Please use this thread for off-topic, but preferably BBC related, comments. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments – our aim is to maintain order and clarity on the topic-specific threads. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.
Open thread – for comments of general Biased BBC interest:
Bookmark the permalink.
GCooper writes:
“Milliband really is an odious little Nazi, isn’t he?”
And I take the Tory party doesn’t have a huge swathe of right wing bigoted, racist and anti-semitic members?
Some folk on here use terms such as Nazi so willy nilly but don’t really know what they mean.
I looked at an earlier report as here:
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/559.htm
Hopefully, the Channel 4 program will prime a blogswarm in the US to check up on who these “2500 most eminent scientists” really are.
There are some real possibilities if the IPCC report can have its credibility wrecked. The BBC will not check the basis of the report nor the credentials of the “2500 most eminent scientists”, but the blogs will. And all credit to Channel 4. It may be the home of Jon Snow but who cares now.
” A Lurker | 13.03.07 – 11:00 pm”
which bit of the National SOCIALIST German WORKERS Party do you not understand? “right wing” my arse.
climate change: dug this interesting link. happened in 2005.
http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/science_policy_general/000318chris_landsea_leaves.html
Scientist leaves IPPC because it is becoming “politicised”
quote:
I am withdrawing because I have come to view the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant as having become politicized. In addition, when I have raised my concerns to the IPCC leadership, their response was simply to dismiss my concerns.
A Lurker writes:
“Some folk on here use terms such as Nazi so willy nilly but don’t really know what they mean.”
Concise OED: a person belonging to any organization similar to the Nazis.
I’d say that covers someone forcing unconsitutional legislation through Parliament, would’t you?
Now, be a dear, and get back under your bridge where you belong, would you?
Some folk on here use terms such as Nazi so willy nilly but don’t really know what they mean.
Authoritarian left-wing statists? *shrug* Sounds like milliband to me…
And I take the Tory party doesn’t have a huge swathe of right wing bigoted, racist and anti-semitic members?
oh do shut the f**k up you boring sod,
he’s using he term nazi as an off the cuff insult.
Concise OED: a person belonging to any organization similar to the Nazis.
o.k maybe not.
Allan@Aberdeen writes:
“The BBC will not check the basis of the report nor the credentials of the “2500 most eminent scientists”, but the blogs will. ”
There is definitely something in the air at the moment, post the Ch 4 programme. While the usual halfwits are still phoning in to R4 programmes, asking which is better for ‘saving the polar bears’ washing and re-using milk bottles or buying milk in plastic ones (heard this afternoon), an increasing number seems to have started complaining about this idiocy.
In the past two days both 5 Live (sic) and R4 have read out listeners’ complaints – albeit through teeth grinding so loudly you could hear them.
People are complaining and I am beginning to wonder if a tipping point hasn’t been reached.
If, as you say, the blogs can deconstruct some of this nonsense and if sufficient MSM pressure can be brought to bear, we might, yet, save the day. The problem is that on blogs like this all anyone is doing is preaching to the choir and a handful of BBC sock puppets.
I’m fascinated by how Alan Johnston if, as I hope, he gets out in one piece will in the future report the Palestine vs Israel issue and Islamic/Middle East matters in general.
Since even the barmiest moonbat probably realises his abductors are not some undercover Mossad agents, how will this experience colour his outlook?
Since he’s a BBC employee my gut instinct is that he’ll have a severe case of Stockholm Syndrome.
Lately there seems to be a little meme going around to reclassify the Nazi party as a leftwing organisation. No doubt this is because they want to plaster the great Nazi epithet on leftwing opponents. Because after all if anyone can be presented as a Nazi, bearing in mind that Nazism is todays convenient moral anathema – the dark Nyarlathotep and Creeping Chaos – then that persons credibility can be immolated in a second.
Another form of Godwin.
Though the Nazis based themselves on racial inequality, it did indeed include socialistic altruism towards Germans (naturally), in the form of jobs, preferable treatment under law compared to racial enemies, and mercy killing/euthanasia (a significant form of altruism). But the Nazis still presented the Germans as superior to all others on a biological level.
The hallmark of Nazism will always be endogenous inequality, even among Germans (entry to the SS for example required recruits to meet certain levels of intelligence on IQ tests).
