Occupy Nazis, Communists & Gangs – Rep. West

we turn to conservatives in their view
of above occupy wall street so you know there’s gonna get ugly rights or hair
comes out of west he’s a congressman from florida visa
so-called tea party guide so what is he compared now this will be too the nazis and the communists that doesn’t even try to make sense
combat since we got his red polar opposites in the political spectrum but he’s like who cares what is called
every dirty name in the book and hope that it sticks and he’s alittle
as she doesn’t have to make sense that’s the beauty of the alan let’s so but now
he also calls the these guys the hockey prior wall street texts there apparently gangs i don’t know what they’ve done that so
gang like except clean up after themselves we’ve got here and and and
try to say go for the american people where you are no diarrheas it turns out
the dare been accurate accusations the two twenty ten campaign when alice is
running that he was linked to an actual gagged is called a outlaws outlaws motorcycle gang candidate
investigated for violent crimes again as always for the conservatives projection i’m associated with hearings sab reply
so that everybody else is part of the things that are the nazis in the
communist it’s absurd and by the way you know alan weston had
to leave the armed forces ’cause he fired a gun next
to a detainees had basically threatening of execution which is orval violation of law and actually should’ve gone to jail for
instead he went to congress

  1. People love hating on Communism even though no one has even done it completely yet.Communism is where everyone shares and do things to help each other.The reason it fails is b/c most people are selfish bastards.Anyone who says that the government in Communism owns everything is not that bright.

  2. Clean up after themselves? Oh you mean blocking trafific, shitting on cars, vandalizing property, smelling, the rape, the people wearing che tshirts, blocking businesses, smokin weed, provoking cops, tagging food carts, breaking a whole foods window, spraying banks, costing the city millions in repairs and cleanups … Fuck these idiot and you fatty!

  3. @koyunbaba73

    Aside from brutal leadership of notorious dictators, what exactly do the two have in common that can reconcile against mutually exclusive beliefs?

  4. @Mathenaut Both used images to portray their version of the new ideal man; Both had an all encomassing enormous government at the expense of personal liberty; Both nazism and communism were antithetical to belief and worship in God; Both took away any gun rights. Those are just their mutual beliefs. They have plenty more in common in terms of their brutal methods of torture and in the stacks of bodies they compiled.

  5. @TheEnslavingForce Yes we all know how well the Jews fared in the Soviet Union. Trotsky did so well after Lenin died, that he fled to Mexico to get away from Stalin. As it turns out, Mexico wasn't far enough.

  6. @TheEnslavingForce There wasn't a Jewish ruling class in Russia. Russian Jews were the poorest in the world, and they were persecuted throughout the Soviet years. Stalin hunted Jewish professionals, and in the late 1920s, the Jews were rounded up and shipped off to the remotest part of eastern Russia, an area called Birobidzhan.

  7. @TheEnslavingForce More bullshit. Britain won that chunk of land from the Ottoman empire in WWI. The league of nations split that land into a half for the Jews and a half for the Arabs who were living there at the time. The Jews accepted and the Arabs declined, prefering instead to destroy the tiny Jewish state on the same day it became a country. The Jews sent 6 Arab armies running.

    You seem to have an obsession with Jewish power. Do you buy into the Protocal of the Elders of Zion too?

  8. @koyunbaba73

    Really? That's it? Modern Republicans fit that bill if that is the sole measure by which you're equating things that are so radically opposed. May as well do the mustache=hitler bit by that line of reasoning.

    Also, Hitler placed himself next to god in his speeches and german soldiers carried bibles. LOL @ Nazis being opposed to god.

    Far Left extremism =/= Far Right extremism. That only flies with Fox and the ignorant people that don't know better.

  9. @hint0122

    If they owned the banks, then that problem would never have happened to begin with. Hell, it would solve alot of things if they just nationalized them.

    I don't expect you to know better though. Requires actual education in politics.

