...and your chicks for free.
Posted on 07/13/2015 1:05:43 PM PDT by Voice of Reason1
The left’s Socialist national scheme at it’s most basic level is predicated on the LIE that one can get ‘something for nothing’ for the mere pittance of sacrificing human dignity and freedom. This actuality should inform everyone that the left’s entire edifice if but a shell of Lies, deceptions, false narratives, false accusations and myths.
The task of even attempting to quantify and catalog all of these interlocking lies is a daunting task. But in order to understand the enemy we face this is a task we all must endeavor to undertake. (Oh, did I refer to the left the enemy… well Alinsky did the same so we move on)
When one tries to take account of all the deceptions, Lies, false narratives, prevarication’s and false implications that daily flow from the spigot of the left’s house propaganda organs it’s much akin to trying to drink from a fire hose with a soda straw..
This is my attempt at trying to classify and catalog some of the national Socialist left’s biggest Lies in the order of their importance while providing quick responses to these Lies.
One has to be mindful that the national Socialist left is very comfortable with deception and lies to further it’s agenda. They know deep down that people won’t naturally vote to enslave themselves and as such they realize they are lost without this foundation of falsehoods.
For these various reason, this 4 part essay will be restricted to mainly the direct Lies of the national socialist left that are used more frequently than others. Please understand that the order of importance of all the lies changes on a daily and almost hourly basis. And also realize that certain subjects like Obamacare and their incessant attacks against civil rights like the 1st and 2nd amendments have their own subset of Lies.
With that in mind this study will confine itself to just the most pervasive Lies of the national Socialist left. In reality, the left’s top 100 lies would be more appropriate, but a ‘Top Ten’ format makes it easier to get a read of the tactics, talking points and falsehoods that issue forth from it’s collective maw of organized evil… (Oops, did I say that out loud.. ) Oh well, those people are perpetually offended when people speak the truth so why should this time be any different… but I digress.
These are also many of the left’s more easily defeated LIES that they still rely upon on a daily basis, and as such easy methods to destroy these lies will strike at the heart of the left’s socialist national agenda.
[Please note that the term ‘national Socialist left’ in and of itself is something bound to set off leftists due to one of their biggest LIES, but that will have to wait for later on in part 4 of this essay]
For part one we are going to start out mentioning some of the national Socialist left’s dishonorable mentions to be sure we don’t miss some of everyone’s favorite lies of the left and discuss their Oh so clever technique of the false accusation.
Before we get into the ‘meat’ (That’s for you Vegan’s out there) of the top ten lies here are just some of the left’s Lies, false narratives and false accusations that for brevity’s sake had to end up on the cutting room floor:
Leftists are ‘Pro-choice’(Just like they are in Socialist dictatorships)
The national Socialist media is ‘objective’
Leftists ‘care’ about the little guy (middle class) etc.
Someone else is always to blame for the failure of the left’s socialist national agenda.
You have a right NOT to be___________________[Offended, etc.]
We need to have a national ‘conversation’ about _____________ Racism, guns, wealth, etc.
[As if we don’t have an ongoing and incessant ‘conversation’ about these issues – this is mainly a ruse that really means: You conservatives need to give up your right dues to supposed past wrongs.. and until you do.. the ‘conversation’ hasn’t taken place
You don’t have a right to (or control of)your property (earnings, possessions, etc.) – the myth of collective ownership
As final note for Part I of this essay, we have examples of the ever present false accusation Lies that are incessantly being spewed by the national Socialist left in much the same manner as a pitching machine that unceasingly throws fast balls at your head:
Conservatives are ‘Racist’, ‘Sexist’, intolerant, etc.
‘War on women’
Conservatives are ‘mean’
We’re addressing these national socialist Lies because the tactics in dealing with them have to be different. If you accept the premise of these false accusation you’ve already lost the argument.
Example: A national socialist will declare that “Conservatives are mean”.
Responding along the lines of “No, we’re not” derails the debate onto this negative connotation and off the original subject. Then it is simply a matter of the national socialists to hurl a new false accusation to divert attention even further with something like “Conservatives are nasty”.
This has the two pronged objective of deflecting the argument and casting negative aspersions on Conservatives.
The conclusion draw by the objective observer will be these negative connotations instead of the real issue.
A much better tactic in dealing with the false accusation lie is to simply not accept the premise and demand the national socialist back up this load of BS with real facts and stay on topic. This whilst pointing out their use of the deflection technique to avoid the real issue.
This turns the tables of the national socialist and cements the point that leftist can’t debate the real issues.
Stay tuned for Part II
Please feel free to disagree with how I rate their lies further on.