There’s nothing leftwing about an actual enthusiasm for inequality.
The socialistic part of National Socialism is indeed important, but it will always be a right-wing phenomenon.
Libertarianism, I might add, because that’s probably where this new enthusiasm for reclassifying Nazism has come from, still relies on the non-biological, almost religious idea of individual rights, as distinguished against the altruistic collectivism (basically left-wing) that it rails against.
Libertarianism accepts natural inequality in ability between individuals, but it doesn’t say that this gives you permission to tyrannize and dominate over people who are either considered to be, or are indeed inferior to you in some regard; because that would be an infringement of an individuals rights.
I doubt this little post is the end of the matter.
” Ultraviolence | 13.03.07 – 11:46 pm |”
no -your post is spot on. i would suspect that the reclassification of nazism as “left wing” stems from the growing libertarian movement , who are quite vocal on the internet. its also a symptom OF the internet as people naturally discover the ideologies of the various “-isms” and wonder why a statist ideology like Nazism could be classed as “right wing”.
surely , a more natural progression would be from extreme left -statist- to extreme right – no state whatsoever.(i.e. Anarchism).
I’ve also notice the term “anarcho-capitalist” popping up a lot. thats a more extreme version of Libertarianism. but yet, “anarchism” has been traditionally lumped in with the “left”.
maybe its also because the old labels dont seem to fit the political discourse nowadays, as the Tories , Lib Dems and Labour all move to statist big government policies. a similar thing is happening in the U.S. – the Republican Party, for example, has to all intents and purposes forgotten about the “small state” ideology of Reagan.
and with the climate change “control our lives” hysteria and the progressive reduction in civil liberties in the UK , then the left/right divide of the Cold War, doesnt seem to fit the modern discourse.
how else does one explain “left” wing socialists teaming up with “right wing” Islamists?
well, it quite obvious – the labels are wrong. left = more state, right = less state. simple.
“Ultraviolence | 13.03.07 – 11:46 pm”
the other thing to consider is that the central tenets of Nazism – anti-semitism and racism – are beyond the pale for the vast majority of people nowadays – its as beyond the pale nowadays as someone advocating a return to slavery.
so people naturally look at the Nazis and ask things like – well if you get beyond those 2 points, what was their economic policy? was it less state or more state?
hence . you are getting the realignment.
even the term “conservative” has been affected by the end of the Cold War. in the run up to the fall of the Berlin Wall, the BBC referred to “conservative” members of the communist Politburo in Moscow, opposed to the “progressive” Gorbachev.
nowadays you can be a “conservative” labour party member , still admiring Marx and Lenin.
or you can be a “progressive” (in new media speak) Conservative like Cameron or Chris Patten.
with the media dahlings making it so confusing for folks , its no wonder that a realignment of what is “left” , and what is “right”, is happening.
and the realignment is happening because of us – us plebs – on the blogosphere or whatever the hell you want to call it. of course, it’ll take another 10 years before the media chatterati cotton on to it.
“There’s nothing leftwing about an actual enthusiasm for inequality.”
actually it is built into it – the class struggle. where the workers , through revolution , topple the higher classes. therefore – the higher classes are “unequal” – and are worthy of extermination.
in fact, the real “equality” is found in libertarianism – where everyone is treated as a human being. notions of “class” and wealth envy dont even come into the conversation. a libertarian doesnt see somebody richer than him as sign of an “unequal” society – he just sees that richer person as someone creating jobs and aspires to be that person.
of course, this hinges on notions like inherited wealth and monarchybeing abolished and a true free market being established. thats why libertarians equally oppose “one nation” patrician class tories as much as the socialists.
“Since he’s a BBC employee my gut instinct is that he’ll have a severe case of Stockholm Syndrome.
Anonymous | 13.03.07 – 11:33 pm”
to be honest – and based on the furious Hamas response to the news- it was a pretty stupid thing to do. to kidnap someone who is an ally of the Pallywood theme park.
i’d go with the rogue criminal gang theory. money is short in Gaza. crime has rocketed.
doesnt take a genius to figure it out.
“The problem is that on blogs like this all anyone is doing is preaching to the choir and a handful of BBC sock puppets.