  10. @TheEnslavingForce I am burdened by a need to speak civily to people and not attack them personally. You are obviously unencumbered by such a need. This seems to be a common thread among those who share your political agenda. When I read your comment about the "real death camps" (as if Auschwitz and Treblinka were not real death camps) that should have tipped me off about the sort of person I was dealing with. But your last comment exposes your bigotry so it wasn't a complete waste of time.

  11. @Mathenaut

    "FLE =/= FRE" (i.e. Soviet communism vs Nazism)
    Not equal (and or extremely similar) in what? Methods applied (e.g. purges, nationalization, gulags/KZ, state run "peoples orgs" for brainwashing, numbers of eliminated people, etc.)?

    "carried bibles"
    Yes… The Soviet communists (and other communists, too) had their own "bibles." That is, diverse communist propaganda booklets. Bibles promise a second life in the heavens. Commies promised a "workers paradise" on Earth.

  12. @Wrath0fKhan

    Hell, America ran prison camps, pushed heavy nationalism, and even sanctioned all arms of the media industry to run endless propaganda. Does that mean America is on similar terms with the Soviets and Nazis?

    I guess having a mustache makes me like Adolf too.

    Soviet communists weren't Christians, genius. The Nazis were, and German soldiers carried bibles. Most soviet soldiers barely had more than their clothes and a gun.

  13. @Mathenaut

    You arent very bright, are you. You are comparing "prison camps" to KZs and Gulags (were millions of people had perished). You are comparing defensive war propaganda to Nazi "take-over-the-world-and-kill-all-the-Jews" propaganda. Or to Stalins personality cult, the pompolit/zampolit indoctrination system, etc.

    "barely had more than their clothes and a gun"
    Despite suffering occasional shortcomings, on average they were eventually well equipped and deadly.

  14. @Wrath0fKhan

    Uhm…Yes. I AM comparing our prison camps to their prison camps, where people suffered and died under senseless cruelty and ignorance. I AM comparing our hateful propaganda to their hateful propaganda.

    Russians literally took down Tiger tanks by ramming their own into them, and bailing. They fought balls to the wall with a fraction of the logistic support that the Germans had and held the line.

    But overall, they didn't have bibles or anything of the sort. Why would they?

  15. @Mathenaut

    "Yes I am comparing"
    Certified crackpottery.

    You are seriously mistaken. Your focus is extremely narrow (e.g. you are only focusing on certain bottlenecks). At the peak of AFVs production, the Soviets had two times more of those than the Nazis. Your conclusion is invalid.

    Again… The "bibles" are irrelevant. Its the ideology that does the trick. A fuhrer, god-inspired against a father of the nation, (almost) god-like. And you dont get it…

  16. @Wrath0fKhan

    "Certified crackpottery."

    Certified hypocrisy. It's only bad when "they" do it. Let me guess, you're a christian?

    "Your conclusion is invalid."

    That they didn't carry bibles? You literally concede this yourself, then copout by insisting that people who don't believe in the christian god replace that figure with someone else.

    Doesn't work that way, and trying to conflate communism and fascism is not only convoluted, but it further underlines your ignorance of both.

  17. @M

    You dont know what hypocrisy is. "Proof" is pending.

    "Its only bad when they do it"
    Here it comes. The US didnt attack Germany or Japan in WW2. It was the other way around. Your argument crumbles again.

    "That they didnt carry bible"
    What? Where did I say that?

    "who dont believe … replace that with someone else"
    Yet thats exactly what they did! Even philosopher Dennett agrees with that proposition.

    "Doesnt work that way"
    It can be demonstrated that it does.

  18. @Mathenaut

    "conflate communism and fascism is not only convoluted, but it further underlies your ignorance of both."

    You apparently have no idea whatsoever about history in general and oppressive regimes as theistic and non-theistic regimes in particular.

    Game over.

  19. @Wrath0fKhan

    You draw parallels between opposing ideologies due to general characteristics that ANY oppressive regime has, regardless of whether said regime even follows those ideologies.

    Then you just gloss over similarities shown in the history of our own system, which would put us on par if we followed your line of reasoning.

    You're just all manner of ass-backwards in this. That you'd decry anyone's knowledge of history based on what you presented is laughable.

