The results:
left - 88 (44%)
right - 60 (30%)
both - 33 (16%)
neither - 17 (8%)
I had not expected so many people to answer the poll, and I thank everybody who did.
The results show that quite a large percentage of my readers believe that Nazism is an expression of the Left Wing.
My opinion? I have been reading a bit more into it in the past couple of weeks and I admit that Nazism has left-wing ideology in it, but it is in essence a right-wing extremist nationalist party. Some of you say that any nationalism is left-wing, and that I find very hard to accept.
I agree, there are many differences between "mainstream" right and the "extreme" right. But that can be seen in the Left wing as well. For those who insist, I think maybe there should be a new political spectrum, with 'totalitarian' on one side, and the 'anti-totalitarian' on the other.
More importantly for me, and the reason for this entire debate: is the danger of neo-Nazism coming from the Right or Left? Let's take a party which has been in the middle of the debate recently: the Swedish Democrats (Sverigedemokraterna). Looking at their site I find a party which places itself as a non-racist nationalist movement. They therefore make sure both on their site and on their newsletter site to stress that they're anti-racist, anti-totalitarian, anti-Nazi (see icon). They had kicked out members who had voiced overly racist ideas. These former members went on to create the National Democrats: a virulent racist party. In other words, the move was from "right-wing nationalist" to "overboard racist".
Does the Right have a monopoly on Racism? Definitely not. However, the Left usually expresses it in a much more sly manner.
Can Europe have nationalist parties which are not racist? Yes, but it is not that simple, if only because Europe, unlike the US, is composed of ethnic nation-states. Many people have brought me an analysis of the past, but I prefer looking at the present and the future. Nationalist parties which take a firm stand against racism should be encouraged and supported. There is a line that can be crossed, and for me it's not always clear where that line is. The right should not be afraid of debate on this issue, to define for itself what is acceptable and what isn't.
Now, the big question - is the Right more dangerous than the Left? I have reconsidered my opinion in the past few weeks. My assumption that the Left is not as dangerous as the Right is based on the assumption that people have a brain and will not stand by forever while their national culture is trampled in the name of "multiculturalism". I still think so. However, I did not take into account the extreme left, the anarchists and related violence. So, I'll leave it for now as an open question. I do think, though, that the minorities will suffer, in any case.
Are both more dangerous than Islam? I think so, but I'm sure this will be an issue for debate far into the future.
10 comments:
you said: "Are both more dangerous than Islam? I think so...."
Wow.
You cannot be serious. Honour killings, stonings, clitorecomy, beheadings, amputations, dhimmitude? A British schoolteacher faces forty lashes and six months in jail for having a Teddy Bear named Mohammed? WHAT!!!?!!
How disconcerting it is that someone could even consider such a return to Dark Age mentality and theocratic absolutism - especially a female!
Stunning. Absolutely stunning. Europe is in worse shape than I thought.
Hi Chalons,
This comment was written in a specific context.. and I had wrongly assumed it was obvious:
Is the extreme left and right wing more dangerous than Islam IN EUROPE FOR EUROPEANS?
I think so. But as I said, I'm sure it will be an issue for debate.
ans" ?
Like Theo Van Gogh? Or young women unfortunate enough to be caught alone amonst thoise who think they have the right?
Yes, it will be worse for Europeans in Europe. When the demographic tipping point is reached and sharia law will be condoned. You already have calls of sharia law. You already have rape defenses based upon Islamic misogyny. You already have calls for 'autonomous zones'.
You already have de-facto 'no-go zones'. What on earth leads you to believe that Islam and its theocratic ideology will be content with peaceful coexistence and that non-muslin Europeans will be left alone? Taqiya pledges? Perhaps study of history might serve you better. Lebanon might be a good start point of what you are inviting.
Ultimately all far-left, far-right, and islamic ideologies are all unacceptable and incompatible humans rights and human dignity. They are three different forms of police states. I'm not sure I see much value in making such comparisons. Far left, far right, and Islam all represent a regression from where we are today. Until people start standing up and defending what we have today, the vacuum will be filled by something undesirable.
I hate to be so negative but that's where all the evidence comes down. The only thing coming down on the positive side of the debate are empty words and denial.
Hi Chalons,
"Until people start standing up and defending what we have today, the vacuum will be filled by something undesirable."
I definitely agree. I think Westerners today don't appreciate what they have.
My opinions regarding Islam in Europe are based on what I see and read. Yes, there are Muslims who want to enforce Sharia law. But in almost every case - this is Sharia law for Muslims (inheritance and marriage/divorce laws), not for Europeans.
I don't see Islam taking over Europe anytime soon. Not because there aren't attempts to do so, but because I think there's a limit where you can push people and I think that people are fighting against it. In various polls Europeans show that their fear of Islam is increasing, their willingness to accommodate immigrant cultures and especially Islam is decreasing. Europeans don't want to give up their freedoms in the name of Islam. European leaders.. that's a different story.
Notice though that many "Muslim demands" do not come from Muslims but rather from trade unions, politicians etc. (ie, the Left).
Muslims and immigrants didn't invent no-go areas, murder and rapes in Europe, and despite everything Iceland has a higher rape rate than Norway.
