Post by The True DoctorPost by The True DoctorPost by The Last DoctorPost by The Last DoctorWhy people who use dogmatic pejorative recidivist terms like
"PC lunatics" and "SJWs" are so stupid - explained!
Theyâre not my words - theyâre his, only holding up the mirror of
awareness
You are having even more delusions about what you cannot
understand.
Itâs true that I do have difficulties understanding insanity, not
being insane. You certainly should have the advantage there, and
would if you were capable of self examination.
Brainwashed by your own delusions.
Post by The True DoctorPost by The Last Doctorin the other direction. There are other groups it applies to,
including the very tiny group of hyper-sensitive oddballs who
really do try to take political correctness way too far. Dwarfs
are short. And dwarfs. Black people are black. Itâs dumb to use
ridiculous word structures to avoid saying it. But labelling
every opinion more than 2% to the left of Hitler as âPC lunacyâ
dilutes any valid criticism to the point that it just canât be
taken seriously.
FOOL! Hitler was a NAZI. Do you know what NAZI stands for? It was
the acronym of the German National Socialist Worker's Party or
Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. Hitler was a
socialist, a left winger.
Boy oh boy. Yes, the Nazis called themselves the 'National
Socialists', and they even stole a few (incredibly benign) socialist
policies. It is, however, a total misnomer, it's like the World
Series, or Democratic People's Republic of Korea. The Nazis were
fascists. Indisputably. They drew their ideology from Italy's
fascists, who arose in reaction to the Left. First, a quick resume
about Italy.
You are now in denial of the truth because of the repeated false
reinforcement of your false dogma. The Nazis were SOCIALISTS and
therefore left wing. The Fascists were right wing so were not socialists
by definition. The difference between left and right wins the left wing
believes that the workers should control the means of production and
distribution of wealth, hence Hitler's desire to rid Germany of the Jews
who he claimed actually controlled it, and give it to the workers. The
right wing believes that the means of production and distribution of
wealth should belong to the wealthy few hence the Fascist desire to
subjugate the workers.
The Italian Right, mired in 19th century thought, could not tackle
the explosion in left-wing organization. Mussolini gives us the first
fascist platform - national/racial superiority, rearmament &
expansion, and consolidation of capital. The Italian Fascists
appropriated, wholesale, Roman imagery, such as the 'fasces', to
evoke renewed national pride & a sense of superiority. The Italian
Fascists sought to expand & reclaim historically Italian lands -
mirroring a large portion of the old Roman Empire. After subverting
some socialist economic policies on public works & spending, the
fascist government formed corporate cartels, enriching the few.
All of which explains what I said above and disproves the dogma which
you falsely believe in. You are a victim of selective feedback.
Hitler & his Deutcher Arbeiter Partei co-conspirators saw this and
decided that they need to steal the support of the real socialists so
the DAP rebadged themselves as the NSDAP. Socialism still being a
relatively new ideology. It was about as meaningful as adding 'i-' to
a product name.
Hitler had already written Mein Kampf based on analysis of the Protocols
of the Elders of Zion, which explained how the Jews planned to take
control of finance, and through that government, and though that all
industry; and it had nothing to do with the beliefs of fascism. It was
in fact the complete opposite; of how to dismantle the product of that
ideology. Taking wealth from the corrupt government formed corporate
cartels, which were enriching the Jews who thus controlled the
government, and giving it to the workers.
In actuality they were purely fascist - 1. Saw themselves as
racially/nationally superior, 2. Wanted rearmament & expansion, 3.
Consolidated capital.
Fascism had nothing to do with racial or national superiority and it's
goal was not expansionism but unifying the people to cope effectively
with economic difficulties and disorder. It grew as a response to the
Great Depression, just like Nazism did, but both were the complete
opposite ideology.
Fascists believe that liberal democracy is obsolete and they regard the
complete mobilization of society under a totalitarian one-party state as
necessary to prepare a nation for armed conflict and to respond
effectively to economic difficulties. Such a state is led by a strong
leaderâsuch as a dictator and a martial government composed of the
members of the governing fascist partyâto forge national unity and
maintain a stable and orderly society.
Fascism rejects assertions that violence is automatically negative in
nature and views political violence, war and imperialism as means that
can achieve national rejuvenation. Fascists advocate a mixed economy,
with the principal goal of achieving autarky through protectionist and
interventionist economic policies.
On 1. Do I really need to go into their views on race & their
feelings towards the Jews?
On 2. Do I really need to go into their designs on a 'Greater German
Reich'?
You don't have the remotest clue of what you are talking about.
On 3. The Germans used socialist economic policies, before retreating
to a corporate cartel base. Companies like Krupp made millions.
Hardly socialist.
More spouted out nonsense which you do not even understand.
Krupp was a revolutionary company that paved the way for workers rights.
Alfred Krupp pioneered a system in which if the worker pledged loyalty
to the company, he would be offered an unprecedented amount of benefits
and social programs including on site technical and manual training,
accidental, sickness, and life insurance, housing (sometimes free),
recreational facilities, parks, schools, bath houses, and department
stores. Widows and orphans were guaranteed pay if their husbands and/or
fathers were killed.
Therefore for Hitler Krupp represented a company governed by socialist
principles.
The ACTUAL socialists who emerged after Marx wanted three things -
1. Removal of classes. 2. World socialism. 3. Distribution of
capital. 1. There was a huge gap between rich & poor in Tsarist
Russia. The Bolsheviks sought to eliminate this division (by violent
revolt). 2. After they succeeded, the Bolsheviks wanted to take the
Revolution worldwide. Heard of 'Comintern'? No race, no nations, only
socialism. 3. As for redistribution of capital, do I really need to
explain the difference between collectivisation & cartels?