  20. @Wrath0fKhan

    "The US didnt attack Germany or Japan in WW2. It was the other way around."

    Irrelevant deflection. Fact is, we had camps that people died in. Something that you would know about if you even read the wikipedia articles on the subject, much less did any real research.

    Dennett drew parallels between religious people and extremists, he didn't say that atheists have to 'compensate' for not believing in the christian god. You'd have to establish that case for all to demonstrate it.

  21. @Mathenaut

    "Irrelevant deflection"
    Irrelevant objection.

    "camps that people died in"
    There was no sanctioned extermination, hence the irrelevant objection.

    "real research"
    I actually did study German history…

    "Dennett parallels"
    Thats what its about, mister expert.

    "atheists have to compensate"
    No idea what you are mumbling about.

    Stalins cult, even Stalins orthodox revivalism have already been established. Commie utopianism has been established as well.

  22. @Mathenaut

    "any oppressive regime has"
    No… Italian fascism didnt promise paradise in the after life, nor did it promise (workers) paradise in this life.

    "similarities of our own system"
    Our states dont endorse these "paradises" (i.e. infinite or tremendous rewards). Again, your argument is missing something.

    "anyones knowledge of history"

  23. @Mathenaut


    Laughable is the denial of socialist-like features of German Nazism. (Of course it doesnt follow that there cant be a socialist-like democratic system as well.) Laughable as well is the denial of Keynesian monetary policy conducted by the Nazis in the 30s.

    Since you have really no idea what you stepped into… This time I mean it – game over.

  24. @Wrath0fKhan

    "Laughable is the denial of socialist-like features of German Nazism"

    "Laughable as well is the denial of Keynesian monetary policy conducted by the Nazis in the 30s"

    Enjoying your strawman? This is an odd game that you like to play, speaking against points that have not been raised. I'm not sure why you flatter yourself on this.

  25. @Wrath0fKhan

    "Italian fascism didnt promise paradise…"

    They were supposed to be inheriting the legacy of Rome and creating a new empire; and their economic system was supposed to decisively end class warfare and disparity due to inequality.

    "Our states dont endorse these "paradises""

    Land of Opportunity, American Dream, etc.

  26. @Wrath0fKhan

    "Irrelevant objection"

    No, the point is pretty unrelated to the discussion at hand. You're essentially tossing out random facts, as if you're refuting a claim. This is a strawman.

    "There was no sanctioned extermination, hence the irrelevant objection"

    So that makes it okay then? There was nothing wrong with our actions because they weren't as bad? Seriously?

    "Stalins cult"

    Oh, you're comparing the cult of personality to religious worship. Both are rather equally unflattering

  27. And do you think that GOP RW conservatism is about freedom, small government and fiscal conservatism?

    Fact is that the only thing RWers want to conserve is status quo and a few generations of regression with the religious right as their whip to impose Big Government where business is over government, government is over the people, while the poor and minorities are vultures and freeloaders whom want to take away the Christian Rights divine right to impose bronze age values while cashing…

  28. And what is the point?

    That the religious Right have almost identical ideology as the Big Government Nazis and "Islamofascists"?

  29. No. Nazis hated Communists because Nazis were fascist corporatists (see I.G. Farben, Bayer, etc.) and opposed socialism in which economic equality was the goal. It's true they were both totalitarian, but with completely opposite ideologies.

  30. There was NOTHING socialist about Nazism. I.G. Farben, Bayer, and many, many other companies were maintained and only those few that resisted the Nazis were nationalized (in essence, nothing to do with socialism rather just silencing opponents.) They were Fascist in the classic sense; i.e., the marriage of corporate and government power to create an authoritarian, totalitarian system. Nazis (despite having "socialist in the name) were completely against socialism.

  31. "There was no sanctioned extermination,…" You mean the documents detailing the orders from the top of the Nazi hierarchy to proceed with the extermination weren't found and examined during the Nuremberg trials? Silly me. So how did they organize the extermination so well and experiment to discover the most efficient ways to do it without planning, organization, and the funds to carry it all out (all during a very expensive war when they needed as much men and material to prosecute the war?)

