Rousseau > Robespierre > Marx > Lenin > Stalin > FDR > Progressive Dems

It’s true that Hitler was a socialist (he was the cruelest and most brutal “social organizer” of the 20th century) but he was not favorable in most of the (non-antisemitic) socialist circles in the early/mid 1900s.

The intoxicating part of socialism… is that someone else pays and it’s not “me”. To get to power socialists point to the few corrupt and sow seeds of discontent.

Correct. In William Graham Sumner’s famous essay “The Forgotten Man” the social philosopher explains:

It is when we come to the proposed measures of relief for the evils which have caught public attention that we reach the real subject which deserves our attention. As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X or, in the better case, what A, B and C shall do for X. As for A and B, who get a law to make themselves do for X what they are willing to do for him, we have nothing to say except that they might better have done it without any law, but what I want to do is to look up C. I want to show you what manner of man he is. I call him the Forgotten Man. Perhaps the appellation is not strictly correct. He is the man who never is thought of. He is the victim of the reformer, social speculator and philanthropist, and I hope to show you before I get through that he deserves your notice both for his character and for the many burdens which are laid upon him.

The forgotten man (and woman) are the hard working, middle class, freedom loving, good-hearted folks who contribute to the economy by employing people in small businesses and by consuming goods/buying products and services. These are the people who will be hurt the most when elites (A and B) like Obama and even McCain talk about “plans” for “government to fix the economy.” To be frank, FDR introduced socialistic policies to mainstream US politics and we are still hurting (e.g. Social Security). The American people have not yet realized the fact that an organism as complex as the economy can not be “planned.” Any attempt to plan an economy or intervene will inevitably put the burden on the Forgotten Men and Women out here just trying to live their lives. There will always be poverty, just as there will always be extremely wealthy people, and the wealthy will not always have worked hard to earn their money. That does not give anyone the right to impose a “windfall profits tax,” which basically penalizes people for being successful.

No matter how much Obama may claim to be looking out for “the middle class,” there is no way for him pull off all of his extensive plans if not at the expensive of Forgotten Men and Women (that is, middle class men and women). I can assure you, if the wealthy fear persecution they have motive and, of course, the means to avoid such a situation either by retiring (which could cost American workers their jobs), relocating (which would cost American workers their jobs) or drastically scaling back, and down-sizing. At any rate, the tax increases on successful organizations, that Obama proposes, will only result in a less productive, less efficient America, and this will hurt everybody.

You make a reasonable but minor observation that both Repub. and Dem. feed at the trough. That is why we need term limits, referendum & recall, voter initiatives, spending limits.

But you ignore the major point: when more than half vote but don’t pay taxes, nothing stands in the way of confiscatory taxes.

An even funnier thing is the amount of local government employees in my area that are registered republicans. I have had many of them as clients, and they continuously bitch to high heaven about the democratic state senate and the byzantine government regs, yet they stand as eager as hogs at the trough clamoring to get their taxpayer supported paychecks, bennies, retirement, etc. I find the irony delicious – “we want small gov’t, but don’t you screw with my pension, bennies, etc.” Some of them are the biggest socialists I have ever met in my life.

By the same token, those who oppose the relentless march down the socialist road which appears to be a natural progression of the evolving nation-state, fail to grasp the grand opportunities that await those who sieze the socialist reigns of influence. Euro socialism makes millionaires of those “at the top” of the government structures and near millionaires of party operatives and key bureaucrats who administer the socialist state. Anti-socialists ignore this trend at their peril and at the peril of their own children’s future. It is possible to rise to the top of the socialist structure and to profit handsomely from the effort.

You ask an interesting question – what proportion of the electorate are either government employees, or accept government handouts. As an approximation, I’d weight all govt employees at 100%, and other receipients (including OASDHI beneficiaries) at 50% equivalent. Perhaps a quarter of electorate.

But that number is far smaller than the really disturbing statistic: nearly half of the electorate pay no taxes. Once that tips to majority, there is no more restraint or feedback in the system.

I could write 1000 pages about why dogs and cats are the same species of animals, and have my only evidence be channeling sessions that I did with the ghost of George Carlin, who assured me that my contentions were true.

Then, anytime you disagreed and had evidence to the contrary, I could just keep parroting “But you didn’t read the book!” – and I could just repeat that over and over. But the truth is, cats aren’t dogs, and reading the book cover to cover would be a monumental waster of time becasue my methodology was absurd, and could never result in a resaonable conclusion. Do you understand why that would be?

1. I read enough to see that Jonah’s methodology is flawed. It’s just confirmation bias + false analogy
2. From flawed methodology cannot come good conclusions
3. The proof is in the pudding: we’re not living in a totalitarian state – even though you said that Jonah says a lot of the Republicans are fascists as well. AGain – where are the fruits of all this fascism? We’re having this conversation, yet we’re not in jail for it. There are no camps that people are being wisdked off to. How come fascism bore those fruits in the past, but don’t in this instance (HINT: because it’s not fascism)

Sounds more like someone who’s live a nice life in the greatest country in the world is pampered, histroically speaking, and doesn’t really know what tough historical times are like living under fascist rule – are. Sounds like someone who thinks that if someone disagrees with them, that person is a “fascist”. The good news is, you’re not alone! People on the left and right have been throwing that word around without a care for years. There’s more good news: fascism isn’t coming anytime soon, so you’ll be prefectly free to spout out this nonsense without shame and without regard for history. I’m sure you will.

Had you read the book, Goldberg points out that he’s not comparing the evil deeds of Stalin, Hitler, et all to modern Democrats, only that the totalitarian fascist form of Government that all of the above support is the same.

But since you haven’t read the book, and apparently won’t read it, you did not know about that.

You are completely wrong about the fundamental argument of a book (that you haven’t read) and yet, amazingly, you still feel qualified to argue it’s point.

*boggle*