So, you see, there's a very slight difference between Nazi fascism
and any actual socialism, in that they're COMPLETE OPPOSITES.
So after having posted a proof which shows that you are wrong you
falsely clam that it proves you right. You are once again proving that
the theory I originally posted is true.
1, 2, and 3 were also what Hitler desired. 1. Removal of classes, by
removal of the Jews who make up the ruling class. Hitler wanted the most
able to rule instead. 2. World National Socialism. That is self evident
by his invasion of most of Europe. 3. Distribution of Capital. Again the
Jews and foreigners who had caused Germany to suffer by being rich had
their businesses and assets sized and nationalized.
So, if you're peddling this 'munuhmunuh NAZIS ARE SOCIALISTS'
bullshit you're either massively dense or an evil Nazi apologist.
Choose.
You don't have the remotest clue of what you are talking about.
The NAZIS called themselves SOCIALISTS so they were socialists! The
Russians called themselves Communists and were fundamentally different.
Let's see shall we.
By the late 19th century, after the work of Karl Marx and his
collaborator Friedrich Engels (both of whom were GERMANS!), socialism
had come to signify opposition to capitalism and advocacy for a
post-capitalist system based on some form of social ownership of the
means of production.
By the 1920s, social democracy and communism had become the two dominant
political tendencies within the international socialist movement. By
this time, socialism emerged as "the most influential secular movement
of the twentieth century, worldwide. It is a political ideology (or
world view), a wide and divided political movement" and while the
emergence of the Soviet Union as the world's first nominally socialist
state led to socialism's widespread association with the Soviet economic
model, many economists and intellectuals argued that in practice the
model functioned as a form of state capitalism or a non-planned
administrative or command economy.
Post by The True DoctorAnd you are right Political Correctness is as extreme as Adolf
Hitler and every other dictator. It represents oppression of the
majority, and suppression of the freedoms of speech and
expression. Replace the poor workers downtrodden by the Jews, so
the Jews must be annihilated, with any other downtrodden group
wanting revenge on another and you have Political Correctness.
Political correctness, properly applied, is a tool for social good.
Do you even know what the term MEANS? Its real meaning, not the
alt-right perversion of it that youâve fallen in love with.
Political correctness is a popularist tool for advancing the interests
self centered chauvinistic minorities who want to overthrough and
replace them majority.
Plato had this figured out 2400 years ago and know full well that this
is what always happens with popularism as he explains in his Republic.
Give any minority power and they become self serving chauvinistic
tyrants who declare that because they have power and people listen to
them and their reinforce their false beliefs and ideology, then by that,
what they say is always that which is Right!
âPolitical Correctnessâ is used to describe language, policies, or
measures that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to
members of particular groups in society. Since the late 1980s, the
But the language, policies, and measures also cause offense and
disadvantage to members of the majority. Therefore the system is
philosophically and fundamentally flawed as was illustrated by Plato. By
attacking or suppressing the majority it lays waste to the body as a
whole; since a person from an ethnic minority or a woman might be
employed only because they were black or female, rather than being the
best person for the job out of all the candidates. That is not the way
to advance civilization. Advancement can only be achieved by nurturing
the best. The best as making pots are nurtured to become potters. Those
best at sewing are nurtured to become dress makers. Those best at
warfare are nurtured and trained to become soldiers and defend the city.
And the philosophers, the best at learning are nurtured to become
rulers. Occasional members from one cast can be promoted to another if
they show aptitude, or demoted if they do not. There is no using silly
language like vertically challenged to describe dwarfs. Deformed or
defective offspring are euthanized at birth so they do not become a burden.
term has come to refer to avoiding language or behavior that can be
seen as excluding, marginalizing, or insulting groups of people
considered disadvantaged or discriminated against, especially groups
defined by sex or race.
Think about that. Whatâs wrong with it? Nothing. Political
Correctness would mean that I attempted to avoid insulting sad little
losers, too. Which is why when I humiliate you, like now, by
comprehensively demonstrating that youâre an idiot, and saying so,
you can be sure Iâm not being PC.
You are totally deranged. You are only humiliating yourself and showing
yourself to be an idiot. The intelligent do not need to avoid using
language or behavior that can be seen as excluding, marginalizing, or
insulting groups of people. The do not need to avoid wearing crosses
because there are Muslims or Jews or Atheists on plane. It is up to the
intelligent Muslims, Jews and Atheists to show tolerance. As Plato said
it is better to be a victim of injustice than to perpetrate and
injustice. So live with it.
Post by The True DoctorPost by The Last DoctorAnd Iâm not A PC loony - otherwise Iâd have to be delicate about
Yads and refer to him as intellectually challenged, and only
describe Aggy as a person of restricted rationality.
You are a raving PC lunatic supporting bigot. Political Correctness
is Left Wing Bigotry.
No, it isnât.
Yes it is as it is manifested by you, Moffat, Chibnall and Whittaker.
Political correctness is a form of institutionalized intolerance.
Not holding bigoted, entrenched ultra right views
isnât Political Correctness OR left wing bigotry. Itâs just not being
a right wing whiny loser. Iâm sorry, I wonât start calling you a
person of restricted rationality just because you feel hurt when I
accurately label you as a raving lunatic. Youâre a raving lunatic. Go
ahead ... respond and prove me right.
You are a deranged ignorant intolerant fool who doesn't realize you know
nothing.