As you say, there might not be any point to comparisons between different totalitarian possibilities and I really don't think that any of them has any other goal than to take over. I just gave my opinion as to their chances of success.
I think, that communism and national socialists are just a sides from the same coin. Not that they were both invented in Germany, but soviet-commies were nationalists too and there is also nationalism in other communist countries. Both were trying to design perfect human, both harassed and killed their minorities, and the list goes on. Italian Facism is closer to right-wing in my opinion.
Dag Esther: allow me to change subject. The problem I have is, your undefined and arbitrary labels make this discussion really difficult. Is "right-wing" the same as nationalist for you? if so, why don't you just talk about nationalism and forget about the "right", so that everybody knows what you are talking about?
So, let's talk about nationalism: why are you obsessed with it? It is not nationalists who have proposed and practiced genocide in modern Europe: it is socialists, starting with Engels and including the Webbs and GB Shaw, all the way to Milosevic and beyond (and of course Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, and Hitler).
It is not nationalists who have proposed and practiced eugenics: it is socialists, including in Sweden, Britain (the Webbs and Shaw again), and the USA (there known as "progressives").
Finally, modern antisemites are not nationalists: they are socialists,
starting with Karl Marx; in his time, not all European antisemites were socialists, but today they are (almost all, anyway).
Sure, the real nazis were/are nationalists as well as socialists.
But the vast majority of nationalists -- even the vast majority of extreme nationalists, even Mussolini and Franco -- does not commit genocide, does not start eugenics programs, and is not antisemitic. Your labels seem specifically designed to hide and distort this reality.
PS: are you also worried about the Scottish, Welsh, Breton, and Catalan nationalists? and if not, why not?
Great post and big question that should enter everyone's mind.
I believe living under Sharia Law would be much, much worse than living under Communism. Just think about it. Living under the old Soviet System would be much worse than living in a Taliban society. Sharia Law is one form of the Far Right.
The Islamic Theocratic Far Right. This kind of far right is not even conducive to any form of real free market capitalism.
Hitler was a creature of the Left.
Under Hitler, Germany was a Centrally Planned economy just like the USSR and Communist China. The only difference was that Hitler let the owners remain as nominal owners and manager/stewards only, as opposed to killing or imprisoning them. But they didn't take their orders from the market they took them from an Economy Czar type bureaucrat.
Right after the Holocaust exposed Hitler and Nazism's evil so well, the Left and the Communists quickly scrambled to blame it on "The Far Right". If people realized that communism could lead to that it would serve to quickly kill off communism.
So basically, that's possibly the biggest scam the Far Left has pulled over everybody's eyes. That the greater dangers come from the right. At this point we could never go anywhere near a non-Islamic Far Right that would be more dangerous or inequitable and exploitive than Communism.
No one wants a Landowner Slave state. Not even rich people, they can make more money and have more opportunity, and more friends at lower economic levels in a Free Market economy if more and more of the citizenry can afford to contribute to the economy and buy things.
Also, in order for the Rich to have real and enforcible Laws of Rights to Property, everyone must officially have those rights and legal protection.
Ludwig Von Mises wrote about why Hitler was from the Left. Check it out.
Omyrus from Democracy Reform has a great post on this:
"The worst mass murderers from the twentieth century and possibly for all time were Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Hitler - all left wing dictators.
Did I say Hitler? I think that most people would not object to my calling Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot left wing dictators. But Hitler? Many people think of him as a right wing dictator but that is not correct. Why is Hitler a creature of the left?
To begin with, the Nazi party stands for the German Workers' National Socialist Party. Hitler claimed in a speech on May 1, 1927:
"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 all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."
The Nazi Party campaigned on a recognisably leftist platform. Here is an excerpt from the 1920 Nazi party manifesto:
"10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. The activities of the individual may not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good.
Therefore we demand:
11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.
12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in life and property, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as a crime against the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits whether in assets or material.
13. We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels.
14. We demand that all the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.
15. We demand extensive development of provision for old age.
16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle-class, the immediate communalization of department stores which will be rented cheaply to small businessmen, and that preference shall be given to small businessmen for provision of supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.
17. We demand a land reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to confiscate from the owners without compensation any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land."
Read the rest here and then SPREAD THE WORD:
Why are the worst mass murderers from the left?
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
go ahead and blame the Jews
IslamoFascists and YOU
believe the same crazy shit
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
blame a small population
deflect your people's anger
let them feel superior
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
never join forces
with whom your past disagrees
just jeopardize your future
http://citizenwarrior2.blogspot.com
.
Oops, correction:
Living under the old Soviet System would be much worse than living in a Taliban society? No way! A Taliban planet Earth would be a MUCH, MUCH worse, and much more miserable place.
imagine
Taliban Earth
- nightmare's paradise
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
let extremists rule
they will drag your country
back to seventh century
absurd thought -
God of the Universe wants
all citizens beheaded
for most petty offences
let society collapse
absurd thought -
God of the Universe thinks
take all girls out of school
they can not be allowed
to achieve more than a man
absurd thought -
God of the Universe wants
extremists to have NUKES
they are looking for fast track
to seventy-two virgins
.
you're all crazy!
try looking up the politicalcompass.org and learn something about politics before you talk about it!
els
Post a Comment