The second thing you need to know is that in order to be a Communist, you must be a liar.
Third, one cannot survive without the other.
The problem with this theory is that the Left aren’t nationalists, therefore they can’t be national socialists.
Actually, that word and the word I'm using aren't the same thing and have two different meanings.
national
of or relating to a nation; common to or characteristic of a whole nation:” this policy may have been in the national interest a national newspaper” http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/national?
Yes, that is exactly the case.
And it’s up to use to have good answers whenever these lies are used lest they seem to be the truth.
(Which is the reason they repeat them so often)
Well, that’s true that they aren’t nationalists. They are internationalists/ globalists. But if you say anything even remotely disparaging about “lefties”, a national socialist will very quickly & adamantly inform/ remind you that *they* are “lefties” [so watch what you say].
A totalitarian is a totalitarian. Nationalist or globalist, it’s just a difference in scope. But has there ever been a leftist “nationalist” country that didn’t try to metastasize into other non-leftist countries?
We are living through a National Socialist revolution. We emphasize the term “socialist” because many speak only of a “national” revolution. Dubious, but also wrong. It was not only nationalism that led to the breakthrough. We are proud that German socialism also triumphed. Unfortunately, there are still people among us today who emphasize the word “national” too strongly and who do not want to know anything about the second part of our worldview, which shows that they have also failed to understand the first part.Same formula was employed by Mussolini, Stalin, Mao and others.
Those who do not want to recognize a German socialism do not have the right to call themselves national. Only he who emphasizes German socialism is truly national. He who refuses to speak of socialism, who believes in socialism only in the Marxist sense, or to whom the word “socialism” has an unpleasant ring, has not understood the deepest meaning of nationalism. …
— Hermann Goering, Nationalism and Socialism, 04/09/1933
A totalitarian is a totalitarian. Nationalist or globalist, it’s just a difference in scope. But has there ever been a leftist “nationalist” country that didn’t try to metastasize into other non-leftist countries?
This is correct - I would say that there isn’t that much of a difference between the types - it’s like arguing over the name of a poison, it’s still lethal so what you call it doesn’t matter.
National socialists, in the generic sense of the term as opposed to the Nazi sense, are socialists who are nationalists, as opposed to Marxists and other varieties of internationalist socialists. Fascists, for instance, are national socialists, generally mixed with a bunch of other stuff.
Today’s America liberals, with their weak sense of nationalism, can’t realistically be called national socialists in any meaningful sense of the term. Indeed, they’re pretty much anti-nationalists.
BTW, I’m perfectly well aware that the reason the term is used is not to say anything enlightening about the beliefs of the American Left, it’s to imply they’re “really” Nazis.
I agree liberals have a good deal more in common with generic Fascism than they’re willing to admit, but they just don’t have all that much in common with the specifically Nazi variant of Fascism.
YMM, of course, V.
Part of the point in referring them that way is to expose one if their biggest lies.
There really isn’t that much of a difference between the various types of Statists, and they all have to be defeated.
Exactly.
The Islamists simply are not socialists of any type. Not all bad guys are. Or at least they’re not all socialists. Socialism is by definition pretty thoroughly opposed to Islam.
Talking about this intelligently requires defining terms. Notably Islamism, Fascism, socialism and national socialism.
If you don’t agree on what these terms mean, a discussion is pretty worthless.
For instance, socialism is not = Marxism, which is simply one of the many subgroups of socialism, albeit the most popular.
Oh, but there are huge differences between the different types of Statists, in their goals if not so much in their methods.
Though I have no problem with confronting and defeating them all.
So you’re dictating to Islamic Socialists that they aren’t socialist. I see.
Socialists are what they do. Their chief characteristic is government takeover of means of production where they dominate; their secondary characteristic is global imperialism. There are religious socialists (which ought to be oxymoronic) and antireligious socialists.
Islam does not prescribe the government control the means of production. In fact, it’s pretty friendly to merchants and businessmen, more so, for instance, than medieval Christianity was.
Here’s a discussion by a Turkish Muslim.
This is not to say that people haven’t tried to combine Islam and socialism, just as they’re tried to create Christian socialism.
Islam is by definition globally imperialist. It is not of itself socialist.
Nobody said Islam is “of itself socialist”. That does not mean that Islamic socialists do not exist or are not socialist, any more than national socialists are not socialist.
The opinions of any imam or non-clerical Muslim are as chameleonic as Islam itself.
...and your chicks for free.
That is essentially the promise of national Socialism.
Leftists like to pretend they are in favor of ‘fairness’ and ‘equality’ but they are really all about what they can get in the bargain.
They are Gimmes of the worst sort.
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.