The Right Is Now Splintered Beyond Repair

[Eric Arthur Blair]

The Neocons
The Paleo-conservatives
The Libertarians
The White Supremacists (rapidly growing)

Versus

The Democratic Party

It's cool though, out of hate for Obama all will rally around the young and dashing Paul Ryan in 2012. :rolleyes:

[Light]

The Left is general is more collectivist than the Right, naturally there would be more factions among the Right than the Left. Heck, even among the "libertarians" you have the libertarians, constitutionalists, and anarcho-captialists. The main problem is that the only right-wingers who get to higher positions of government are neocons. I think Ron Paul would have been all the guy to unite all the different factions of the right, however, he will be too old by 2012 to challenge Obama.

I personally think that the only two right-wing factions that could unite all the different right-wing groups would be either a paleo-con or a constitutionalist.

Neocons are no friends to conservatism and they only pay lip service to the ideas. The only things neocons do right is tax cuts, and maybe sticking up for gun rights. Other than that the neocons are merely another type of leftist that simply call themselves right-wing. They also create a good strawman for the the other leftists to knock conservative/libertarian ideas.

[Kludge]

What evidence is there that "The White Supremacists" group is growing?

[Krugerrand]

I don't see the Left as all that unified. The union membership has been falling apart since the likes of Bill Clinton pushed through NAFTA. There's a large left population that does not want to pay for services to non-citizens. (sensitive word selection in light of other discussion threads)

Obama and Hillary may have mended their relationship on the surface ... but there is a rift underneath them.

Add to that the Democrats elected from Red states. They are not full-time party-line goers.

Not listing the factions does not make them go away.

[Krugerrand]

What evidence is there that "The White Supremacists" group is growing?

Didn't you read it. It says so right there in the OP.:rolleyes:

[heavenlyboy34]

who needs a "unified" right anyways? I don't.

[acptulsa]

What evidence is there that "The White Supremacists" group is growing?

There's plenty of evidence that they're rapidly growing completely obsolete. And no small amount of evidence that they're already there.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Far right groups 'growing' in US

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8000763.stm

[acptulsa]

Far right groups 'growing' in US
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8000763.stm

It doesn't say that there. Not once.

In fact, it all but says simply that the federal government is pretty much considering every Republican but John McCain and Lindsey Graham a 'right wing extremist'. Nothing much more to be gleaned from that fine example of BBC tripe.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

in 2012 the Nazis will be as big as the libertarians.

[acptulsa]

in 2012 the Nazis will be as big as the libertarians.

Doubtful, but since I have no crystal ball debate is pointless. In any case, one thing is certain. Nazis still won't be libertarians.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

In any case, one thing is certain. Nazis still won't be libertarians.

I'm sure they won't cry over it. While Libertarians are fighting for what? to make the state more efficient? The Nazi White Supremacists believe they are fighting to prevent a bloodless genocide of the American people. (Looking at it from their perspective).

[__27__]

in 2012 the Nazis will be as big as the libertarians.

Clayton Bigsby is that you?


And the KKK believed they were going to run the country at one point as well. What are their numbers??

[Young Paleocon]

....Nazi's aren't on the right, they are national socialists, so as far as I'm concerned they should be happy with Obama quit writing bs speculation that doesn't make sense.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

....Nazi's aren't on the right, they are national socialists, so as far as I'm concerned they should be happy with Obama quit writing bs speculation that doesn't make sense.

The Nazis were right wing.

[Young Paleocon]

The only right wing thing about Nazi's is that they are extreme nationalists which is more authoritarian than "right wing", other than that they are economic socialists, central planners, and dumb fuck eugenicists.

[paulim]

The Nazis were right wing.

What these groups you have listed (except the neocon leadership) have in common, is that they hate false elites and usurpation. They all try to remove this artificial power structure. The dems and progressives on the other hand don't share this goal, because they live in their bubble where everything is fine as long as the borrowed money flows.

[__27__]

The Nazis were right wing.