GCooper | 13.03.07 – 11:28 pm ”
send a comment in to the David Miliband blog. seriously.
i did. my line was not “f*** you, you ecofascist”, but more along the lines of being more honest about moving away from fossil fuels.
its nothing to do with “climate change” – its more to do with our addiction to Saudi Arabian oil – a country that hates the West with a passion. and we’re buying oil off the Iranians as well.
doesnt make sense strategically does it?
add into the mix increasing competition for oil from the Chinese and Indians, and Putins erratic “on/off” switch in Russia – well, all that says to me that it makes economic and strategic sense to be less dependent on fossil fuels, now that the North Sea reserves are running out.
thats basically what i said to Miliband. but of course, they cant be honest about it. say that to the Saudis and Kuwaitis and they’ll withdraw their billions in investments in the Western financial markets.
hence – the “climate change” meme. perfect excuse. and you dont have to say to a Saudi Prince “screw you and your Wahhabist Islam” – you can dress it up in a much “nicer” climate change greenery weenery waffle.
decarbonisation is a good idea. a move to British nuke power is a good idea. but we cant piss the Saudis off too much while we’re doing it – hence “climate change”.
based on the furious Hamas response to the news- it was a pretty stupid thing to do. to kidnap someone who is an ally of the Pallywood theme park.
There are those who take whatever Hamas says with a large dose of salt:
http://backspin.typepad.com/backspin/2007/03/bad_news_for_jo.html
Allan@Aberdeen: from my earlier post.
“The UN report by the IPCC was published in February. At the time it was promoted as being backed by more than 2,000 of the world’s leading scientists.”
“There are 2,000 people on the panel, not 2,000 scientists. Most are bureaucrats and politicians”
http://www.canadafreepress.com/ 2…cover030607.htm
The reason why you will not get the BBC to mention many of the so-called “scientists” on the IPCC is becaue there is not that many on it.
archduke writes;
“send a comment in to the David Miliband blog. seriously.”
Sadly, Miliband, like almost every party politician I have encountered (and that’s a few), already “knows” everything. It’s why at the tender age of 13 (or whatever he is) he thinks he is in a position to rule our lives according to his mistaken beliefs.
Short of a length of piano wire and a handy lamp post, the only way of dealing with the little squirt (and the rest of his ilk) is to have them hurled from office. And the only way of doing that is to convince the voting public of the extreme danger Miliband and Co present to their future happiness and well-being.
Which, sadly, brings us back to the BBC, that great impediment to truth and common sense.
“send a comment in to the David Miliband blog. seriously.”
I think Ian Dale or Guido has mentioned Millibands blog – and they say that all messages are censored. Although I am not 100%sure on this.
But …
“LibDem MP Chris Huhne has discovered that David Miliband’s blog costs £40k a year to run”
http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2006/06/david-miliband-invites-you-to.html
Tax payers money no doubt.
Just to add to the above:
“As predicted the Boy Miliband has started his blog and it is crap (as also predicted). Humourless, colourless and personality free – or maybe that is his personality. Things are all “brilliant”, “effective” and full of New Labourspeak adjectives.
The comments don’t appear till the next day, which will make the comment thread very unlively.”
http://www.order-order.com/2006/03/miliband-blog.html
just finished an IM chat with a mate of mine who’s signed a record deal with an italian techno label. he’s irish, but now basedin spain.
deal entirely done – including music demos – over the internet. music will only be available via download.
yet another reason why the BBC is irrelevant to today’s world. you never hear about the explosion in internet only record labels?
thought not. 3,000 journalists and they cant even report on the ENORMOUS seismic shift in the music industry thats going on right now.
On the subject of Milliband – check out the Defra Wiki about an “enviromental contract” at –
http://www.jdavenport.plus.com/defra/
And read some of the comments. The arrogance of this government has no bounds. I like this one.
“Citizens will:” “In return government will:” ????
“You are there to reprsent, not rule. You do not instruct the population, we instruct you. It would appear you have forgotten this.”
“just finished an IM chat with a mate of mine who’s signed a record deal with an italian techno label. he’s irish, but now basedin spain.
deal entirely done – including music demos – over the internet. music will only be available via download.
yet another reason why the BBC is irrelevant to today’s world. you never hear about the explosion in internet only record labels?
thought not. 3,000 journalists and they cant even report on the ENORMOUS seismic shift in the music industry thats going on right now.”
