tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post113502411614889808..comments2024-03-29T10:51:27.752+13:00Comments on Not PC: Cue Card Libertarianism - FascismPeter Cresswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1135159326441433902005-12-21T23:02:00.000+13:002005-12-21T23:02:00.000+13:00It seems to me that theroatically at least facisim...<I><BR/>It seems to me that theroatically at least facisims allows the accumlation of wealth by indivduals where as communism does not.</I><BR/><BR/>RG-> Yeah<BR/>RG-> "de facto"<BR/><BR/>Let me just expand on that.<BR/><BR/>Yes, facisims allows the accumlation of wealth by indivduals where as communism does not. But, as already pointed out above, it is "de facto" accumulation of wealth by individuals. But this is in name only because it is, de jure, merely state accumulation of wealth by an insidious guise.<BR/><BR/>Essentially Tristan, or whoever you are, your point has already been addressed above as meditation on the words "de facto" should reveil to you.<BR/><BR/>Sorry if that was bluntly obvious the first time I was <B>repeating what PC already said</B> (and has now recanted as idiocy)....but that's what idiots do don't ya know? Repeat themselves.<BR/><I><BR/><B>Rick</B>, there really is a village somewhere being deprived of an idiot. Hasn't your absence been noted yet?</I><BR/><BR/>Auckland seems to be getting by on a substitute for now. But I'll be back in Newmarket in a bit. Why you rushing me?Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06315796390662297759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1135124886691226502005-12-21T13:28:00.000+13:002005-12-21T13:28:00.000+13:00You'd have to agree, Sam, that some of the best pl...<EM>You'd have to agree, Sam, that some of the best places in the world to live now are those where the British came, and saw, and then buggered off, leaving behind a framework of law and at least a passing interest in the protection of rights. And making the world safe for trade wasn't such a bad achievement either. :-)</EM><BR/><BR/>Yes, I agree with that much.<BR/><BR/>What I meant with my question was, because the law itself is supreme over property rights and is "supreme over individuals" by restricting individual freedoms, doesn't that make pretty much every country fascist?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1135114588103540662005-12-21T10:36:00.000+13:002005-12-21T10:36:00.000+13:00Yes, you're right Justin, that is, oh hell ... th...Yes, you're right Justin, that is, oh hell ... that is, you're <I>correct</I> that right and left are as bad as each other -- they're both happy, just quietly, to support their own favourite brand of authoritarianism.<BR/><BR/>It's as disgraceful seeing Margaret Thatcher and Milton Friedman praising Pinochet as it is seeing trendy liberals praising Castro. Breaking bread with thugs and murderers is breaking bread with thugs and murderers, wherever they are nominally on the spectrum.<BR/><BR/>"Socialism and fascism (as are their “moderate” versions liberalism and conservatism) are different sides of the same collectivist coin."<BR/><BR/>All too true.<BR/><BR/><B>Sam</B>, you asked: "I note that in other posts you are in favour of Common Law, but by this definition, wouldn't the entire British Empire be fascist?"<BR/><BR/>Whatever else you can say about the British Empire, it did transport the idea and the practice of property rights and the rule of law across the globe, with the common law system being one of their best and most lasting exports.<BR/><BR/>You'd have to agree, Sam, that some of the best places in the world to live now are those where the British came, and saw, and then buggered off, leaving behind a framework of law and at least a passing interest in the protection of rights. And making the world safe for trade wasn't such a bad achievement either. :-)<BR/><BR/><B>AT</B>, you say, "It seems to me that theortically at least facsism allows the accumlation of wealth by individuals, whereas communism does not." But there's little point in accumulating wealth when you're told how and where to spend it or invest it, or at least how not to spend and invest it. ~Wealth~ really doesn't mean money in the bank, it means having lots of choices available. When choice is limited, all the wealth in the world is of little use.<BR/><BR/>And of course, those who do accumulate wealth and power under fascism are the same cockroaches who accumulate privilege and power under communism. They differ only in the colour of the uniforms they suck up to.<BR/><BR/><B>Rick</B>, there really is a village somewhere being deprived of an idiot. Hasn't your absence been noted yet?Peter Cresswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1135110500355615502005-12-21T09:28:00.000+13:002005-12-21T09:28:00.000+13:00Great post, PC. But what some on the political rig...Great post, PC. But what some on the political right don’t seem to recognize or accept is that fascism has enjoyed the support of the right-wing constituency and has almost universally been in opposition (often violent opposition) to left-wing parties. All that the political right can say is they have done a (slightly) better job of washing their hands of fascism than the political left have of socialism. They can’t go the step further and disown fascism as a left-wing ideology – it’s a collectivist ideology, but then so is conservatism and nationalism, or whatever else they’re in to. Socialism and fascism (as are their “moderate” versions liberalism and conservatism) are different sides of the same collectivist coin.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1135063947590123452005-12-20T20:32:00.000+13:002005-12-20T20:32:00.000+13:00I note that in other posts you are in favour of Co...I note that in other posts you are in favour of Common Law, but by this definition, wouldn't the entire British Empire be fascist?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1135034878853866102005-12-20T12:27:00.000+13:002005-12-20T12:27:00.000+13:00Yeah."De facto."Yeah.<BR/><BR/>"De facto."Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06315796390662297759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1135027816183213092005-12-20T10:30:00.000+13:002005-12-20T10:30:00.000+13:00While I can see that under facisim and communism. ...While I can see that under facisim and communism. the level of totalatersim is about the same.<BR/><BR/>you seem to miss the very important disscussion of distubution of wealth. It seems to me that theroatically at least facisims allows the accumlation of wealth by indivduals where as communism does not.Thttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17332348774219250967noreply@blogger.com