Political spectrum fail.

http://www.thelibertypapers.org/wp-images/spectrum/pol_matrix_pop.png

[Eric Arthur Blair]

again the Nazis were right wing. That's not how you may see it, but it's how your political enemy sees it. It would be like Liberals saying that Communism was a right wing philosophy. Liberals don't ever have to embarrass themselves this way because the average person has no idea how many people the Communists killed. A Nazis were devils flick comes out of Hollywood every month, a Communists were cool and sexy every year or so.

[__27__]

again the Nazis were right wing. That's not how you may see it, but it's how your political enemy sees it. It would be like Liberals saying that Communism was a right wing philosophy. Liberals don't ever have to embarrass themselves this way because the average person has no idea how many people the Communists killed. A Nazis were devils flick comes out of Hollywood every month, a Communists were cool and sexy every year or so.

Again, purple is yellow. Because I say so. :rolleyes:

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Again, purple is yellow. Because I say so. :rolleyes:

and the cat ran away with the fiddle because it snorted to much cocaine at Aime Winehouse's 25th birthday party.:cool:

[Young Paleocon]

Eric the second you give into the Hegelian Dialectic and allow them to define what "is" then you are doomed to fail because you begin contradicting yourself with left vs. right.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Eric the second you give into the Hegelian Dialectic and allow them to define what "is" then you are doomed to fail because you begin contradicting yourself with left vs. right.

I have no idea what that means, but the nazis were right wing, build a bridge and get the fuck over it.

[__27__]

I have no idea what that means, but the nazis were right wing, build a bridge and get the fuck over it.

Good call. Next time I'll know to check with you first, so I know I have the facts of the case. It'll be a lot easier having Eric Arthur Blair in my life, cause if he says it, it's fact.

[Young Paleocon]

I have no idea what that means, but the nazis were right wing, build a bridge and get the fuck over it.

Wow Eric, you are about as gentle, well spoken, cordial, and inquisitive as those lovely white nationalist trolls we had on here.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Wow Eric, you are about as gentle, well spoken, cordial, and inquisitive as those lovely white nationalist trolls we had on here.

If I wanted to post on Vanguard Forums I would. I'm not a Nazi. That's why I'm here. If you are to dumb to get how stupid it looks to argue the Nazis were Left wing. Then that's fine, suit yourself. I'm to smart and good-looking to care.

[__27__]

If I wanted to post on Vanguard Forums I would. I'm not a Nazi. That's why I'm here. You just don't get how retarded it looks to argue the Nazis were Left wing. Then that's fine, suit yourself. I'm to smart to care.

You're still using right wing and left wing as though they describe something.

[__27__]

I'm to smart and goodlooking to care.

And too dumb to know how to spell, or how to use the space bar.

[apropos]

Entertaining thread here.

[Young Paleocon]

If I wanted to post on Vanguard Forums I would. I'm not a Nazi. That's why I'm here. If you are to dumb to get how stupid it looks to argue the Nazis were Left wing. Then that's fine, suit yourself. I'm to smart and good-looking to care.

Alright, have it your way Eric. Continue to rant and rave without even questioning what you learned in high school history books and what the msm continually trumpets as to what it means to be right and left. Don't think about collectivism and individualism, don't read any books, just continue to use ad hominem attacks without any support other than "because I say so."

[Eric Arthur Blair]

And too dumb to know how to spell, or how to use the space bar.

i could make a joke about spelling nazis here, the irony :D

My spelling is atrocious though so you got me there. But the Nazis were right wing and I'm still toO smart and good looking to care so just drop it. :cool:

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Alright, have it your way Eric. Continue to rant and rave without even questioning what you learned in high school history books and what the msm continually trumpets as to what it means to be right and left. Don't think about collectivism and individualism, don't read any books, just continue to use ad hominem attacks without any support other than "because I say so."

True, maybe because Libertarianism unlike Nazism didn't even make it into those history books. At least until 2007.

[Young Paleocon]

That's right, progressives and commies right the textbooks and they can't have the mass murdering racists on the same side of the spectrum as they are, therefore they make and propagate the false left vs. right paradigm.

[heavenlyboy34]

True, maybe because Libertarianism unlike Nazism didn't even make it into those history books.

Or at least the government-approved ones. ;)

[specsaregood]

Just be wary of kosians posting racist crap on forums such as this so that they can point to it later and say, "see they are nazi racists".