Where can I listen?
Archduke: I’m still not convinced that Nazism is leftwing, I suppose it depends merely on what your definition of left and right is. By inequality/equality the divide is pretty stark, but by individualism/collectivism Nazism and Communism go in the same box – collectivist. But I’m not completely disagreeing so yes.
And I meant enthusiasm for inequality as approving of it, not as in being motivated to destroy it as in socialism.
And as for Nazism being statist, what if I bought a hotel and used it as base for a kind of eugenicist lebensborn program? Nobody needs to forced into being “mercy killed”, just a selective breeding program by consenting adults. Which would be basically Nazism in action, but so long as no ones individual rights were infringed, it’s all okay right?
And wasn’t Ayn Rand libertarian on all things except trade unions? But what if all the workers using their individual freedom agree to go on strike – and cripple industry?
What if a one-nation conservative decided to offer cheap schooling to poor people (because there will be no state-schooling) on the condition that the children learn tons of nationalism?
What if the Welsh decide, without a state to back them up that they want to remain really Welsh and really chauvenistic and nationalistic?
What if a multi-billionaire decided he wanted to use his individual freedom to pay people into carving a mountain into a giant penis!!?
Of course Libertarianism is hostile to states, but what about independent organisations? And what if an independent organisation were to become as powerful as the state is today? Who would curtail the strength of that organisation? Another capitalists private army?
What about culture? What if art goes into private collections and is never seen by anyone? In a hyper individualistic society is there any possibility of collective experience? In a crowd of individuals each with there own aims the only thing that can be agreed upon is the lowest common denominator – lethal for a refined culture.
Mass produced sliced bread is a good example, when bread is sliced it drys out quickly and loses its flavour, something you can’t avoid when it has to be transported from a factory to a supermarket – as opposed to a a local bakery.
But what if? What if? Sorry for the grilling.
“Where can I listen?
Ultraviolence | 14.03.07 – 2:20 am ”
http://www.myspace.com/chymeramusic
and more stuff , including mixes, from
http://www.chymera.org
he’s good. no banging BBC “pete tong” crap – just intelligent techno.
“What about culture? What if art goes into private collections and is never seen by anyone? In a hyper individualistic society is there any possibility of collective experience?”
Internet music is a case in point. The timeless appeal of rock music is the whole collective freakout involved, with lots of sweaty moshing and shouting and so on.
But how can you have collective experience with an iPod? Or sat in front of your computer?
And if you go to a techno club: we all know how loud those places are; you can’t talk to anybody. Of course nobody is forcing you to go, and you can never conclusively prove one piece of music is any better than any other piece of music.
I view this new form of music distribution with foreboding. Not with condemnation of course, but I no longer hope that the future will bring great new things in the way the previous four decades have.
Would it be unfair to say that the west is in a deep cultural slump?
With the BBC as a sympton!
“Who would curtail the strength of that organisation? Another capitalists private army?”
true. the libertarian argument gets a bit ridiculous sometimes. eventually, you end up with a “state” enforcing individual rights.
“I’m still not convinced that Nazism is leftwing”
you need to study Nazism a bit more so. Read Mein Kampft, as i have.
the central tenet of Nazism is that the “Volk” – the German people – are superior to others. But that is a collectivist ideology. ergo – it is a form of socialism.
“What about culture?” – but why should the STATE tell a private collector how he should display his art, that he bought himself?
in any case, the lesson from history is that billionaires do like to show off their art – hence all the art galleries in New York.
“I view this new form of music distribution with foreboding”
i dont – it gives the youngsters of nowadays a new outlet, bypassing the traditional druggie coke snorting chatterati class. you can bypass that and get your music released.
nowadays, its actually uncool to be a techno musician and to be on drugs.
for starters, you just end up making very crap music if you are on drugs. modern complex techno requires a clear head to make it.
