Shootings in Europe even with gun control...

[billc]

Eugenics has a particularly racist bent to it...wouldn't you say and it was the socialists who advocated for it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society

The Fabian Society is a British socialist organization whose purpose is to advance the principles of socialism via gradualist and reformist, rather than revolutionary, means.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP] It is best known for its initial ground-breaking work beginning late in the 19th century and continuing up to World War I. The society laid many of the foundations of the Labour Party and subsequently affected the policies of states emerging from thedecolonisation of the British Empire, especially India.

Geoffrey Robertson criticised Fabian socialists for providing the intellectual justification for the eugenics policy that led to the stolen generations scandal.[SUP][30][/SUP][SUP][31][/SUP] Such views on socialism, inequality and eugenics in early 20th century Fabians was not limited to one individual, it was a widely shared view in Fabian Society.[SUP][32][/SUP][SUP][33][/SUP]

On Eugenics and socialism...

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/opinion/malthus-hitler-socialism-eugenics-13167.html

The term final solution usually will find its way into the passages of commentary on the German National Socialists (Nazis). However very few people know what the initial question was that was first asked, nor by whom. In addition, even fewer recognize that Adolf Hitler was not the originator of the question or the answer.

By the commencement of the “Third International Eugenics Conference” in New York in 1932, the proposed forms of population control and resource consumption reduction were established and were as follows:
1. Birth control through the methods of sterilization of the undesirables, use of contraception, and abortion.
2. Euthanasia for the sick and old.
3. Establishing a one- or two-child policy for appropriate countries.
4. Promotion of abstinence for the poorer classes.
5. State-educated “Family Planning” organizations.
6. Restrictions on international migrations.
7. Environmental protection laws and the promotion of conservationism which led to the “green movement.”
Apparently the “Final Solution” had been found.
That same year, Margaret Sanger, Communist Party USA member, American Eugenics member, and founder of “Planned Parenthood,” lobbied the U.S. Congress on behalf of her cohorts. She represented her benefactors, urging the passing of a “two-child policy,” as well as a law that called for the forced sterilization of over 25 million Americans. Shockingly enough, the two bills were nearly passed by Congress.

Sanger was highly praised by Hitler for her work in eugenics and her promotion of abortion as a population control tool. Often calling her his inspiration, Hitler ensured she worked closely with the most important person in the early Nazi movement, Dr. Ernst Rudin, to plan their new society.

Now, which current political party in the United States is opposed to abortion...? Which party is for the rights of the "individual,"? Which political party supports the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the Declaration more than the other? Hmmmm...

 

[granfire]

Have you ever read the nazi positions on those issues. You really should, they could have been taken from the democrat party platform. The racism...I believe socialists of all stripes dislike Jews, have in the past pushed for killing undesirables, in particular those of other races. Look at the much loved Planned Parent hood in this country and where they started. Margaret Sanger wanted to reduce the population of minorities. Remember as well, the democrats were the party of slavery, jim crow, the ku klux klan, church bombings and lynchings. The photos you see of peaceful marchers being beaten and fire hosed...the people doing it are all democrats.

I'll find the 25 points the nazis pushed but here is a quick look from wikipedia...



Doesn't sound like an American conservative position to me...

Here you go...

http://users.stlcc.edu/rkalfus/PDFs/026.pdf



Does this sound like the republican party or the democrats and OWS?

As to war...remember Stalin and the invasion of Poland, that little Vietnam thing, the Chinese communists...

Eugenics has a particularly racist bent to it...wouldn't you say and it was the socialists who advocated for it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society





On Eugenics and socialism...

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/opinion/malthus-hitler-socialism-eugenics-13167.html







Now, which current political party in the United States is opposed to abortion...? Which party is for the rights of the "individual,"? Which political party supports the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the Declaration more than the other? Hmmmm...

Ok, sweety....let me try one last time:
NO
The NAZIs were not socialists.

How come I know?
because my Grandmother was a nazi. her brother was a nazi and she was damned proud of him having been a member before it became mandatory to hold any type of position!
There was NOTHING socialist about it.

By your definition Bismark was a socialist. After all he pushed the most comprehensive social reforms through the legislature during his reign.