Edit: the nazis were definitely leftists, i can't believe anybody would argue otherwise.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

That's right, progressives and commies right the textbooks and they can't have the mass murdering racists on the same side of the spectrum as they are, therefore they make and propagate the false left vs. right paradigm.

that's way to Alex Jones for me.

The Nazis had the word Socialist in their name, but they were anything but socialist. Anything the state gave you was in return for something, for men it was work and your life and for women babies.

Nazi Socialist Germany built one of the strongest economies in the world (despite a major boycott) completely free from central banks and based on a commodity (labour hours) currency. Which all sounds pretty libertarian and right wing to me.

They screwed it all up by invading Poland and killing millions of Jews but the main philosophy was on the right.

[__27__]

that's way to Alex Jones for me.

The Nazis had the word Socialist in their name, but they were anything but socialist. Anything the state gave you was in return for something, for men it was work and your life and for women babies.

Nazi Socialist Germany built one of the strongest economies in the world (despite a major boycott) completely free from central banks and based on a commodity (labour hours) currency. Which all sounds pretty libertarian and right wing to me.

They screwed it all up by invading Poland and killing millions of Jews but the main philosophy was on the right.


State owned industry sounds right wing to you? So the Obama takeover of GM is right wing, right?

I see the problem here is you have absolutely no idea what fascism really is. Not surprising, as another has pointed out, for a person with an American government education to not understand.

[PlzPeopleWakeUp]

I love Big Brother.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

State owned industry sounds right wing to you? So the Obama takeover of GM is right wing, right?

I see the problem here is you have absolutely no idea what fascism really is. Not surprising, as another has pointed out, for a person with an American government education to not understand.

I never said that. But since you ask it depends on the outcome. When state bodies are taken over to save the nation in times of total war then I don't have a problem with that. That is what Hitler did in Germany.

Obama toke over GM to do the opposite, rip it up and let the bankers strip its best assets than take production over to China or Mexico.

[specsaregood]

I never said that. But since you ask it depends on the outcome. When state bodies are taken over to literary save the nation in times of total war then I don't have a problem with that. That is what Hitler did in Germany.

Obama toke over GM to do the opposite, rip it up and let the bankers strip its best assets than take production over to China or Mexico.

Uhm but we are in times of total war in the US. How many "wars" do we have going on? I lose count. I guess you shoudn't have a problem with the current Administrations actions then....

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Uhm but we are in times of total war in the US. How many "wars" do we have going on? I lose count. I guess you shoudn't have a problem with the current Administrations actions then....

Total war is when every single facet of the economy is turned over to war production. When mothers are told to only fed their children once a day to save on energy etc. It's not that bad yet.

Hitler had no interest in running the economy. If he had won the war (shudder) he would have made some basic pro-Aryan racist stipulations to corporations after that it would have been a free for all.

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

[specsaregood]

Total war is when every single facet of the economy is turned over to war production. When mothers are told to only fed their children once a day to save on energy etc. It's not that bad yet.

So if war is a valid excuse to steal private property; then it seems like a great reason to generate a war.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

So if war is a valid excuse to steal private property; then it seems like a great reason to generate a war.

When Iran gets bombed we will find out. As regards Hitler it wasn't some money grabbing exercise.The Germans believed that if the they lost 'international jewry' would sterilize the entire German male population. That's why Hitler toke over private business. Yes it's bonkers crazy but the Nazis believed it.

[Bucjason]

The Left is general is more collectivist than the Right, naturally there would be more factions among the Right than the Left. Heck, even among the "libertarians" you have the libertarians, constitutionalists, and anarcho-captialists. The main problem is that the only right-wingers who get to higher positions of government are neocons. I think Ron Paul would have been all the guy to unite all the different factions of the right, however, he will be too old by 2012 to challenge Obama.

I personally think that the only two right-wing factions that could unite all the different right-wing groups would be either a paleo-con or a constitutionalist.

Paul is a constitutionalist, and that is the approach we need to get back to, IMO.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

No, I don't agree that the left is any less factionalized than the right has become. They've been splintered longer, too, and only managed to hold throw enough votes at Obama and elect him with the help of voters who aren't really leftist because of the strong distaste for Bush and McCain.

