

And to make it worse: Marx and Engels did not create a political, but an economic system. You will not find any statements in 'Capital' or 'Communist Manifest' about how political power should be allocated.

 

But there is an intersting inter-link between communism and fascism, including national-socialism. It's an answer to the threat of communism.

If communism is way more evil if than fascism, than fascism is good. The fascist movements were to a big extend an answer to the communist threat, externanlly through Russia, internally through marxist parties. All fascists vanted themselves being the only reliable bulwark against communism.

That's why direct comparisons usually are a tad bid delicate. Communism is the primary justification for National-Socialism. It's the literal "lesser evil". Everything else had to be done for the greater good...... or so they say.

Ah, and the jew Hitler hated the most... Marx.

The Nazis fought against the "jewish-bolshevik world conspiracy". And communism was the living proof and instrument of jewish evil, from which the world and the fair-races of Europe had to be saved. Enslavery of the slavic people were just another step to up-keep complete purity, Ivan is to Michael what Cain was to Abel.

Oh.. and of course, no secret to star wars fan, the "REPUBLIC", mother of all evil and just another communistic derivate.

 

Am I the only one still bothered by the title of this thread? Communism is misspelled (Communiam), which Svy could fix by editing the first post, and Aldeth still hasn't shown up despite his name being in the title.