Politics & Stuff

[Fulham Broadway 17,306]

1 hour ago, Spike said:

Would it really matter though? Why would someone go to the trouble of defending sub-Saharans when the country is nearly 100% white?

Perhaps because they see them as human beings ? Maybe they don't like people being discriminated against just because of their race or colour of skin.

[Fulham Broadway 17,306]

24 minutes ago, Spike said:

Just curious because most people don't use fascism in the traditional sense anymore. Nothing cracks me up more when people call Hitler a fascist. 

The BNP were a fascist organisation, as were the NF

[Spike 12,049]

55 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Perhaps because they see them as human beings ? Maybe they don't like people being discriminated against just because of their race or colour of skin.

That isn't the point. Manpe said' public racists would get their fair treatment in no time by other fans. Would you start a fight or a ruckus without someone that was being racist despite their being no-one around that is the intended target? No one has been discriminated, they aren't defending anyone, it would simply be an exercise in censorship. And from Manpe has said again it'd be better handled by the authorities as it seems the Estonian authorities have a handle on the situation.

 If I lived in a homogeneous society and a group of young men were spouting racist views down the street, I wouldn't make it my business to lecture them or attack them. I do not have the moral authority to change their minds, I can engage them in open discourse if they are willing but I cannot force a change of ideals. Just because I disagree with them doesn't mean I should intervene; the only time I would intervene if it was in a scenario that endangered another person. Of course ultimately you'd want to cultivate a culture where those sort of people are on the fringes of society but I as an individual have no right to do so. If I stab the air with the knife, I haven't hurt anyone, should I do it? No, I shouldn't.

[Spike 12,049]

There is the difference between FB and Manpe. The latter says 'interesting point'  and give his reasoning the former lectures with platitudes.

[Spike 12,049]

1 hour ago, cosmicway said:

Hitler was one.
Apart from his other antics he believed in the "corporate state", the streamlined economy. This is a system in which the state dictates what economic activities are favoured or not favoured. That's not quite the same as making some types of business illegal but some stiff government control is at play. Thus if you are a chemist it's not illegal of course but you can't open a chemist's shop, because the state (the party) gives a limited number of licenses to whomever they like. This system resembles up to a certain point the Stalinist system but it's not quite the same of course, as Stalin says everything belongs to the state and there is no activity other than strictly state activity.

That is a contentious statement because there has never been an agreement on what a fascist economy entails. Many scholars are in disagreement if the principals of fascism even address economic issues. The only thing we know for certain is the social aspects of fascism. 

[cosmicway 1,333]

2 minutes ago, Spike said:

That is a contentious statement because there has never been an agreement on what a fascist economy entails. Many scholars are in disagreement if the principals of fascism even address economic issues. The only thing we know for certain is the social aspects of fascism. 

That was basically Goerig's economic policy.
It's true however that 20th century fascists did not have the means to control economies by 100% - given that they were not keen on state ownership.
In the 21st century and in the 22nd century it will be different (assuming that in the 22nd century further fascistization will be needed).

[Spike 12,049]

Just now, cosmicway said:

That was basically Goerig's economic policy.
It's true however that 20th century fascists did not have the means to control economies by 100% - given that they were not keen on state ownership.
In the 21st century and in the 22nd century it will be different (assuming that in the 22nd century further fascistization will be needed).

But how many truly fascist states have existed? I count one with  threeothers being controversial. Italy being the obvious choice, Spain, Austria, and Portugal. The latter two being clerical fascism.

[Fulham Broadway 17,306]

21 minutes ago, Spike said:

There is the difference between FB and Manpe. The latter says 'interesting point'  and give his reasoning the former lectures with platitudes.

I am so sorry if you were offended. It was not meant as a 'platitude'.

 

[Fulham Broadway 17,306]

37 minutes ago, Spike said:

That isn't the point. Manpe said' public racists would get their fair treatment in no time by other fans.

That is the point. I agree with Manpe, he is saying fans would get their comeuppance if they were racist. Don't you think that would be a good thing ?

All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing

[cosmicway 1,333]

15 minutes ago, Spike said:

But how many truly fascist states have existed? I count one with  threeothers being controversial. Italy being the obvious choice, Spain, Austria, and Portugal. The latter two being clerical fascism.

In the year 1970 democracies were the Commonwealth-USA-EU-Japan-Israel. All the others were fascist.
The world's newest fascist state is UK.
The economic fascists are Greece.

[Spike 12,049]

33 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

I am so sorry if you were offended. It was not meant as a 'platitude'.

 

I wasn't offended and don't apologise. I hate disingenuous remarks. You didn't mean to offend me nor did I take offence so there is nothing to apologise for.

[Spike 12,049]

2 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

In the year 1970 democracies were the Commonwealth-USA-EU-Japan-Israel. All the others were fascist.
The world's newest fascist state is UK.
The economic fascists are Greece.

How is the UK fascist when parties are democratically elected?

[cosmicway 1,333]

1 minute ago, Spike said:

How is the UK fascist when parties are democratically elected?

Yeah but Theresa is giving it a hell of a good try.

[Spike 12,049]

14 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

That is the point. I agree with Manpe, he is saying fans would get their comeuppance if they were racist. Don't you think that would be a good thing ?

All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing

To a degree but that is on the basis that there is an objective moral law. This is the same train of thought used by globalists and interventionism. Where does the right to grant justice come from especially in an instance where there has been no action against any parties? Where does the right to reprimand someone or a group come from when the group hasn't actually done anything? From your perspective you are the good that is enforcing morality, from their perspective you are the evil enforcing it's own morality.

I'm more interested in the culture Estonia. Anti-racism isn't an inherent part of 'good'. I'd wager there are more racist cultures in the world than not and I don't readily label all those people as strictly 'evil'. I was merely curious if Estonia was a nation that wasn't fussed by racism. 

[Spike 12,049]

3 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

Yeah but Theresa is giving it a hell of a good try.

Back to the previous post. Are you conflating fascist states with dictatorships? Surely the rigid class nature of fascism is at odds with the 'classless' society perpetuated by the eastern-bloc?