Anyone acquainted with Marxist groups easily sees the left's factionalism. Just look at all minuscule Marxist, Leninist, Trotskyite, Stalinist, Maoist, etc. organizations there are pushing their ridiculous newspapers on college campuses and in major cities. Then you add in left greens, anarchists, and Nader-type folks into the mix. I dare say the left is more splintered than the right, and their hatreds and distrust of other factions seems to run far deeper.

Strange as it is, any internet search will reveal feisty socialist groups that rail against each other more than they do capitalism in a bizarre hatred that goes way deeper than differences on the right between, say, Libertarians and Paleo-Conservatives.

[tpreitzel]

The Neocons
The Paleo-conservatives
The Libertarians
The White Supremacists (rapidly growing)

Versus

The Democratic Party

It's cool though, out of hate for Obama all will rally around the young and dashing Paul Ryan in 2012. :rolleyes:

No, it's not. Currently, it just appears that way. The "Left" is having their problems, too. Chaos just breeds more chaos. We, the people, need to return to minimal law as specified under the Constitution. However, the latter statement doesn't imply the fantasy world of no law which just breeds chaos or excessive law which just breeds unnecessary oppression. * ;)

* Unfortunately, even some law seems oppressive to anarchists, but the real world is a harsh mistress. Furthermore, minimal law seems threatening to snobbish socialists since they don't want "lower" class individuals mucking up their utopian world with independent decisions, but the real world is a harsh mistress. :)

[Alawn]

If I wanted to post on Vanguard Forums I would. I'm not a Nazi. That's why I'm here. If you are to dumb to get how stupid it looks to argue the Nazis were Left wing. Then that's fine, suit yourself. I'm to smart and good-looking to care.

You are too crazy to reason with. Welcome to my ignore list.

[TortoiseDream]

The Left is general is more collectivist than the Right, naturally there would be more factions among the Right than the Left. Heck, even among the "libertarians" you have the libertarians, constitutionalists, and anarcho-captialists. The main problem is that the only right-wingers who get to higher positions of government are neocons. I think Ron Paul would have been all the guy to unite all the different factions of the right, however, he will be too old by 2012 to challenge Obama.

I personally think that the only two right-wing factions that could unite all the different right-wing groups would be either a paleo-con or a constitutionalist.

Can someone explain to me the difference between libertarian, anarcho-capitalist, and anarchist?

[Young Paleocon]

Eric if you can explain to me significant details between what Hitler and Stalin did economically and politically I might believe you, but you can't....They are super-fascist collectivist totalitarians. They were authoritarian and the antithesis of individualists....And yes it is a known fact that progressives and keynesians write the textbooks for school and they often don't chronicle the horrors of the communists but go in depth into Nazi horrors though the two are nearly the same.

[BillyDkid]

The Left is general is more collectivist than the Right, naturally there would be more factions among the Right than the Left. Heck, even among the "libertarians" you have the libertarians, constitutionalists, and anarcho-captialists. The main problem is that the only right-wingers who get to higher positions of government are neocons. I think Ron Paul would have been all the guy to unite all the different factions of the right, however, he will be too old by 2012 to challenge Obama.

I personally think that the only two right-wing factions that could unite all the different right-wing groups would be either a paleo-con or a constitutionalist.Are you kidding, the right - neo-cons and the rest of the American empire types hate Ron Paul far more than the left does.

[Light]

Are you kidding, the right - neo-cons and the rest of the American empire types hate Ron Paul far more than the left does.

I forgot to mention that the neocons are no friends to conservatism and they only pay lip service to the ideas. The only things neocons do right is tax cuts, and maybe sticking up for gun rights. Other than that the neocons are merely another type of leftist that simply call themselves right-wing.

[Number19]

that's way to Alex Jones for me.

The Nazis had the word Socialist in their name, but they were anything but socialist. Anything the state gave you was in return for something, for men it was work and your life and for women babies.

Nazi Socialist Germany built one of the strongest economies in the world (despite a major boycott) completely free from central banks and based on a commodity (labour hours) currency. Which all sounds pretty libertarian and right wing to me.