HELL NO.
he did that in the attempt to appease the masses, trying to steal the socialist movement's thunder!

Same for the Nazis. DO not forget, in the 1930s, the world was crippled by the Great Depression. People had nothing. it was around that time when they went shopping, carrying their money in laundry baskets to the store.

Bread and games...
Every time you equal Nazis to socialists, I swear, Grandma is adding a few RPMs to her revolutions in the grave!

Yes, you have to feed the people, because full sheep are easier to guide!

 

[billc]

For you granfire...from the Nobel prize winning economist...the guys who study...economic systems...like socialism...

http://carrefoursagesse.wordpress.com/2009/10/21/friedrich-von-hayek-nazism-is-socialism/

The persecution of the Marxists, and of democrats in general, tends to obscure the fundamental fact that National “Socialism” is a genuine socialist movement, whose leading ideas are the final fruit of the anti-liberal tendencies which have been steadily gaining ground in Germany since the later part of the Bismarckian era, and which led the majority of the German intelligentsia first to “socialism of the chair” and later to Marxism in its social-democratic or communist form.

One of the main reasons why the socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized, is, no doubt, its alliance with the nationalist groups which represent the great industries and the great landowners. But this merely proves that these groups too, as they have since learnt to their bitter disappointment, have, at least partly, been mistaken as to the nature of the movement. But only partly because, and this is the most characteristic feature of modern Germany, many capitalists are themselves strongly influenced by socialistic ideas, and have not sufficient belief in capitalism to defend it with a clear conscience.

But, in spite of this, the German entrepreneur class have manifested almost incredible short-sightedness in allying themselves with a movement of whose strong anti-capitalistic tendencies there should never have been any doubt. A careful observer must always have been aware that the opposition of the Nazis to the established socialist parties, which gained them the sympathy of the entrepreneur, was only to a very small extent directed against their economic policy.

What the Nazis mainly objected to was their internationalism and all the aspects of their cultural programme which were still influenced by liberal ideas. But the accusations against the social-democrats and the communists which were most effective in their propaganda were not so much directed against their programme as against their supposed practice — their corruption and nepotism, and even their alleged alliance with “the golden International of Jewish Capitalism.”

It would, indeed, hardly have been possible for the Nationalists to advance fundamental objections to the economic policy of the other socialist parties when their own published programme differed from these only in that its socialism was much cruder and less rational. The famous 25 points drawn up by Herr Feder, one of Hitler’s early allies, repeatedly endorsed by Hitler and recognized by the by-laws of the National-Socialist party as the immutable basis of all its actions, which together with an extensive commentary is circulating throughout Germany in many hundreds of thousands of copies, is full of ideas resembling those of the early socialists.

But the dominant feature is a fierce hatred of anything capitalistic-individualistic profit seeking, large scale enterprise, banks, joint-stock companies, department stores, “international finance and loan capital,” the system of “interest slavery” in general; the abolition of these is described as the “basis of the programme, around which everything else turns.” It was to this programme that the masses of the German people, who were already completely under the influence of collectivist ideas, responded so enthusiastically.

The collectivist and anti-individualistic character of German National Socialism is not much modified by the fact that it is not a proletarian but middle class socialism, and that it is, in consequence, inclined to favour the small artisan and shop keeper and to set the limit up to which it recognizes private property somewhat higher than does communism. In the first instance, it will probably nominally recognise private property in general. But private initiative will probably be hedged about with restrictions on competition so that little freedom will remain.


Artisans, shop-keepers and professional men will, in all likelihood, be organized in guilds, like those of the medieval crafts, which will regulate their activities. In the case of the wealthier capitalists, state control and restriction of income will leave little more than the name of property, even while the intention of correcting the undue accumulation of wealth in the hands of individuals has not yet been carried out.


Even at the present moment, state commissioners have been put in charge of many important industries and, if the more radical wing of the party has its way, the same is likely to happen in many other cases. At the present time, when the National Socialist party has grown to such an enormous size, and accordingly embraces elements with very divergent views, it is, of course, difficult to say which views on economic policy hold the field, it will mean that the scare of Russian communism has driven German people unaware into something which differs from communism in little but name.