“But how can you have collective experience with an iPod? Or sat in front of your computer? ”
you can with myspace. it not all doom and gloom as the BBC luddites with their woefull tech reporting make it out to be.
i would go as far as saying that socialising has actually improved enormously. for the tech heads and youngsters anyway. in my own case, i’ve lived in england for ten years now, and my friends in ireland are the same as when i left ireland – i havent lost touch. regular contact. that would just NOT have happened 20 or more years ago. if you emigrated it was bye bye to everything.. nowadays it isnt. you can keep in touch with your mates back home. tech is a great thing, no matter how much the bbc try to disparage it with endless “child porn” or “virus” stories.
of course they would do that – they dont want us discovering information for ourselves – they’d rather we all got it from the goggle box television a-la Big Brother 1984.
utter tossers, the lot of them.
“in any case, the lesson from history is that billionaires do like to show off their art – ”
The virtue of selfishness!
As for left and right, it’s a case of definition, and I think this redefinition is rhetoric in the purest sense, as in, selling a point of view. I don’t disagree or agree. Which wraps it up for me.
As for your friends music, I’m listening now, he’s obviously quite competent and I can see why he’s getting a little success. People need bar music!
” it gives the youngsters of nowadays a new outlet, ”
Which is why didn’t reflexively shout “IT’S CRAP!!11!”
“bypassing the traditional druggie coke snorting chatterati class. ”
Which is why I don’t live in London.
On the whole – let’s wait and see.
yeah – theres some interesting stuff happening right now. powerful laptops plus broadband access means that you can be nearly anywhere on the planet and still do your job. lets see how this pans out, but al i see is unbrindled optimism about the future, in contrast to the BBC’s doom and gloom. the bbc has gotten so gloomy that i’ve given up on it entirely. “Today” is a joke that i just dive into in 30 seconds segments. more than that is too much.
oops – anon above is me
“they dont want us discovering information for ourselves – they’d rather we all got it from the goggle box television a-la Big Brother 1984. ”
That could well be true!
“BBC luddites”
You can be a naturalist, the problems begin when you want to start smashing up the modern world, via “global-warming” and replace it with a morbid dream of agrarian socialism.
It has been suggested that the green movement and anti-globalisation protesters are in fact total misanthropes who want to punish all humanity. They often cite Adolph Hitler as a good example, as Hitler was a skinny vegetarian animal lover. Hitler didn’t like all that fat muscle and hair, it reminded him too much of the adulthood that had destroyed him and taken him away from his mother or something.
India has a great tradition of Hindu hermits who take vows of silence, and live naked in the trees eating only berries. You don’t see them leading genocidal movements.
—
I also think I heard David Milliband say on newsnight that companies should buy and sell “carbon credits”, set by the state obviously. He also said that western companies would buy up the credits to prevent, for instance, Indian companies from burning fossil fuels and thus slowing down India’s economy.
Pretty fiendish don’t you think? Evil genius if it’s true.
GCcooper | 13.03.07 – 10:33 pm |
You are right.
“The doctrine of parliamentary supremacy may be summarized in three points:
Parliament can make law concerning anything.
No Parliament can bind its successor (that is, it cannot pass a law that cannot be changed or reversed by a future Parliament).
No body except Parliament can change or reverse a law passed by Parliament.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty#United_Kingdom
GCcooper | 13.03.07 – 10:33 pm |
HOLY POO POO!
“and replace it with a morbid dream of agrarian socialism.”
google it. you’ll find that the first uber-eco nutcases were the Nazis
“Pretty fiendish don’t you think? Evil genius if it’s true”
yeah right miliband – try imposing that on the Chinese red army…
as i said above, its really all about energy indepedence. once we have that then we can nuke meccah next time a muslim terrorist blows up something.
That’s not precisely true, I remember reading about it in the New Statesmen magazine.
There was a naturalist movement in Germany before the Nazis. Probably based on disatisfaction with modern-architecture and factorys. I think the two coincided and merged.
You can be a naturalist/hermit without being a psycho, which is why I brought up Hindu holymen.
I can see environmentalists getting a real panning over this, being called Nazis and stuff, in the near future and I don’t think it’s very fair.
You will be able to separate the (perfectly amicable) Ray Mears types from the wackos based on how much trouble they have in giving up the apocalyptic global warming meme.
But anyway, nature? A non-human non-social organic reality is completely intolerable. Anybody who perfers nature to people is suspect .There is no world but the human world. Social activities are the most important. If you do not socialise then we must pathologise.