They screwed it all up by invading Poland and killing millions of Jews but the main philosophy was on the right.Nazis were Statists. Their economic model was fascism. Fascism allows the private ownership of business, which the government controls by laws and a regulatory bureaucracy.

When you get right down to the nitty gritty, all statists are first cousins to each other. It really doesn't matter, in the long run, which is which or what their minor differences are.

As weird as it may seem, Star Wars, philosophically had it right. It's light versus the dark. It's Libertarians versus Statists.

[Objectivist]

The Neocons
The Paleo-conservatives
The Libertarians
The White Supremacists (rapidly growing)

Versus

The Democratic Party

It's cool though, out of hate for Obama all will rally around the young and dashing Paul Ryan in 2012. :rolleyes:

From where I sit the LPDs and the Blue Dogs aren't seeing eye to eye. Seems like they are splintering too.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

I forgot to mention that the neocons are no friends to conservatism and they only pay lip service to the ideas. The only things neocons do right is tax cuts, and maybe sticking up for gun rights. Other than that the neocons are merely another type of leftist that simply call themselves right-wing.

Exactly. You can even trace the neo-con philosophical foundations back to fascistic roots at institutions like the University of Chicago. I contend that fascism was more left than right, as a historical political movement. Benito Mussolini started out as a fervent socialist, and never let go of socialist rhetoric or policies under his fascist system. He even flirted with Stalin-like land collectivization in his most radical phase toward the end of WWII, when he was given his own little fiefdom under German military protection, the so-called Republic of Salo.

Incidentally, many of the original neo-cons were hardcore Marxists in their youth, mostly Trotskyites of one stripe or another. Someone with the time and brilliance could probably write a whole volume about what these weird left-right/socialist-fascist ideological crossovers mean in the personal lives of prominent rulers (and would be rulers). It's really interesting though, at least to me.

[Conservative Christian]

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions."

~ Adolf Hitler
(Speech of May 1, 1927)


.

[ClayTrainor]

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions."

~ Adolf Hitler
(Speech of May 1, 1927)


.

Thank you for this... i have some people i need to send this to.

[Imperial]

If the right is full of factions and the left is full of factions, libertarians can destroy the left-right paradigm. Pull the progressives and constitutionalists together under one banner in a crusade against corporatism, usurpation of civil liberties and foreign adventurism.

[CUnknown]

If the right is full of factions and the left is full of factions, libertarians can destroy the left-right paradigm. Pull the progressives and constitutionalists together under one banner in a crusade against corporatism, usurpation of civil liberties and foreign adventurism.

Hell yes! That would be an unstoppable platform if we could convince people (right and left) to give up some other parts of their agenda.

But, seriously, the left is just as full of factions as the right, perhaps even more so. The Left is primed to break apart the second the Right does. The only thing that holds together the Left is that they have an enemy in the Right that they feel they must defeat. The "anyone but Bush" mentality. Many of them split from the Dems in 2000 to vote for Nader and they regret it bitterly because they think that allowed Bush to take power.

Once they learn the error of their ways--Obama isn't much better than Bush, if at all--they might be ready for a more progressive candidate, someone like Kucinich or a 3rd party run. They need to learn that they will -never- get the change they want unless they fight their own party for control, just like Ron Paul Republicans would never get the change they want if they just gave in and voted for McCain.

The thing about voting is that you have to vote for what you want, otherwise you stand no chance of getting it, lol. It's simple but for some reason people don't get it.

[Conservative Christian]

If the right is full of factions and the left is full of factions, libertarians can destroy the left-right paradigm. Pull the progressives and constitutionalists together under one banner in a crusade against corporatism, usurpation of civil liberties and foreign adventurism.

The Libertarians have numerous divisive factions of their own.

In 2008, after 36 years of fielding candidates for President, the LP garnered only four tenths of one percent of the popular vote, and ZERO electoral votes.

No wonder that Libertarians like Ron Paul, Peter Schiff etc.---are telling Libertarians to get involved and active with the Republican Party. Ron will now only run for office as a Republican.


.

[dgr]

The only thing we have to agree on is where we want to go,
and forget about fighting about how we got to where we are