Centrism

[email protected]

Or how about you make laws that limit the influence any one person can have and remove money from politics so anyone can run and you don't have bribes called lobbying?

Oh not your power fantasy? Sorry. I guess countries where democracy works and socialism is blended with capitalism so people are happy all need to have bloody genocides happen to them as well. I can see how it is a very reasonable and non extreme take from a very educated person.

Mubelotix

Wtf? We know where morality comes from. It's about acting with others as you want them to act with you. Because as social animals, if we didn't have morals, our kind would just die. I like Kant's way to define something as moral or not: Ask yourself "What if everyone did this?" and if the result is bad, you will easily understand why it's in everyone's interest to collectively prevent it instead of trying to individually cheat

[email protected]

It’s a well documented fact that authoritarians utilize leftist terminology as the keystone of their propaganda/branding strategy. The masses, sadly, will always accept charismatic, strongly-worded branding over genuine ideals. There is nothing “no true scottsman” about it.

[email protected]

First day provided tons of evidence from the lord god being disrespected and completely shat on by trump to literal nazi salutes.
That have endless meme potential and can be spread around for completely free and low effort in order to swing public opinion.
I am sure returning to some obscure tibetian basket weaving forum with userbase of five and talking about genociding everyone not like you while the right media machine is working overtime is going to get the public to change their mind.

[email protected]

By that logic, anti-monarchism is also fascist. After all, they tried to create a "better society" by eating all the kings, killing the landed gentry, and destroying feudalism. Must be fascist, right?

[email protected]

I asked AI the following question. I thought it's response was worth sharing:

"What evidence is there for the merits of horseshoe theory?"

Let me analyze this carefully. The horseshoe theory suggests that the far-left and far-right of the political spectrum are more similar to each other than to the political center.

The main arguments made in favor of horseshoe theory include:

Both far-left and far-right movements have historically shown tendencies toward authoritarianism, with examples like Stalin's USSR and Hitler's Germany using similar tactics of state control, propaganda, and suppression of dissent.
Some similar rhetorical and organizational patterns appear in both far-left and far-right movements, such as: populist appeals, scapegoating of particular groups, calls for radical system change, and rejection of liberal democratic norms.
There are historical cases of individuals and groups moving between far-left and far-right positions, suggesting some underlying commonalities.

However, there are significant critiques of horseshoe theory:

It oversimplifies complex political ideologies and movements, forcing them into a rigid geometric metaphor that may not reflect reality.
Surface-level similarities in tactics or rhetoric don't necessarily indicate deeper ideological similarities. The fundamental goals and values often remain drastically different.
The theory can be used to dismiss radical critiques of existing systems by equating all forms of political extremism, regardless of their specific content.
Political scientists generally view it as an oversimplified model that doesn't adequately capture the multidimensional nature of political ideology.

Rather than a strict horseshoe pattern, many political scientists prefer more nuanced models that consider multiple axes of political belief and recognize that authoritarian tendencies can emerge across the political spectrum without necessarily indicating ideological similarity.

What are your thoughts on how political ideologies should be mapped or compared?

[email protected]

Naturally a planned economy under-performs an evolutionary economy.

The first time. What about the planned economy that learns from the previous one's mistakes? Or the one after that?

[email protected]

Or how about you make laws that limit the influence any one person can have and remove money from politics so anyone can run and you don’t have bribes called lobbying?

Do you see a path forward to this that doesn't somehow involve doing away with the current system that allows influence and money in politics? Don't you think the people who benefit from this arrangement will do everything in their power to keep us from reforming it?

qaz

What are your thoughts on how political ideologies should be mapped or compared?

I feel like one scale (left/right) to represent all of politics is such a generalization that most models based on it are pointless

[email protected]

A lot of countries went from monarchies to democracies peacefully and are better for it.
If you want to kill people you dont agree with you are faschist.
The government is literally baby feeding you workable memes you can use to ring over the population to the side of societal reforms.
If you lot were more public about wanting to kill people, why wouldnt the general population vote for trump the third time in order to keep you violent maniacs in check?

How about you spread information about everything the current administration does wrong to sway the public opinion. There is ton of material already and its been day 1. You jerking off to mass murder is working against your goals of a better society.

[email protected]

If entirety of the public sees how fucking stupid they are and if you keep reminding them constantly you will get your reforms especially since almost all of the rest of the democractic world has it figured out.

DerGottesknecht

Your fathers degree doesn't matter if he didn't researched this topic, world history is pretty big abd you can't be an expert in everything.

Plus that article has been posted to several history forums over the last ~10+ish years as best I can tell and not once has it included sources or been taken seriously by any of the historians that read it.

Proof or it didn't happen. 4chan doesn't count as historical forum.

One of the major contributors was his insistence on building the highway/Autobahn.

This was your Sentence. And it is proven false.

I never said they didn't build lots of autobahn, but it was neither their idea nor did it cause the german the economic economy to rebound. That were mainly jobs in weaüon manufacturing.

You've then linked a German website and a German Wikipedia page. I am not fluent in German so I can't read them, but they are both German hosted so I suspect some modern German biases probably apply. It would behoove any and all Germans to forever distance themselves from Hitler whenever possible but I also see that extending past reality with people trying rewrite history such as yourself.

You know you can translate websites with google or deepl to do a cursory check? Here, i did the work for you and found you an english source.
But ultimately, just fuck off for your general dismissal of german historians and their research. You have no fucking clue, but think you know better. Fucking delusional. If there are any systemic biases there should be at least one academic paper talking about that...

I don't know why you have to defend hitler this much, even in face of several linked sources with only your dad as your witness, but it's really infuriating.

[email protected]

[email protected]

Obligatory "axis spectrum better"

[email protected]

What a ridiculous position. You honestly believe that all socialists and/or communists want to kill the rich and the landlords?

Or is that just a convenient strawman you've created?

[email protected]

This is such an unnuanced representation of anti-monarchism

[email protected]

Practically all countries that abandoned monarchism did it during of after violent upheaval. Your frankly just historyless in your reasoning here.

[email protected]

To be fair, those sentiments are also espoused on ml. Just saying...

[email protected]

No, some of you are reasonable and non violent.
Communists are just fucking idiots no matter which way you cut it.

Because see, you are right now excusing stalin for killing up to 20% of a countries population.
YOU
ARE
NORMALIZING
GENOCIDE
OF A MASS MURDERER

you have no idea what went down and how it wasnt an accident. it was a quota.
There is nothing to discuss. Fuck you for normalizing mass murder and making excuses. You are literally no better than a fucking nazi making excuses for hitler.

[email protected]

If you want to kill people you dont agree with you are faschist

Not even the word. A definition of fascism from wikipedia

Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/ FASH-iz-əm) is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2][3] characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy

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

The countries which didn't go so peacefully notably the US and France and the UK executing Charles I by chopping his head off were partially responsible for other abdications of power being more peaceful. Had nobody been willing to fight we might still all be saying "your majesty"