Posted on 10/15/2013 4:40:47 AM PDT by moneyrunner
Edited on 10/15/2013 6:13:59 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
AFP - France's mainstream political parties were Monday scratching their heads over what to do about a surge by the Front National (FN) after a breakthrough by-election win for the far-right party.
The ruling Socialist party and the centre-right Union for a Popular Movement (UMP), the party of former president Nicolas Sarkozy, face humiliating reverses in municipal and European elections next year if the FN can sustain its current standing in the eyes of an electorate thoroughly fed-up with record unemployment, rising taxes and a perceived increase in crime and insecurity.
(Excerpt) Read more at moneyrunner.blogspot.com ...
All the same. Same ends sought under cover of something good for the people, always B.S.
Nazi and Commies were brutal gangs nothing more. WWII conflict between them was a gang war for turf and dominance.
History is written by the victors and they prefer to hide their true nature behind veils of lies about doing good for the common people.
That is how I see it. You can make your own call but bear in mind that they care nothing for you or yours, witness tens of millions of noncombatants dead on all sides.
Knee jerk is the right word. They don't THINK.
If they THOUGHT they would see the general failure of communism, even of socialism.
Socialism often works in a country where everyone is generally the same. I saw that in Scandinavia. There is a common Scandinavian "think," that is, that mommy-government can/should/must be the nipple on which ALL suckle.
Americans live in a dog-eat-dog society to many socialist countries like them, but THIS is the BEST place in the world to be (Am I a bit prejudiced?). We have to EARN what we get and that makes us stronger.
Stronger is better because it makes us self-reliant so when gubmint fails, and it often does, or when gubmint runs out of money from the commie/socialist "money tree," which it often does, then the independent people can/will survive AND thrive. The nipple-dependent don't survive or thrive and just WHINE.
That’s a simplistic, one dimensional approach.
Look at it two dimensionally. Standard Liberal/Left and Conservative/Right on the X axis, but Statism and Anti-Statism on the Y (bottom and top, respectively)
So extreme lower left quadrant is Communism. Lower right is Fascism, upper right is Randian Objectivism and upper left is big L Libertarianism.
ALWAYS end the conversation by calling me a “Fascist”. It’s a knee-jerk reflex.
To add: Constitutionalism would be in the upper Right quadrant, but not out to the extreme as with Objectivism.
The French are NOT going to die. They are the most tenacious monkeys. They were inculcated with liberal guilt by their mainstream media. So, they tried to do what THEY thought was the "right" thing. WRONG AGAIN, froggies! Enabling folks does them more of a disservice than ignoring them, I think. I wonder if the frogs will let reality happen to those who won't work. Hmmm.
You nailed it.
But,then, you are simply demonstrating the reality of your call sign.
Despite what dictionaries and definition-sites say, YOUR definition is the CORRECT one.
There is no such thing as right-side statism. Statism is leftist thinking. The “fascism is right-side statism” is a successful propaganda blitz performed by the left in order to cover their about-face turn from their former darlings, Hitler and Mussolini. Refuse to accept the left propaganda.
Left loves government and control.
Right loves freedom and liberty.
Keep those keys in your mind and it’s easy to see who falls where.
Thanks for the book tip - I will look for it.
Negative, and see my post #15. Kidd’s #14 is worthwhile as well.
My own call aligns with Hayek, who I must assume you didn’t read by going to my FR profile page.
Summary: There isn’t a nickel’s difference between Nazis and Communists, and the real difference is with respect to a “liberal of the old type”, or what we now call a conservative, since in the intervening years Leftist collectivists have hijacked the term “liberal”.
They’ve had enough. Rapes, theft, murders, cars burned. The parasites come in, take everything they can, and then assault the people who provide for them.
Kick them out!
Yes.
ObamaCare is very consistant with Corporatism, at least on its face and for the time being.
-Heavily regulated but privately owned insurance.
-Price controls.
-Subsidies.
-Rules on who private insurance can have as a customer and what they have to cover.
-Forced purchases.
Yes, Fascists would be very happy with Obamacare.
Of course, the intent is to force everyone into a single-payer system. Then it becomes pure socialism.
Marine Le Pen interview (translated to English). Being half French this interests me. Glenn Beck's knee jerk (heavy on the “jerk”) reaction was Nationalist Fascists, Nazis, anti Semitic.
As Glenn has suggested in the past, that the political scale is not a line with left on one end and right on the other, but it is a circle. Fascism is the point where left and right meet on the circle. I think this is correct.
The FN Party may have been very close to this line under Marine’s Father, but has moved away from it becoming more of a far right party. Nationalistic? Yes, very much so, but the French are a very proud people when it comes to their nationality. They have a very long history that we in America have no concept of. I remember attending church in this little town of Le Conquet. It had a dirt floor. I questioned it's primitiveness and was told it had been just like this for TWO THOUSAND YEARS. There are Giant crosses in open fields that are so old no one knows how they got there. In colonial days and way before, France was a WORLD power. So, being nationalistic in France isn't the same thing as nationalism in Nazi Germany.
Marine wants to secure France's borders, limit immigration (especially Muslims), get out of the EU, bring back French currency, create and protect French jobs and fair trade.
Sounds good to me! More like her!
Liberalism is simply a stage of Leftist totalitarianism. It’s not a separate category.
The standard libertarian square of personal freedom v. Economic freedom makes more sense, but its flaw is in the definitions, where personal freedom is effectively defined as libertinism.
The Mainstream Media in most Western Countries represent their own opinions and the opinions of their co-worker one desk over...
There’s really no perfect way of representing the political/ideological spectrum. So it comes down to personal preference and how one likes to frame the discussion (and against who they wish to frame it).
I like the two axis approach (Left/Right X and Statist/Anti-Statist Y) because it traps Liberals in their argument that policies like ObamaCare are “center-right” and allows me to define them as fascist (or corperatist). I like going out on the Liberals’ own playing field and being able to win. Which I define as reducing them to sputtering indignance/rage at being unable to defend themselves against being the ones labled “fascist” and “corporate stooge”.
A good assessment. Truly, this is about what we won’t tolerate as we have been pushed beyond the edge and any hope of reconciliation.
For an assemblage of the massive evidence of just how far Left the Nazis were, see The Lies of Socialism.
France, today, has terrible problems. One can only hope that Marine Le Pen's influence continues to grow in France.
William Flax
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.