  32. That's what I told him too. It's a bit like calling Liberals and Libertarians the same thing since they are both based on the idea of freedom for the individual, even though they have different ways to get to that ideal.

  33. "you mean the documents detailing the orders from top of the Nazi hierarchy"
    I was referring to his utterly stupid claim that the American camps were analogical to the Nazi extermination camps just because they were "camps."

    "Silly me"

    "So how did they organize the extermination"
    Should I keep playing this game? Well, they (i.e. the Americans) didnt organize any extermination (e.g. in the "internment camps"). Extermination was organized (mostly) on the Nazi occupied territories.

  34. "There was nothing socialist about Nazism"
    Completely false statement.

    "I.G. Farben"
    What about them? The Nazi state exerted great influence over them. Totally in a "socialist" fashion (just like France does even nowadays in some of their contemporary big industrial companies).

    "maintained and only those few that resisted the Nazis were nationalized"
    That statement is illogical.

    "fascist in the classic sense"
    Since there was little to no autonomy of those "corps," you are once again wrong.

  35. You are just as ignorant as your "buddy in arms." And I will look like a dummy, if I fall into the same trap (i.e. engaging an uneducated ignoramus) as I did previously… Good bye…

  36. They still kept businesses intact and those businesses were allowed to profit without having to give all the proceeds to the government. they had to tow the party line and go along with what the Nazis wanted, but they still remained independent as financial units; unlike in Russia. Fascist in the classic sense of the marriage of business and government working together to control the populace. Autonomy is not the issue; the ability to make and retain profits is.

  37. The extermination of the Jews was ordered from the very top of the Nazi hierarchy and the documentation of this was used during the Nuremberg trials to convict the Nazi elites of crime against humanity (the Nazis kept very good records.) That's not that difficult to understand.

  38. Easy, the Nazis were a right wing totalitarian autocracy. The Russians were a left wing totalitarian autocracy. Although I understand that you are making the point that totalitarianism is totalitarianism but you seem to want to make them all into "left wing" totalitarian regimes; which is incorrect. Liberals are closer to the Anarchist ideal than anything on the right (although you guys seem to be slipping closer and closer to that as an ideal; ironically.)

  39. The conservative right is closer to fascism since it retains the marriage of government with big business; which is the entire ideology of fascism. You miss a few history classes. Many liberals were anarchists who begrudgingly accepted the pragmatics need for government but limited to those things necessary to maintain a civil society. The very definition of being liberal is to believe in maximizing freedom of the individual and securing those rights through government if need be.

  40. Fascism works with big business and communism abolishes it. Big difference. I do agree that any oppressive form of totalitarian government is bad. We're quibbling semantics when actually we agree on the fundamental point.

  41. What "buddy in arms?" You are trying to revise history by making the Nazis into "socialists" so you can equate left leaning liberals with Nazis and we just ain't falling for it. Totalitarianism is bad in any form and liberals don't want to have anything to do with totalitarianism (by definition since liberalism is about maximizing the freedom of the individual.) Any hint of anything socialist in this country should only be allowed if it's democratically driven and the will of the people.

  42. "marriage of government with big business" = socialism
    "Many liberals were anarchists"
    Yeah, a classic liberal, which is a modern conservative. A classic liberal could never spew something as stupid as "securing those rights through government if need be." Everyone knows the left promotes the collective and not "freedom of the individual'.

    I would rather be punched in my face, than have my intelligence insulted by a simpleton, thinking I'd believe a single word of that mindless babbling.

  43. What painful irony.

    We are a Constitutional Republic. So named due to the limitations on the power of government and the means by which the minority is protected from the oppression of the majority.

    It's something that would deny alot of the borderline fascist conservative ideology. The comments you make seem to deny any working knowledge you have of that document.

  44. Democrats haven't shifted far to the left. It's Republicans that have bore so far to the right as to completely shift the scale.

