The 'Deplorables' Speech: Five Years Later

You sound pretty right wing.

How so?

I don't go around all embittered because many people were born better looking than I. Nor over those more intelligent, nor more athletic. It's just a fact of life that there's no "level playing field" (a metaphor you yourself interjected into the discussion) in any sense of life. Want to be happy, quit whining, get over it, and do your best.

Oh, and if it makes you feel more fair, I'll take the 50 and you can take whatever you choose. And I'll pick the course.

 

Your answer shows considerable confusion (Obfuscation) over the term Neo-Nazi. On the one hand, you say "A person of extreme nationalist views is under the same umbrella as a person of extreme racist views???" Three question marks, and a statement that it would be "odd" for the traits to be so joined. . But then you go on to insist "to have been a Nazi, you had to be both racist and nationalist. Not just one or the other. But primarily racist."So which is it? Are you trying to question Neo-Nazis out of existence when we've seen them in action--the tiki torch marchers at Charlottesville, those stiff armed Heil Trump salutes led by Richard Spencer, the folks storming the Capitol in their "Camp Auschwitz" t-shirts.

Obviously, it's possible to be both an extreme nationalist and an extreme racist. Hitler and the Nazis in Germany showed that, as do the various groups on my list above.
And they are not extreme just because someone called them that. Your belief in the sovereignty of nations doesn't make you extreme. National self-determination was a principle ratified by the League of Nations. There is quite a difference between believing that and believing in Deutschland (or the United States) Uber Alles. And when extreme nationalism is coupled with "Great Replacement"- white supremacist ideology. Marching through the streets of Charlottesville chanting "Jews will not replace us" is extreme, as is storming the U.S. Capitol.

But there's more to Neo-Nazism than just that. We need to add authoritarianism, endorsement of violence, and the Führerprinzip--all of which are characteristic of the groups on my list (#55) as well as, to a growing and alarming extent, the Retrumplican Party. Authoritarianism is illustrated by Retrumplican efforts to overturn the 2020 election and to rig future elections. Retrumplican efforts to whitewash the January 6 insurrection and condone the use of violence against opposition groups illustrates the second principle. Madison Cawthorn's warning of Bloodshed" in future elections, uncensored by his colleagues in the House, is a case in point. The Führerprinzip is exemplified by the fawning devotion of der Donald by Kevin McCarthy and the other ass kissing Retrumplican sycophants, not to mention the mindless MAGA hat wearers who go to his rallies. So if it looks like a Nazi,talks like a Nazi, and goose steps like a goose steps like a Nazi, I conclude it must be one. It's deplorable you can't see that.

 

Let me guess, your marks in reading comprehension were "needs improvement".

 

Let me guess. Your marks in writing comprehensible English were "D-" or lower.

If that isn't what you meant, what were you trying to say?

 

That's my point.
Unless a group labels themselves as "neo-nazi" then it's no more than a label some dishonest people place on them in an attempt to discredit them. No doubt some groups consider themselves that but it's not up to outsiders. Yet some outsiders are devolved enough to try to pin discrediting names on people who counter their own worldview.

How does calling people names help improve the state of the union?

You think they're gonna bow their heads in shame and agree to whatever the detractors say, or maybe would they be motivated to double down and work on increasing their numbers?

Some of you guys act like you believe the former.

But maybe in secret you know it strengthens them and that's what you're shooting for.

Anyway...

Wasn't Hitler himself more left wing than right wing?

 

Let me try to be more clear to you.

The definition given for "neo-nazi" specified extreme racism or (emphasis on or) nationalism to qualify.

Those are two different and unrelated concepts.

A person could be one and not the other, and yet by that definition be conflated into a group that espouses both.

Kahpeesh?

 

Odd then, how they both seem to be manifesting in a large segment of our population.

 

Left of whom? Attila? Ghengis Khan?

 

Whadda you know. I'm a member of the radical right! I'm married to a woman, go to church with my family every Sunday, try to love and respect others, work a steady job, don't receive government benefits--and don't drink, smoke, use illegal substances, or dance. My idea of a good time is going to Bible study.