 

[billc]

Here is another Ph.D in economics on why nazis are socialists...he mentions Von mises in his paper...

http://mises.org/daily/1937

My purpose today is to make just two main points:

(1) To show why Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And (2) to show why socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.

The identification of Nazi Germany as a socialist state was one of the many great contributions of Ludwig von Mises.When one remembers that the word "Nazi" was an abbreviation for "der NationalsozialistischeDeutsche Arbeiters Partei — in English translation: the National Socialist German Workers' Party — Mises's identification might not appear all that noteworthy.

For what should one expect the economic system of a country ruled by a party with "socialist" in its name to be but socialism?Nevertheless, apart from Mises and his readers, practically no one thinks of Nazi Germany as a socialist state. It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed.The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.

What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name onlyunder the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.​

 

[arnisador]

Early Godwinization of this thread.

 

[Tez3]

It looks like I've proved my point, Bill rants on just about everything are skewed by insane fervour for the extreme right to the extent that if someone does something wrong it's the left's fault, if it's correct it's the right that in the right.
Did I mention the posts where he said that the right are peace loving and non violent while all the lefties are violent and aggressive? Or where the lefties are child murderers but no conservative has ever murdered anyone ever?
To rant about socialist and Jews, well, what would I know, my parents were both. To rant about Nazis being leftists, well my mother was a concentration camp survivor but what would she know about Nazis eh? To rant about the violence in the UK and Europe, funny thing is...I'm both British and European and know quite a bit about crime, laws, and even history but hey, again what would I know?

Bill despises, fears and hates anything and anyone that is not of his way of thinking, and his way of thinking is formed by reading stuff from right wingers, sometimes extreme right wingers. There's no room for critical thinking, no room for questioning, no room for dissent from these views, it's very extreme right wing, actually it's right wing to the point of being fascist. Beware these thoughts because he and his ilk will have America as tied up as Hitler did Germany, don't think, obey. shout down anyone who disagrees, flood this thread with endless and pointless quotes so that peopole give up and just accept what he says. After all if he keeps on about it he must be right, if it's repeated enough it becomes the truth. Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! people must be encouraged to think for themselves, to retain their freedom fighting for it if necessary. Just because someone has a university degree doesn't make them right, being on television doesn't make them right. They have agendas too.

 

[K-man]

Bill despises, fears and hates anything and anyone that is not of his way of thinking, and his way of thinking is formed by reading stuff from right wingers, sometimes extreme right wingers. There's no room for critical thinking, no room for questioning, no room for dissent from these views, it's very extreme right wing, actually it's right wing to the point of being fascist. Beware these thoughts because he and his ilk will have America as tied up as Hitler did Germany, don't think, obey. shout down anyone who disagrees, flood this thread with endless and pointless quotes so that peopole give up and just accept what he says. After all if he keeps on about it he must be right, if it's repeated enough it becomes the truth. Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

By jove, I think you could be right! :hmm:

 

[granfire]

By jove, I think you could be right! :hmm:

Sadly, she is.

(I mean, the wolrd according to billie...I think even Atilla the Hun would be considered a lefty....)

 

[Tez3]

The whole premise of the OP is wrong, we have over 50 countries in Europe all different from each other, you can't praise Switzerland for it's so called lack of gun laws ( it does have them) then say 'Europe' is riddled with gun crime.
The European countries.
Albania
Andorra
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Austria
Belarus
Belgium
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bulgaria
Croatia
Czech Republic or Czechia
Cyprus
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Georgia
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Kazakhstan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
FYR of Macedonia (Republic of Macedonia)
Malta
Moldova
Monaco
Montenegro
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
San Marino
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
Ukraine
United Kingdom
Vatican City

Some like Turkey, Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Kazakhstan are considered as Transcontinental, that is belonging in Europe and Asia.

 

[billc]

I just point out that even in European countries with strict gun control, there are still mass shootings. That's all, it's that simple. Bad guys will get guns regardless of what you do to stop them.