  45. You do not seem to understand socialism very well. Only the infrastructure need be nationalized, so to prevent the whims of corporations from directly influencing the government as they do in forms of so-called 'crony capitalism'.

    Also, individual freedom and collective wellfare are not mutually exclusive. More ignorance.

    None of us is free unless all of us are free.

  46. But the state is US. "We the People." And there are people out there who need help, NOT golden parachutes for CEOs of failed businesses.

  47. The Constitution and especially the Bill of Rights is a perfect example of liberal values. It was considered liberal then, and it still is now. The Constitution allows for changes to be made to change with the times. If the people of this country decide that we would rather have the government run health insurance and not be at the mercy of for profit businesses who have no problem denying their contractual obligations and not paying for purchased services, then we have a right to abolish.

  48. You do realize that you are arguing against business regulation that worked for the better part of over a half century and during the most productive time in America. Returning to Glass-Steagall and other effective business regulations would not turn America into a socialist paradise (unless you think that's what the '50s were like in America.) Basically what you want is Cronyism and to allow businesses to run rough shod over their communities with impunity.

  49. Actually, welfare and other forms of assistance have been so gutted over the years because of people like you who rant and rave about the "undeserving poor" there is almost no assistance available. I used to be a social worker who job it was to help people find assistance so I actually know something about it. YOU ARE WRONG! I worked with lots of people who were working and became disabled and then could not work at all and found almost no assistance at all. They get screwed.

  50. Mathenaut is right. the left hasn't moved an inch. It's the right that has embraced fascist values and moved the extreme right. How old are you? 10? I remember when Reagan was alive and I remember his policies (and how he laundered money and weapons through the Iranians–the exact people who held Americans hostage for over a year–to support the Samozan rebels. Samoza was a fascist, totalitarian, murderous SOB that we supported for years because he helped American businesses.).

  51. I'm on SSDI (an insurance program) and get right at about $1000 and I can get no further assistance. Tell me, what welfare program are you talking about? Have you actually tried to get welfare? I'm in Oakland, CA and even being disabled, I could only get $105 in General Assistance and $200 in food stamps and now that I'm on SSDI, I cannot get that. Your government figures are being used disingenuously. If all these services are available, why couldn't I find them? Where are they?

  52. Individual freedom and responsibility? L.O.L.

    Conservatives cry about their 'entitlements' and 'freeloading' all of the time. Except, they want the money elsewhere. Corporate welfare, the lower classes supporting the rich, wage slaving, and constant war.

    Faith? Freedom of religion only for christians.
    Morals? Preach hate and call it 'moral'.
    Free Market? More like corporate owned state.

    There is nothing decent about this.

  53. Oh, I get it. Since I developed a serious heart and vascular condition that causes neurological damage and had to use the INSURANCE program that I paid into, I'm not worth talking to? BTW, I paid back the General Assistance and Food Stamps AS REQUIRED, so I haven't taken anything not due to me. I'm telling you, even with serious health issues, there's little to no assistance out there. I hope you get health issues and have to find out what it's like.

  54. What are people supposed to do when they can no longer work. Pray for food to drop from the sky? Where are we going to live, at your house? You gonna invite me over and let me stay there for free since I cannot afford rent? I didn't think so. You live in fantasy land.

  55. You still haven't replied to what I wrote about the Iran Contra scandal and the Samoza regime. You afraid I'll destroy your crappy arguments?

  56. And there have been many who have been helped and made something of their lives. You act as though spending "gazillions" has been to help the same group of people without them having gone anywhere. But the truth is that many have been helped and there are others who take their places as their circumstances change. It's not static.

  57. "marriage of government with big business" = socialism WTF are smoking? I said it's fascism, not socialism. Big difference.
    "Many liberals were anarchists" as dumb kids, not as adults who know better. But they grew up and realized that someone has to be in charge.
    The left promotes the collective AND the freedom of the individual. Why the fuck should some asshole who doesn't have a clue tell me what I should smoke? Or drink? Or eat?

  58. liberal
    1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
    2. ( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
    3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
    4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.