On the other hand, my idea of love includes compassion for those who are less fortunate. Jesus' concern for the poor is evident throughout the New Testament. Matthew 11:2-3; 4-6; 25:45; 50; Luke 6: 17-26; 21-22; 14:16-24; 16: 19-31; 21-22; 25; 25:45;50. Likewise, we find this in the Old Testament. In Gensis, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah tells us of an incident in which a mob showed up at Lot's door seeking to get to know (in the biblical sense)the strangers from out of town who were his guests. Were all the men in that town gay? Is gang rape the usual mode of gay behavior. Do we see such behavior today? Yes, I read about an incident just a couple of days ago in which the Taliban raped and beat a gay man after tricking him into meeting with them on promise of escape. I think the Taliban, not their poor victim, were behaving like Sodomites. Ezekiel tells us “Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy”. Does that sound like anyone we know today? Retrumplicans might review their immigration and welfare policies in light of this passage. Leviticus, which is also most heard in the context of admonitions against gays tells us
“You shall love the stranger as yourself,”“The wages of a laborer shall not remain with you until morning.”“You shall not curse the deaf or place a stumbling block before the blind.”
“You shall not stand idly by while your neighbor’s blood is shed.” “Do not hate your brother in your heart.”"You shall not reap the corners of your vinyard, but rather leave them for the poor.” Jesus( Mat. 22:37-39) told us that the law and the prophets could be summed up in just two commandments: Deuteronomy 6:5 - And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And Lev. 19:18 “Love your neighbor as yourself”. As for gays, my wife said to me once that she wished they could marry like us so that they could enjoy the love we have for each other. I'm glad I married her!

 

Calling a spade a spade is essential to clarify the real danger presented by these groups. Love the sinner, hate the sin. Labeling a disease is the first step toward curing it.

No.
Hitler and Nazism: “Left Wing” or “Right Wing”? : Paul McKeever
No, Nazis were Not Leftists: Or, How to Debunk Right-Wing Propaganda - Wrath-Bearing Tree
The Nazis were not socialists - Full Fact
Hitler/Nazis are Right Wing and not Left Wing. Don't be fooled by lies., page 1

 

(To post 70)Nice. I'm not religious , but obviously there are some important passages in the bible that if followed would certainly make this a better world. Perhaps since I agree with the passages as you have written---maybe I'm more religious than I realize.

 

To understand a basic premise, facts must be presented , understood and accepted. Here's one now. Trump and many ( not all ) of his followers are racist, authoritarian white supremacists and avowed neo nazis. I'll not got into the litany of the racists acts and statements he has made. They are well known. (thus-half of the basic premise). He has stated America first, quit the Iran nuclear deal that was working, dropped out of the World Heath Organization, demeaned the United Nations and said that it was no longer necessary, called nations in Africa shit hole nations, has worked to divide this country by race--color, the former to the detriment of many nations including our own, the latter especially our own. IE: Nationalism. (second half of basic premise) Therefore the two fit together quite nicely.

 

And a third part of the basic premise, as amended by me: he's authoritarian as hell, as shown by his effort to take power after his defeat in a free and fair election. He's a world class demagogue, in the tradition of Hitler and Mussolini, appealing to his populist working class base while catering to the interests of the 0.1%. Der Führer personified.

 

Neo-nazis and deplorables. The last one disproves his own claim.

 

He wears Gloria Vanderbilt.

 

The definition of neo-Nazi, obviously from some dictionary, said: "a member of an organization similar to the German Nazi Party." You omitted that part. which says it better than "extreme racist or nationalist", although I don't think membership in an organization is a necessary condition for being a Neo-Nazi. Then you pick at the secondary definition. I agree. An extreme racist might be a Klansman instead of a Nazi and an extreme nationalist might be a Basque separatist. A neo-Nazi must be both an extreme racist and extreme nationalist, and then some: authoritarian and devoted to playing follow the leader. So what? The important facts are that neo-Nazis are real, dangerous, and not nice, and are similar to what Hitler started in Germany. We have some here in the U.S.A. I gave you a list. It's not just matter of subjective self-definition. A rapist, child molester or mugger would be that, regardless of how (s)he thinks of or labels herself/himself. You Retrumplicans let political correctness go to your heads! Let's call a spade a spade, even if it hurts the poor snowflake Neo-Nazis feelings.

 

I already answered that question, but now I have time to elaborate. And it's important to do so, cuz lately the rightwingers have been tying themselves in knots trying to disown Hitler. It's a difficult question to discuss with people of limited education, since it's complicated and nuanced.

One of the complicating factors is the fact that U.S. terminology is different from the traditional European concepts of "left" and "right". "Left" and "right" were terms borrowed from the seating order of the French National Assembly circa 1789, when supporters of the monarchy (aristocracy and clergy) sat on the right end, supporters of the middle and lower classes sat on the left, and other parties were arranged on a continuum in between. When the terminology was brought over to the United States, we didn't have a king, aristocracy or established church, but we did have rich merchants, bankers, and landholders who were treated as the equivalent; and we had small farmers and a debtor class who were regarded as the equivalent of peasants. Another American quirk is that we use the terms "conservative", "liberal", "libertarian" and "radical" to designate positions on the size and role of government. Conservatives want government out of the economy and into the bedroom; liberals, vice versa; libertarians, none of the above; radicals, all of the above. When a hybrid comes along who doesn't exactly fit our boxes, we get befuddled.