And tez, no I don't hate, despise or loath anyone. In fact, I think that most lefties are simply wrong in what they believe, and that it is sad that they have implemented their high taxes, poor healthcare policies, and infringed on free speech the way they have. Hate isn't something I feel. I always find it strange that when I point out the flaws in Britains healthcare system, taxes, gun policies or speech policies, you automatically go to the "hate," accusation. Is that projection on your part, because it isn't what I feel or believe.

As Dennis Prager likes to say, Conservatives think that liberals are wrong, and liberals think conservatives are evil. It comes from the sense that they believe that they are right and good, and because of their ego, that means that anyone who disagrees with them must be evil...after all, they are the good guys...in their own mind.

Afraid, yeah, I am afraid that the liberals in America are increasingly bringing policies like they have in Europe here to the states. The idea that bigger government is better, high taxes are a good thing, guns are evil and should be banned, that speech is something that should be controlled by the government, and that what has happened over there in the past, communism, nazism, fascism, and the other mass murdering ideologies may one day take root here. I would like to avoid that and part of that process is making people aware of why bigger government, centralized government without checks and balances on it's power and the focus on groups instead of the rights of the individual human are how those horrible things eventually come to be.

 

[granfire]

I just point out that even in European countries with strict gun control, there are still mass shootings. That's all, it's that simple. Bad guys will get guns regardless of what you do to stop them.

And tez, no I don't hate, despise or loath anyone. In fact, I think that most lefties are simply wrong in what they believe, and that it is sad that they have implemented their high taxes, poor healthcare policies, and infringed on free speech the way they have. Hate isn't something I feel. I always find it strange that when I point out the flaws in Britains healthcare system, taxes, gun policies or speech policies, you automatically go to the "hate," accusation. Is that projection on your part, because it isn't what I feel or believe.

As Dennis Prager likes to say, Conservatives think that liberals are wrong, and liberals think conservatives are evil. It comes from the sense that they believe that they are right and good, and because of their ego, that means that anyone who disagrees with them must be evil...after all, they are the good guys...in their own mind.

Afraid, yeah, I am afraid that the liberals in America are increasingly bringing policies like they have in Europe here to the states. The idea that bigger government is better, high taxes are a good thing, guns are evil and should be banned, that speech is something that should be controlled by the government, and that what has happened over there in the past, communism, nazism, fascism, and the other mass murdering ideologies may one day take root here. I would like to avoid that and part of that process is making people aware of why bigger government, centralized government without checks and balances on it's power and the focus on groups instead of the rights of the individual human are how those horrible things eventually come to be.

and there you go, proving every single point she made.

Great job.

 

[Dirty Dog]

ATTENTION ALL USERS:
Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Please review our sniping policy http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=71377. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.
Mark Cochran
-MT Moderator-

 

[GrandmasterP]

Moss Side is a ghetto area in the city of Manchester in Lancashire where gun crime is common.
Drug dealers shooting each other and sometimes in innocent bystanders too.
The rest of the county is a very peaceful place on the whole.

 

[Tez3]

Could someone explain to Bill that most of the governments in Europe are Consevative -the Right- as indeed is the UK's government. Even Sweden and Spains governments are Conservative. A good many countries have very liberal gun laws, and no mass killings, a good many countries have quite strict gun laws and no mass killings. It's more to do with the culture of a country than the gun laws. Some countries have never had a mass killing, some have had full scale wars like the Balkans, liberal gun laws and ethnic cleansing. There's no correlation between gun laws and mass murders I'm afraid. It very much depends on the country. I would point out that the mass killing in Norway was called a political killing by the killer an Ultra Right winger.
for the country that is often pointed as as being sensible in it's gun politics Switzerland one should look at it's politics and see that there are a good many sociliasts including Christian Socialists it has in it's government which is a coalition. Liberals in the UK and Europe as has been pointed out many times aren't the same as liberals in the USA, very different actually, so saying 'liberal' politics in Europe compares to liberal politics in the US is incorrect.

Before embarking on a criticism of the UK and Europe it's important to actually understand what the countries are in Europe along with their culture and politics, to lump it all into one big country and label it 'leftist' is incorrect and very very stupid.

 

[Grenadier]

Administrator's note:

Thread closed, pending review.

Ronald Shin
MT Assistant Administrator