Al Beebers claim to have successfully studied their journalism 101 courses; but what about their 101 courses in Islam?
They’re in luck. Jihadwatch has just posted (13 Mar.) such a course.
It’s an excellent educational reference for non-Muslims.
See “Islam 101” by Gregory M.Davis,PhD, at:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/015638.php
The Political Compass
Political Survey
What a pity there is no search mechanism in this blog because I have written about this before.
The two dimensional left/right analysis of the political system is long obsolete as the discussion here shows. Why don’t you (collectively) take a look at the two competing sites above that attempt a four dimensional analysis. Either approach would avoid sniping which IMHO is lowering the standards of this blog.
My late father who lived in Germany until immediately before the invasion of Poland told me that the NAZI party only adopted the Socialist Workers tag because they were in direct and violent competition with the Social Democratic Party of Germany (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands known as SOZI) for the disaffected German lower and middle class (Yet another debatable distinction, I know).
They were never ideologically socialist although just what that means has changed dramatically since the fall of the Soviet Union and I believe varies from country to country and period to period.
SPOILER:
Please do one or both of the 4D analysis’ before looking at this picture so as not to affect your answers.
Basic Compass
BTW I landed in exactly the same place on both analysis.
On another issue every B-BBC reader should be well aware that the English language is flexible enough to admit multiple meanings. The expression Nazi can refer to the German political movement but just as easily to 3. Sometimes Offensive. (often lowercase) a person who is fanatically dedicated to or seeks to control a specified activity, practice, etc.: a jazz nazi who disdains other forms of music; tobacco nazis trying to ban smoking.
Deegee I too have posted about the political compass before to try to explain the model it adopts. But as ever, most on here just chose to igniore it and continue fulminating over their Daily Mails.
Archduke – I will check out the link to your mate’s techno track, soinds interesting. As to Pete Tong’s show on the BBC it is indeed utter tosh but that is just programme that is catering to the generally more popular commercial and mainstream dance music.
The BBC does do other good music shows, Gilles Peterson, Annie Nightingale, Rob Da Bank etc.
Techo (and by that mean the intelligent stuff) – now is that a right wing or left wing musical artform?
A look into why the BBC is refusing to report Alan Johnston’s “disappearance” as a kidnapping:
http://littlebulldogs.blogspot.com/2007/03/bbc-journalist-gone-missing-in-gaza.html
If you have any ideas please let us know.
Little Bulldogs has a good point. Anyone reading the Beeb’s reporting about the disappearance of their own employee in Gaza might think he’d done a Reggie Perrin or John Stonehouse.
Bizarre.
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/busin…ess/ 6445559.stm
Why is the bottom of that article all in bold?
A quick ‘view source’ reveals incorrectly nested <B> tags in the HTML
“Techo (and by that mean the intelligent stuff) – now is that a right wing or left wing musical artform?
A Lurker | 14.03.07 – 8:53 am”
“right wing” possibly – if one takes the extreme right to be anarcho-capitalism & uber-libertarianism.
for example Guido Fakwes, ex-M25 rave organiser , i would class as being on the right. busybody Statist interventionist Tories (like Cameron), i would just place on the left. with New Labour.
if you reclassify the right/left divide into less state/more state you suddenly find that the lib dems/labour/tories are all clustered on the left, and arent even on the supposed “centre”. its how you frame the debate – for example, during the Soviet Union the political debate was between “conservative” communists and “progressive” communists (like Gorbachev. a “right/left” divide, even though the entirity of the debate was taking place on the extreme left.
A pinch of salt required for this one, especially when you see the byline.
When troops nearly took over the BBC
By Andrew Marr
Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 14/03/2007
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;jsessionid=A2OCPZB25NJ0XQFIQMGSFFOAVCBQWIV0?xml=/opinion/2007/03/14/do1403.xml
Now what’s the motive for peddling this.
Not that this really has anything to do with B-BBC or the climate change swindlers but as a matter of fact
1. There were always two intertwined strands in the NSDAP – the “nationalist” and the “socialist”. I believe the title of the party pre-dated the arrival of Hitler.
