On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:50:04 -0500, Wilbur Hubbard wrote:


It's so clear that you
have to be a fascist liberal to misinterpret it.


Well, it seems you have misinterpreted fascism. One of it's founding
tenets is anti-liberalism. It is a movement of the *right*.

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:50:04 -0500, Wilbur Hubbard wrote:


It's so clear that you
have to be a fascist liberal to misinterpret it.


Well, it seems you have misinterpreted fascism. One of it's founding
tenets is anti-liberalism. It is a movement of the *right*.

I do not "misinterpret" anything to do with the English language. I happen
to be an expert on it. Fascism is a political philosophy, movement, or
regime that exalts nation and often race and stands for a centralized
autocratic often militaristic government.

Central, autocratic government is a liberal (socialist) ideal. Read
autocratic as dictatorship. It is far from conservatism which is considered
to be on the right in the current political spectrum. Today's conservative
movement is for smaller, decentralized government and a strict abiding by
the Constitution. I know it's difficult to understand because today's
so-called conservative seems to grow government like crazy but the
conclusion that needs be drawn is Republican doesn't necessarily equal
conservative. On the other hand, Democrat definitely means liberal. Fascist
liberal is a slightly more to the left version of what we see in today's
Democrat party. Believe me, Hillary Rodham is a fascist.

It is necessary to abide by today's definitions of liberalsim vs.
conservatism - i.e. left vs, right in order to have an intelligent
discussion. Your harkening back to some mythical founding tenet couched in
the past when the terms were defined diferently than they are now is a lame
attempt to misdirect the discussion. Now, go to the back of the class..

Wilbur Hubbard

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:08:31 -0500, Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:50:04 -0500, Wilbur Hubbard wrote:


It's so clear that you
have to be a fascist liberal to misinterpret it.


Well, it seems you have misinterpreted fascism. One of it's founding
tenets is anti-liberalism. It is a movement of the *right*.

I do not "misinterpret" anything to do with the English language. I
happen to be an expert on it. Fascism is a political philosophy,
movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race and stands for a
centralized autocratic often militaristic government.

Central, autocratic government is a liberal (socialist) ideal. Read
autocratic as dictatorship. It is far from conservatism which is
considered to be on the right in the current political spectrum. Today's
conservative movement is for smaller, decentralized government and a
strict abiding by the Constitution. I know it's difficult to understand
because today's so-called conservative seems to grow government like
crazy but the conclusion that needs be drawn is Republican doesn't
necessarily equal conservative. On the other hand, Democrat definitely
means liberal. Fascist liberal is a slightly more to the left version of
what we see in today's Democrat party. Believe me, Hillary Rodham is a
fascist.

It is necessary to abide by today's definitions of liberalsim vs.
conservatism - i.e. left vs, right in order to have an intelligent
discussion. Your harkening back to some mythical founding tenet couched
in the past when the terms were defined diferently than they are now is
a lame attempt to misdirect the discussion. Now, go to the back of the
class..

I can see why you consider yourself a sailor. You sure are windy, but a
little confused. Perhaps you will answer me this, if the terms were
defined differently for fascism, a mere 80 years ago, why do you wish to
demand a "strict abiding by the Constitution", a document that is over
200 years old? Were not the terms defined differently then?

If autocratic government is a liberal ideal, why is the greatest threat
to democracy always from the right? The left has a history of
overthrowing kings, and tyrants. The right, a history of overthrowing
democracies. I've looked, but I have only been able to find 3
democracies that were overthrown by leftists, but well over 100 that were
overthrown by the right. Why is that?



Wilbur Hubbard

wrote in message
...

If autocratic government is a liberal ideal, why is the greatest threat
to democracy always from the right? The left has a history of
overthrowing kings, and tyrants. The right, a history of overthrowing
democracies. I've looked, but I have only been able to find 3
democracies that were overthrown by leftists, but well over 100 that were
overthrown by the right. Why is that?


Right and left are subjective to the person deciding the direction.

Hitler and Bush are both considered right wing by you, aren't they?

There is no difference between the right or left. They both want to control
other people's lives where they have no business. One side wants mob rule,
the other rule by dictator.

Whatever happened to people running their own lives?

Democracy is simply mob rule, 51% rule the other 49%. Democracy does not
guarantee freedom nor protect it.

Only Constitutional Republics can do that and only if their constitution
works on the principles that the power is derived from the people and the
constitution is an enumeration of powers delegated to the government by the
people. Powers not delegated are retained by the people. Constitutions are
used to limit governments, expand and protect individual freedoms in a non
contradictory manner.

Anything more is less freedom.

Mitchell Ryan

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 09:41:33 -0700, Robert Musgine wrote:


Hitler and Bush are both considered right wing by you, aren't they?

Hitler? Yes. Bush? I'm not sure what he is. He sure isn't fiscally
conservative, nor do his actions belie small government, rule of law,
abiding by the Constitution, etc.

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 09:41:33 -0700, Robert Musgine wrote:


Hitler and Bush are both considered right wing by you, aren't they?

Hitler? Yes. Bush? I'm not sure what he is. He sure isn't fiscally
conservative, nor do his actions belie small government, rule of law,
abiding by the Constitution, etc.

Hitler was a socialist. So what makes him right wing?

Is Stalin right wing too?

Is Franco right wing?

Is Trotsky right wing?

Castro?

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 10:06:40 -0700, Robert Musgine wrote:


Hitler was a socialist. So what makes him right wing?

No, he was a fascist. Just as there is nothing democratic about the
Democratic People' Republic of Korea, there is nothing socialist about
the National Socialist Party. In socialism, property and wealth are
communally controlled. That didn't happen in Nazi Germany. He was a
fascist. His rise was based on Nationalism and racism.

Is Stalin right wing too?

Just another autocratic, totalitarian, SOB. The former Soviet Union was
an elitist dictatorship.

Is Franco right wing?

Fascist, and that means right wing.

Is Trotsky right wing?

Definitely a leftist.

Castro?

I would say he's a leftist. A dictator, no doubt, but more benevolent
than most.