He can’t read. He has to be presented information in pictures. Sorry but there is a literal mountain of evidence he is not intelligent. Not even a little bit. He fails to comprehend the simplest of concepts.

It is absurd that anyone could have actually taken in what he has said and done in the part four years and claim his iq is 120-130. Simply ridiculous.

Dude, you should probably finish reading the thread, you're pretty much pre-empting all my posts that you haven't read yet lol.

Actually there's nothing fallacious about demagoguery. By rousing emotions, you're just a good politician. If people are afraid of MS 13 gangs killing them, like they did to some farmers in Arizona, Trump isn't originating the fear, he is just stoking it. That's good politics.

Obama gave people false hope. He preached "change" but nothing came. Isn't that worse?

What I have gleaned from your comments is that either you don't understand what the word "fascism" means, or you're fine with it.

If Victor says they are not communist they are not communist. That much I know is true.

Pushing the CCP angle is pure right wing propaganda. Whether they are communists or not is irrelevant to this discussion anyways. It makes zero difference. To be clear, though, they have not been a communist country for a long time. I understand them using the word communism in the name of the ruling party is tripping you up, but that is not what causes a country to be following communism.

I know a lot about fascism, it's similar to Marxism as it's founder was influenced by Marx

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_Gentile

How is Trump a fascist when he's a conservative, the opposite of a Marxist?

I didn't say demagoguery was fallacious, that's your word. As above - you clearly don't understand why people think fascism is a bad thing, but that's probably a topic for another thread.

I'm sure there are plenty of things Trump has promised and not delivered on. That in and of itself is not demagoguery.

You certainly seem to support it, even if you don't know what the specific word means.

This might shock you, there was quite a famous Austrian fella who was also the opposite of a Marxist (he hated commies so much he even went to war with them), and he is pretty much the canonical reference point for contemporary discussions of fascism.

Arguments from authority don't work for me. Victor isn't God.

They are a communist country with many principles. They've opened up their economy but they still have a tight grip. It's not pure marxism, no, because there would be no currency or stock market under marxism. But they still use many of the communist tactics in re-education camps, social brainwashing, socialized behavior training, and so on. I urge you to watch these videos. These things do not happen in the post-enlightenment west. They have been used in Vietnam, USSR and Romania.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7P2rlLPxro

Hitler was a socialist. Outwardly he attacked communism, but his policies were the same. Think about it. He hated private corporations. The state took them all over. Same as in socialism. He had a centrally controlled government. Same as communism. There was a unified mission for the whole country. Same as communism.

Hitler was a socialist. He was nothing near a free market capitalist like Trump.

I think we might have isolated the source of the confusion. Fascism and socialism are both totalitarian regimes, so they have those aspects in common. Other than that, they are at opposite ends of the political spectrum. The Nazis were fascists, not socialists but I can see you might be getting confused by names again. The Democratic Republic of the Congo is not very democratic either, for various political reasons some names are the opposite of what they actually represent.

https://www.britannica.com/story/wer...zis-socialists

Regardless, extremism on both sides is bad, and authoritarianism is bad. You are concerned with economic policy, whereas all my points were all to do with subverting democratic norms.

It is hard to classify anything Trump has done in regards to foreign policy as neutral let alone positive. It has all been very bad. I know before the election I regularly commented on how Trump would be an absolute disaster when it came to foreign affairs, due to his behavior, intellect, understanding and absurd gullibility. He has surpassed my wildest imagination.

I would like to know op’s thoughts on the idea that foreign leaders regularly take advantage of Trump simply by blowing smoke up his backside and appealing to his obscene narcissistic self centeredness. Do you believe Trump is susceptible to such manipulation by people significantly smarter, more learned and more savvy than himself? If not why not.

I can not think of a single foreign policy interaction where Trump came across as succeeding on behalf of the United States.

No, fascism is the political left, not the right. Brittanica is incorrect. I never said it was because of the names. I said it because of their actions. You might want to read my post again. Politicians use many words, but their actions show what they are. Hitler was clearly a socialist.

Maybe it would help if you defined what fascism is to you. I always find it entertaining that people think of fascists on the right, and communists on the left, when in reality they are exactly the same. What's so different about Hitler's regime and Kim Jong Un's?

Because the "far right" in American politics means essentially Adam Smith economics, classical liberalism, and limited government. Does that sound like Hitler to you?

and you don't understand what pacifism means, or you're fine with it.

look around. how do you envision our nation's place in the world, without its agency to impose might? yeah, we've meddled incessantly in foreign lands, but what if we hadn't?

Russian 'active measures' have meddled and messed with our country. it's nice to conceptualize about freedoms, but the American public doesn't know the difference between organic manifestations of liberty(which can be very dangerous), and the fabrication from abroad that we engineered AIDS in a government lab to kill Africans. If I show you a government at ease with anything and everything hurled at its integrity, I'll show you a system not fit to last.

It's not just Britannica, it's all encyclopedias and other mainstream sources. You seem to be promoting a very nonstandard view here, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so please cite some evidence that Hitler was a socialist, and that fascists and communists are exactly the same.

Before you do that though, there are some other posters who have addressed you upthread, they were first.

Sorry, I have no idea how any of what you've said is relevant to the post to which you responded.

There are plenty of sources for each side which you can research. Even better, think for yourself. We can look at socialism, see it's effects, see it's dogmas. We can look at Hitler's regime, see its effects, see its dogmas.

They're very similar. So what do you think is different?

Actually, there is one difference. Hitler was ethnically charged, where as communists are idea-charged. However, the Han Chinese are also ethnically charged in brainwashing the muslim minority. They consider themselves to be a superior race. But that's the only example I know of. Generally communists put the idea above all.

Also, Hitler was bent on world domination, whereas the communists are happy to spread their idea and start revolutions. Stalin however did have ambitions to spread Russia's influence, just not as aggressive as Hitler's.

Meditate on it for a minute lol

OP still Goat

Fine, we can spin off another thread for fascism vs. socialism. I'll rephrase my characterisation of Trump having fascist tendencies instead as having tendencies which authoritarian and anti-democratic, with behaviour reminiscent of totalitarian regimes. Your comments along the lines of "lol that's what I'd do" are not quite the scorching rebuttal you might think they are.

Bro, just because you like to post blazed off your tits, doesn't mean that everyone who is reading your posts also is.

u r mentally il

He's Tha Ill Kid

Think I found the answer:

"Without race, he went on, National Socialism "would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground". Marxism was internationalist. The proletariat, as the famous slogan goes, has no fatherland. Hitler had a fatherland, and it was everything to him."

"Yet privately, and perhaps even publicly, he conceded that National Socialism was based on Marx. On reflection, it makes consistent sense. The basis of a dogma is not the dogma, much as the foundation of a building is not the building, and in numerous ways National Socialism was based on Marxism."

It seems the key difference was Hitlers love of his fatherland, hence his need for "lebensraum" and his nationalist tendencies were deeply engrained. Other than that, basically a communist.


https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...m-1186455.html

Bombing thread science

As I said, we can discuss that in a different thread if you like. There are already other posters who have replied to you upthread so maybe engage with them for a while.