  59. 5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

    "marriage of government with big business" is fascism, not socialism. Socialism, in it's purest form (i.e., communism) gets rid of for profit businesses altogether so as to develop equality. Not something I advocate. The Nazis were fascists, not socialists. The Bill of Rights is liberal; freedoms guaranteed by law.

  60. So the businesses that want less regulation so they can do whatever they want and buy whichever candidate they want (i.e., laissez-faire capitalism without regulation) is "liberal" in your eyes, even though that's exactly what conservatives say they want and libs say they are against? You are just plain nuts!

  61. Oh, I get it. Because you see Obama as being liberal and he continued Bush's bailout plan (the govt. becoming involved with business in this case) you have decided that this is what "liberal" is. We are against the bail out too. It's a conservative driven program to save the conservative businesses, not at all in line with liberal ideas. I got news for you. Obama's not liberal at all. He's conservative and followed Bush's plan to the T. The bailout was anything but socialist.

  62. I'd have to disagree with you on this. Socialism is all about more money for the government and that means the corporations pretty much.

  63. That's true. It is a myth that Nazis and Communists were opposites. Technically, the USSR and all 20th century socialist/communist states were state-socialist systems. Marx advocated anarcho-socialism, of course.

    Anyways, the main difference between the Nazis and the state socialists is that
    – The Nazis murdered for cruelty and evil
    – The state socialists murdered for the brotherhood of man

  64. yup! Occupy wall street are just like the nazis. They had Occupy Berlin under the brownshirts.
    Just like Hitler and his nazis they support gun control support command HQ economies and are hardcore anti semites.



  65. so the nazis said communists and capitalists are one and the same(jew)
    the communists said nazis and capitalists are the same(rep. of bourgeoisie)
    now a conservative says liberals and nazis are the same

    this shit never gets old

  66. Americas most wanted terrorist. Wanted for crimes against americans. He should be put in jail with the other RIGHT WING NUTZ. We need to take back our country from guys like allen west and MR BONER

  67. No sir its not and the stupid one here is u. In pure democracy, the staate has rights and power to. Your fucked up, corrupt and capitalist liberalism isnt the only form of politics out there u braindead idiot. And no the staate is not evil, we in europe are actually very thankfull for the staate and its help. As it protects us from extremist terrorists of all kinds, and gives free education and social healthcare to those who are sick or cant afford it, unlike u liberal guys in america.

  68. Jesus ur so stupid alone reading ur braindead comments hurts in the eyes. First: Of the USSR was based on social/communist systems, however the 3rd reich was not socialist but fascist.

    Secondly: Marxism and the communists were anti-fascist, and the worst political enemies.

    3rd: The myth that nationalsocialism and communism are the same, goes back to propaganda campaigns of hitler. He called himself "communist" for popularity but he wasnt, and even right wing communists like ernst thälmann

  69. rejected hitler and his nationalsocialism and openly fought against it. Btw. hitler made many propaganda myths, he also called himself "a pacifist". Hitler is clearly no pacifist, and he is clearly not leftwing or communist either.

    4th: Oh my fucking god really sorry but please go and fucking LEARN history and politics! seriously ur so wrong and stupid it hurts the eyes. Marxism was marxism and the oldest and first communism, anarcho-communism was advocated and made by kropotkin and NOT marx!

  70. Also whilst ur at it and brainwashed anyway: Please read about the differences between liberalism and democracy and a liberal or democratic staate.

    And read how a democratic staate funktions. The money goes to the staate and from the staate to the people, instead of giving it to the government and the rich only like u americans do.

  71. Yes, EXACTLY this IS liberalism u idiot! Freedom in any way, this means so much freedom that there are NO regulations on the econimical market, this means u can build up monopoles, manipulate prices etc. etc.

    Welcome to your beloved liberal system u idiot! Why dont u look up and READ what liberalism is and how it works?

    If u monkeybrain would understand how liberalism really works, I bet u would be angry at it and hate it for the rest of ur live, unless ur a rich, corrupt bastard yourself.