Hitler and Trump are hybrids. The labels that best fit them are "nativist nationalists", "racist", "populist", and "personalist", not to mention "authoritarian". And both were megalomaniacs and opportunists, driven by whatever served their interests and appealed to their base at the moment. Nationalists: Trump's "Make America Great Again" echoes Hitler's Deutschland Uber Alles". It was nativist in the sense that it is particularly concerned with maintaining national purity from alien contamination: Trump's immigration policy, Hitler's death camps. For Hitler, racism was overt and blatant. For Trump it was more covert and dogwhistle, owing to the constraints of his political culture, but it no accident that he is the darling of so many racist groups. Donald Trump’s long history of racism, from the 1970s to 2020
Both Hitler and Trump were populists: person(s), especially politician (s), who strive to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups". Oxford Dictionaries BillionaireTrump was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, but a demagogue at heart,he followed patrician Julius Caesar's example of cultivating a plebeian base, which is where the votes are. Personalism, is what Nazis called the Furerherprincip--follow the leader. Both Hitler and Trump developed a cult of personality. And of course, both were authoritarian. With Hitler, that needs no explanation. Trump tipped his hand when he tried to retain power after his defeat in the 2020 election, despite the constitution.

The confusion over Hitler being "more left than right" stems from the populism and the authoritarianism. Being for the little guy is ordinarily considered "left" as is, in American political parlance, belief in government control, which authoritarianism certainly involves. But both Hitler and Trump were ultimately saviors of the rich: Trump by giving them a tax cut that added a $ trillion to the deficit, Hitler by crushing the international socialists and the Communists who were posing a serious challenge to the ruling class in Weimar Germany. The "little guy" in Weimar Germany included petty bourgeios small businessmen and clerks who felt threatened by the rise of organized labor. Despite the "Socialist" label in "National Socialist", Hitler's socialism was superficial. Yes, they had "Socialism" (as well as "Workers' Party") in their official name, just as communist countries typically have Democratic" and/or "Republic" in theirs.e.g. Kim jong-un's Democratic Republic of Korea. But labels can be misleading. According to historian Richard Evans."Nazism was in some ways an extreme counter-ideology to socialism”. The "Socialist" label was adopted in 1920 to attract working class voters.
Nazism, socialism and the falsification of history
There were genuine Socialists in the Nazi movement, the Strasser brothers and Brownshirt leader Ernst Roehm, but they were purged in the Night of the Long Knives in1934. Hitler, and his sidekicks Göring and Goebbels, had no use for international Socialists and their trade union allies, and met with business and industrial leaders in 1933 to assure them they would protect them from "Judeo-Bolshevism".

Under Hitler, there was no talk of class warfare, private property was respected, the State did not own the means of production (although it effectively controlled it), trade unions were outlawed while the wealthy elite were allowed to retain their property, and some previously government owned services were privatized. Socialism held equality as a paramount value, but Nazism was about inequality, hierarchy, Ubermensch (supermen) and Untermensch (underlings). The first concentration camp at Dachau was built for Hitler's left-wing opponents, and Socialists and Communists were ruthlessly persecuted by the Nazis. Nazism was actually and ingenious strategy to combat Socialism and Communism by substituting racism and nationalism for class warfare and internationalism that were hallmarks of the Socialist movement. Sure, the Nazis promoted public works projects (so did Trump, so does Biden), jobs programs (so did Trump, so does Biden), government spending (so did Trump, so does Biden), and Social Security (so did FDR). These welfare state measures are often called "Socialistic", but strictly speaking Socialism involves government takeover of the means of production and distribution, and that didn't happen in Nazi Germany to anything like the extent it did in Socialist countries like North Korea or Cuba.

The other thing that confuses Americans who are used to associating "left" with Big Government is that Nazis were authoritarian and favored big government. But so did kings, and monarchs were the original "right wingers". And so do conservatives in some areas, particularly when it comes to regulating morals and what people can do with their own bodies. When it came to enforcing traditional values and combating godless communism, nobody did it better than the Nazis.

So this is why I say No to the assertion that Hitler (or Trump) was "more left-wing than right-wing". It's more complicated than that. But it's clear that Neo-nazism is evil and is making dangerous inroads in the Retrumplican Party! We may find out the hard way the truth of Santayana's predicition: "Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.'' (and those who do learn it are doomed to stand helplessly by and watch others repeat it).

 

No. It's a Wrangler ad!