2. The power struggle within the party between the two elements was (more or less) finally resolved in 1934 in the Night of the Long Knives when the “socialist” SA leadership and many of their followers were murdered
3. Notwithstanding the victory of the nationalist element, Nazi rhetoric right up to the end always had a pop at the “plutocrats” (not necessarily Jewish ones) and the evils of capitalism
So, yes, the nazis were both right-wing (nationalist) and left wing (socialist) but, whatever they were, they were definitely anti-democratic in the sense that we understand it. However, despite their recourse to “the streets” (along with their communist opponents) they achieved power by democratic means under a constitution which was a beacon of democratic rectitude. Calling the climate change swindlers “nazis” is an insult and an exaggerated one at that. However, the suppression of free discussion on the BBC, the propagandising in elements of the MSM, the political stich-up across the 3 main parties and the bullying of some scientists opposed to the “consensus” are things of which Goebbels would heartily approve.
Good Morning…..
I’ve really enjoyed reading this thread,so I thought I would throw in my tuppenny bit:
-“Right” and “Left” wing Nazi’s.
It is very difficult to explain what Nazism is because by it’s very nature the Nazi “State” was infact unlike any other political body in history,as I hope I can illistrate.
To my mind the Nazi (and Communist) party has different “wings” to it ranging from “Left” to “Right”,taking a snapshot in the ’33 election you could say that the “party” was made up of:
-The original “founding fathers” from the days of the Frikorp and violent nationalism.They later split when Gregor Stasser formed the Black Front against Hitler,but are the most “Hitlerite” (ie Mein Kampf is gospel).From this group Ernst Rohm (Head of SA untill murdered),Alfred Rosenberg and Hess emerge from this collection of misfits.
-A closley allied extream right-wing individualists/libertarians mostly doctrinaire racists who joined in 1925-29 like Himmmler Goering and Goebbels.
-A third group who joined in 1930-33 were from the youth movements, the Volkish “Blood and Soil” (the forerunner of todays Green movement)groups and petty bourgois “Socalism” from in the middle class’s.They came from those who had lost there savings in the depression and were without direction.Speer,Walter Schellinberg,Werner Best and Heydrich joined about this time.
-The largest group were the ordinary citizens who voted the Nazi’s as a “Party of National Revival” These included the military,the Civil Service and the buisness world fearful of a Communist takeover and yearning for a “proud and strong” Germany
Some like Meuller, Head of Gestapo never voted for the NSDAP.
After the election until ’45 the German “State” was a just groups of competing beaucracies and fiefdoms,each battling for the attention of Hitler.There was never any formal Cabinet meetings (too politcally dangerous for Hitler),no unified policy but a series of vague asperations and ideas brought to life by “yes” men.Hitler’s basic doctrine of Government was always “divide and rule” and “survival of the fittest”.
It is a paradox,but by carrying out the “Final Solution” Germany doomed itself to defeat simply by wasting resources which could of served her better,but was brought about because of an outburst by Hitler on how he wanted to dispose of his Jewish problem.
Witness the battles between Himmler (of the SS) and the Army,Speer (Minister of Production) and Bormann (Sec of the Party).The idea of a monolithic ldeaology is a creation of Gobbels propaganda (like Triumph of Will), and historians trying to explain the Second World War just after it was written.
The other thing-Mein Kampf was read by more people outside Germany than in-Hitler always relied of his mastery of PR that Mein Kampf was never a central plank of political text in terms of electioneering.
Saddam run a very similar set-up,although the ideaology was different.
The insults are flying now because the debate has now kicked off, thanks to Channel 4’s documentary and the oppressive tendancies of the leftist global-warming lobby.
Energy efficiency is obviously desirable and anyone who is not should be made to pay, and does, through taxation on consumption. What rankles is the big-brotherism of the eco-fascists. The science is heavily flawed but the argument for energy efficiency is reasonable: why could they not use that and get of our backs? Naturally, the BBC recognises one of its own and supports the eco-loons.
i’d go with the rogue criminal gang theory. money is short in Gaza. crime has rocketed.
doesnt take a genius to figure it out.
archduke | 14.03.07 – 12:35 am
Agreed. No conventional Gaza terrorists would have kidnapped their resident BBC propagandist, and he’s been strictly neutral on the Hamas-Fatah fight.
Echoing the sentiments of others on this blog, I hope Johnston is soon released safe and sound. It must be one helluvah ordeal.