  72. Again wrong wrong wrong…. why dont u idiot EVER lookup what the systems and things actual mean. There there would also be less bullshit comments like yours on youtube.

    Socialism is NOT the total ridding off of profit, but theres a small difference between the capitalist/liberal model:

    In the socialist market system, the human, his rights and needs stand on top above everything else, profit still exists as a high priority, but its on place 2, place 1 goes for the human and his rights and this

  73. I understand the communism thing there are similarities
    broad overlook
    Bolshevik-the only people that were benefiting in russia at the that time was the rich government so the workers and the poor overthrew the government
    OWS- the rich are the only ones hear and basically buy votes and Capitalism is corrupted and ruined because of the government so we change minds and fix it and overthrow this broken system. I still support OWS because I completely agree with them.
    Still Pissed

  74. The soviet union was not marxist it was based on stalinism and to a very small part leninism.

    I agree on that, in trotzky and lenin there was some hope.

    You dont understand marxism, marxism comes from germany you idiot and not from russia. Congratulations like many other people u lack education in history. But dont worry, there are many other people who are just as stupid as you.

  75. Yeah maybe. Still the overall lack of history knowledge angers me. Also were not in the middle ages, at least in europe everyone has to go to school, if they are poor and dont have the money its free for them, but they still have to go to school. Also we got libraries, internet etc. There are enough possibilities to read and learn history.

    But most people wont do that, instead they would rather follow the doctrines and words of some idiot and take that as reality instead of reading history

  76. themselves. This kinda pisses me off.

    What also pisses me off are nazis, in the german speaking room as well as in america and elsewhere. Everywhere on youtube this propaganda lying criminals spread theyre propaganda and hatred. Officials and police do nothing. I even got death and murder threats and a "bounty" on my head, as well as they tried to hack and cyberterror me and others, and this in germany!

    Im absolutely not on friendly terms with fucking fascists and nazis. This pisses me off to.

  77. How stupid can you be? "heroes"!?
    Fascists rose to power and were supported by the elites to counter the threat of the left.
    Fascists were American allies dumbass. Look at what Nixon said of Franco, a good old american ally

  78. "The rise of fascism was to conquer the world."

    That's is seriously deranged. You have never heard of imperialism?

    You live in AN EMPIRE dumbass. America is an empire. and like any empire, it wants to "conquer the world". Just like Russia, Britain, France, Germany etc all wanted and tried to do.

    The Fascist states were more aggressive, but no different than other Imperialist nations

  79. And before you say America is not an empire, go find:
    – how many US troops are spread around the world
    – how many US colonies are there, how many became territories and states, how many still last

    Hint: both Cuba and the Philippines were american colonies you idiot

  80. Tsk tsk. Cuba was an American colony in the 1st half of the 20th century dumbass.

    "Under Cuba's new constitution, the U.S. retained the right to intervene in Cuban affairs and to supervise its finances and foreign relations. "
    "The U.S. intervened by occupying Cuba and named Charles Edward Magoon as Governor for three years."


  81. You don't even know the history of your own country, which shows how incredibly stupid you americans are.

    I bet you also think that Africa is a country

  82. Pretty much
    "47% of American adults currently report that they have a gun in their home or elsewhere on their property."
    " Pickup trucks accounted for 20.57 percent of all vehicles in operation and SUVs 11.42 percent, according to analysis by Experian Automotive."

  83. That comment shows the typical ignorance and idiocy of Americans. You are not only completely wrong, you are amazingly ridiculous and retarded.

    Congrats for living up to the stereotype of your countrymen

  84. lol. You are like a child grappling with some random ideas that you've heard somewhere but have no understanding what they mean. Very funny

  85. You have no idea what you are talking about. Fascists were a far-right populist-nationalists that galvanized the masses and were backed the by the elites.

    The free-market capitalist elites supported and funded the fascist regimes, and continued to praise them after the war, for "saving Europe from socialism".

    Hakyek and Mises said that, just to name a few. In general, almost ALL the conservatives in Germany, Italy, Spain, Croatia, Romania, Hungary etc supported the radical far-right parties

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *