Just as a reminder that Democracies are NOT killers, R.J.Rummel compiles the hideous death toll reaped by Leftist governments and their handmaidens.


-128,168,000 VICTIMS: THE DEKA-MEGAMURDERERS
61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill
20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Genocide State
10,214,000 Murdered: The Depraved Nationalist Regime

-19,178,000 VICTIMS: THE LESSER MEGA-MURDERERS
5,964,000 Murdered: Japan's Savage Military
2,035,000 Murdered: The Khmer Rouge Hell State
1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey's Genocidal Purges
1,670,000 Murdered: The Vietnamese War State
1,585,000 Murdered: Poland's Ethnic Cleansing
1,503,000 Murdered: The Pakistani Cutthroat State
1,072,000 Murdered: Tito's Slaughterhouse

-4,145,000 VICTIMS: SUSPECTED MEGAMURDERERS
1,663,000 Murdered? Orwellian North Korea
1,417,000 Murdered? Barbarous Mexico
1,066,000 Murdered? Feudal Russia

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM

Most of these are not leftist

You've GOT to be kidding????

Or are you one of those sophists who want to pretend that "real leftism hasn't been tried right"?

You've GOT to be kidding????

Or are you one of those sophists who want to pretend that "real leftism hasn't been tried right"?

Most of the states you want to discuss here are fascist dictatorships (even if they had the window dressing of democratic process), which is a rightist thing.

You dont seem to realize that everything you just listed involves totaltarian rule of the right. As you pointed out your state, there has never been a leftists state, nor will there probably ever be.

explain how the nazis or the japanese war machine were 'leftist'

and look up the definition of 'sophist' before you look foolish again

Nazis were SOCIALISTS.

They are LEFTIST.

The Japs were not leftist, of course.

But, you said MOST of those weren't leftist governments and that is CLEARLY incorrect.

Im really sorry you have no understanding of the political spectrum or history.

Nazis were SOCIALISTS.

The word is used in their name, but they became fascist which is incompatable.

Both sometimes use state control of the economy

socialism the state is supposed to use the resources for the people (it doesn't work very well) and in fascism the people are used for the glory of the state, one pursues the good of the populace one pursues increasing the power of the state.

You'd be hard pressed to show that Hitler didn't change the party since he joined it, and it's a fact that the name did not.

Nazis were SOCIALISTS.

They are LEFTIST.


Um, no. It seems that your understanding of the definitions of "socialism" and "leftism" is comparible only to your understanding of the meaning of "sophist". :|

Nazis were SOCIALISTS.

They are LEFTIST.



oh thats RICH !

you have broadened the meaning of the term "leftist" to include the NAZIs who were fascist ... which pretty much renders your whole OP as one big pointless straw-man

nice try and thanks for playing

Fascism IS leftism, as well.

You cannot HAVE full leftism without a fascist state to control it.

Sorry, but Nazis are not "right" and this canard, created by leftist professors at Universities who are desirous of distancing themselves from the results of their own beliefs, should be defeated.

Still, that aside...

Even if I were to accept your premise that Nazis are "rightists" and don't belong considered as socialists, that does NOT confirm that foolish claim above that "most" on that list were not socialist. In FACT only two can really be taken off the list if you want to include only leftist governments. Mexico and Nazi Germany (if you accept that the Nazis weren't really leftists).

Even the Muslim ones are based off of leftist ideology at their base.

The claim that "most" were not socialist and left leaning is absurd.

Im sorry dude, but you have no clue what your talking about... I have no idea where you get your info on this matter, but find a new source that isnt insane and completly incorrect.

Fascism is the opposite of socialism.

It places the value of the state as paramount and that of the individual irrelevant.

Socialism while also using extensive state control is SUPPOSED to use it to the benefit of its people. In fact, the main complaint against social policies is usually that they weaken the countries overall to help individuals.

The most amusing element is that Mobile is appearintly for Anarchy, which is as far left as you can go. :|

Of course, Im sure he thinks it loops around or something and puts him back on the right, as how the political spectrum actually works means nothing to him.

Some charts make the spectrum a circle

Fascism IS leftism, as well.

You cannot HAVE full leftism without a fascist state to control it.

Sorry, but Nazis are not "right" and this canard, created by leftist professors at Universities who are desirous of distancing themselves from the results of their own beliefs, should be defeated.

Still, that aside...

Even if I were to accept your premise that Nazis are "rightists" and don't belong considered as socialists, that does NOT confirm that foolish claim above that "most" on that list were not socialist. In FACT only two can really be taken off the list if you want to include only leftist governments. Mexico and Nazi Germany (if you accept that the Nazis weren't really leftists).

Even the Muslim ones are based off of leftist ideology at their base.

The claim that "most" were not socialist and left leaning is absurd.

The only way the majority of those were 'leftist' is to redefine all forms of tyranny as leftist ... and that is the transparent underlying premise of your argument (and also is the latest form of attempted revisionism that is popular on the right-wing blowhard sites)

the only problem is ... tyranny is not the equivalent of leftism so your conclusion ... like your Orwellian blurt that "Fascism IS leftism" ... is completely bogus.

Mobile Vulgus must eat the same cereal as Contra because they seem to have the same secret decryption rings ;).

Mobile Vulgus must eat the same cereal as Contra because they seem to have the same secret decryption rings ;).

'good IS bad'

'right IS left'

'up IS down'

'war IS peace'

:rolleyes:

A strange world, right-wing-revisionism is ... its like Lewis Carroll meeting George Orwell in a house of mirrors .. ANYTHING is possible

'good IS bad'

'right IS left'

'up IS down'

'war IS peace'

:rolleyes:

A strange world, right-wing-revisionism is ... its like Lewis Carroll meeting George Orwell in a house of mirrors .. ANYTHING is possible


Yup, and these same depraved people are the ones in full support of fascism, also known as neo-conservatism.

:nonono:

From an American standpoint, the Soviets were leftists, but from their vantage point, they were hard line conservatives, sticking to their beliefs in the communist manifesto, the same way American conservatives stick to the constitution. The terminology of left and right are reversed from the opposite ends of the spectrum.

Gorbacev was a left wing liberal reformer (by necessity; not choice) from a Russian standpoint, while Breshnev was a hard line conservative. Deep down, Gorby was always a communist, and was a complete and utter failure. Everything he believed in disintegrated under his policies.

He underestimated the fact that freedom could never be contained once it was implemented, because communism was all he ever knew. He has now aligned himself with the environmental movement, which is the next logical progression for a communist with no place to go. That movement seeks to control and limit private property rights , the same as communism and socialism does.

Leftism always leads to tyranny, because it takes away private property rights, and sets the state up as God. It leads to economic decline, because there's nothing to work for beyond basic survival needs, and holds very little hope for the future. That elusive utopia which is promised is always far off in the future, and never materializes in the here and now. China is going down the same road as the Russians, and one day, the commies will be thrown out there as well.

The promises of leftism are empty, and don't work in the long term. Governments that have to murder millions of citizens, and imprison millions more as slave laborers are doomed to failure in the end. That's what leftism has delivered when implemented on a wide scale, and history proves it.

Leftism always leads to tyranny, because it takes away private property rights, and sets the state up as God.


Oh the irony!!!


It leads to economic decline, because there's nothing to work for beyond basic survival needs, and holds very little hope for the future. That elusive utopia which is promised is always far off in the future, and never materializes in the here and now. China is going down the same road as the Russians, and one day, the commies will be thrown out there as well.


Oh my..


The promises of leftism are empty, and don't work in the long term. Governments that have to murder millions of citizens, and imprison millions more as slave laborers are doomed to failure in the end. That's what leftism has delivered when implemented on a wide scale, and history proves it.


How ironic is it that so many slaves around the world are working to build the junk American corporations sell to you at Wal-Mart. How ironic is it that the right supports war with any nation who doesn't give us their natural resources and enslave their people.

If corporatism worked, it wouldn't leave a path of death and destruction in it's wake.

[QUOTE=Corporate Avenger]Oh the irony!!!





Oh my..




That's funny, the two biggest wars in history, and the Viet Nam war were fought under Democratic administrations. It was a Republican administration who got us out of what the left started in Viet Nam, after 58,000+ deaths for nothing.

Had Kerry been elected, he would have continued the mission in Iraq. He knows, and agrees with it's goals. Don't be so naive to think he doesn't. He's as much of a pampered, fat cat politician as anyone else, and voted for the war, along with many of his democratic colleagues, many of whom now seem to be suffering from selective memory loss, after the fact. Many in the public are suffering from the same disease. He only pretended to be against it because he thought it was a winning issue politically. This time, he and his handlers miscalculated, maybe next time, he won't.

Never forget, politics is a BUSINESS, and like any other, certian things need to happen in order for individuals to rise to positions of power, and to attain ever higher earning potential. Those who don't play ball are relegated to the small offices, get no seats on any committees, and receieve far fewer percs and speaking engagements (which pay VERY well) than their more savvy colleagues. Politics comes first for the heavy hitters in Congress, while conviction comes in second, third, or even last. Politicians can change what they so passionately believe in on a dime, if the polls tell them that they it's the politically expedient thing to do.

and the Viet Nam war were fought under Democratic administrations. It was a Republican administration who got us out of what the left started in Viet Nam, after 58,000+ deaths for nothing.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower

The Domino Theory was Eisenhower's, and he sent the first troops there. Kennedy increased the troops, which was a huge mistake, but it was the Republicans who sent us there, and who insisted on keeping us there. The Democrats were the opposition to the war.

Don't try to rewrite history. It's unbecoming.


the same way American conservatives stick to the constitution.


If by "stick to the constitution," you mean, "talk about sticking to the Constitution while they wipe their arses with it," then I'm in full agreement.

Given the prevalence for The Left to advocate Statism (ie, the the subordination of the individual to the service of the State) - modern Lefty philosophy is very closely related to the Totalitarian Regimes on Rummel's list.

I have a first edition copy of his book. It is an excellent reference work.

The difference is that socialism gives power to the state but expects it to us it for their benefit. Fascism gives the state power and makes the people's own needs secondary.

The difference is that socialism gives power to the state but expects it to us it for their benefit. Fascism gives the state power and makes the people's own needs secondary.


Actually, the Socialist caretaker promise is the sugar-coating on the same bitter pill of enslavement. Just because a slave has health benefits and a pension doesn't make slavery moral.

Actually, the Socialist caretaker promise is the sugar-coating on the same bitter pill of enslavement

It's the difference in theory, the fact that those in power in "socialist" states run them as fascist ones is a seperate issue. That's why socialist democracies are prevalent in Europe while the communist governments have collapsed.

Nazis were SOCIALISTS.

They are LEFTIST.


they also were NATIONALISTS

ergo they were RIGHTIST

wich lead us to the conclusion that, showing characteristics participating both of rightism and leftism, they were CENTRISTS.

they also were NATIONALISTS

ergo they were RIGHTIST


That's not at all true.

Nationalism occurs almost everywhere on the political spectrum. Since there's a left besides an international communist or socialist party you can be nationalist and on the left, not that the Nazi's were.

Wrong. Leftism and rightism cannot be reduced to economic or social political orientations, those are are but by-products of a deeper reality, namely a philosophical rift existing since the Parmenides vs Heraclitus controversy:

What is cannot not be
vs
everything flows.

by extention:
the eternal, the concept, the principle, absolute, the universal.
vs
the temporary, the phenomenon, the tradition, relative, the local.

As a result, anything leftist is necessarily aiming at having a universal scope: a political project ceases to be purely leftist when it forsakes this ambition. As is the case when it becomes nationalist, ie , local.
Stalinism, for exemple, by it's rejection of the international revolution, is also a centrism .

"rightists"

Why do you put 'rightists' in quotations but not 'leftists'?

It's all irrelevant anyway. You could call all those governments 'kranlipists' and it would have the same meaning as calling them 'leftists'.

Why do you put 'rightists' in quotations but not 'leftists'?

It's all irrelevant anyway. You could call all those governments 'kranlipists' and it would have the same meaning as calling them 'leftists'.

Because if a rightist does something bad then he becomes a leftist automatically :|.

As I have said before the issue is not left or right; it's a pointless argument. The issue is how did thos govt.'s treat their people. If they were totalitarian dictatorships then that is all you need to know, you don't need to go any further. No-one on this site would want to have such a govt., whether you are far left or far right! Why? Because you would not be allowed to engage in what you are doing now: Free speech ( albeit in many cases: free silly speech!)

As I have said before the issue is not left or right; it's a pointless argument. The issue is how did thos govt.'s treat their people. If they were totalitarian dictatorships then that is all you need to know, you don't need to go any further. No-one on this site would want to have such a govt., whether you are far left or far right! Why? Because you would not be allowed to engage in what you are doing now: Free speech ( albeit in many cases: free silly speech!)

Sounds like we need a ministry of silly speech! Forgive the Monty Python reference.

Except it was actually the Ministry of Silly Walks ;).

Why do you put 'rightists' in quotations but not 'leftists'?

Because "rightists" is a euphemism that should be looked on as rhetoric instead of description.

On the other hand, Leftist is an epithet. It should be used like calling someone an Azz_hole, or Dink_head, etc.

How's that?

Except it was actually the Ministry of Silly Walks ;).

I'm well aware of that. The parallel is striking, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower

The Domino Theory was Eisenhower's, and he sent the first troops there. Kennedy increased the troops, which was a huge mistake, but it was the Republicans who sent us there, and who insisted on keeping us there. The Democrats were the opposition to the war.

Don't try to rewrite history. It's unbecoming.



If by "stick to the constitution," you mean, "talk about sticking to the Constitution while they wipe their arses with it," then I'm in full agreement.


Lyndon Johnson did more to escalate Viet Nam than everyone else combined. It was the Nixon administration who negotiated the pullout, and started bringing our guys home.

Henry Kissinger was the chief negotiator for the US in the secret Paris peace talks.

K, wait, let me get this straight: The left was not only responsible for starting the war in Nam, opposing and Losing the war in Nam, But the republicans were completly responsible for patrioticaly ending the war in Nam?

Anyone who posting **** this weak is so partisan im amazed they can see outside the echo chamber that is there own head.

Oh, BTW--If lefts are all in cahoots here, and the Nazi's were Leftists--Then why in the hell did so many openly liberal leaders stand up and violently oppose Hitler?

Of course its a fallacy to begin with, as the Nazi 'S's' were anything but socialists. Anyone who puts that much meaning in words over actions best declare themselves king of earth.

hahah

Attempts to equate Nazism or communism with liberalism or left politics is sophomoric and doomed to fail. You cannot locate an ideology on a one dimensional map any more than you could locate a place knowing only its latitude.

There have been several attempts to rectify this and one of the more popular charts is the Nolan chart which uses 2 dimensions (economic and personal) to place an ideology on a map

Politics is still more complex than that, the best way is to add an additional dimension of 'politics' and this became the Friesian chart.

(You could add more dimensions, but these get extremely difficult to format or visualise on a 2-dimensional space like a computer screen.

Basically it is the 2 dimensional Nolan chart projected on to the 3rd political dimension with Monarchy on one extreme and Anarchy on the other. Democratic-Republic would fall near the center.

The Friesian charts I found online were too-busy and hard to read so I re-drafted it in a more eye-friendly form.

http://tinypic.com/k0sjma.jpg

Political tyrants would fall near the corner of the monarchist-moralist-social quadrant, this is where an individual ruler would have complete economic, political and moral control of the populace.

The US would fall somewhere near the center of the cube with a balance of powers.

The traditional Left-Right axis forms a diagonal between tolerance/social economics and moralist/market economics.

Authoritarian-Dictatorship politics are placed at a right-angle to the one-dimensional left-right axis ... this is why arguments about how "Hitler was a leftist" are patently idiotic and need to be exposed as such.

Now that you all have been edumacted ... there is no excuse to post bulls**t threads like this again.

http://tinypic.com/k0sjma.jpg
This is great. The only thing I would change would be the naming of the "personal liberty axis," to "civil liberty axis," to include collective liberties, such as the right to organize. And the collective right to bear arms... (just kidding on that one, gun nuts).

http://img499.imageshack.us/img499/3881/3dpoliticalcharta4je.gif

Okay, I renamed the civil-libery axis, moved the label field to the center of the political axis, and added scales to the axis.

So your typical dictator-tyrant would rate near 0 on the civil axis, near 0 on the political axis, and somewhere between 0 and 50 on the market axis.

Terrorists would be similar on the civil and market axis, but on the opposite extreme of the political axis.

Okay, I renamed the civil-libery axis, moved the label field to the center of the political axis, and added scales to the axis.

So your typical dictator-tyrant would rate near 0 on the civil axis, near 0 on the political axis, and somewhere between 0 and 50 on the market axis.

Terrorists would be similar on the civil and market axis, but on the opposite extreme of the political axis.
Looks great, but maybe something like this would be easier to read? This is a rough draft using your model as a base, and getting rid of the transparency.

I was not sure how that transparency would look ... I incorprated your changes into the original, colorized the left-right line and added some tic marks on the edge .... It looks damn good now !

http://img467.imageshack.us/img467/1003/3dpoliticalchartb8kb.gif

I was not sure how that transparency would look ... I incorprated your changes into the original, colorized the left-right line and added some tic marks on the edge .... It looks damn good now !
Yeah, it sure does. Sorry to make you work for it, but that's a nice finished product.

Now, graph yourself! :)

Thanks :)

I'm 50 political , 80 civil liberty and 40 economic

Is there a site that automatically graphs in 3D? I have done the political compass one before, but that is 2D.

Is there a site that automatically graphs in 3D? I have done the political compass one before, but that is 2D.
Java Man's working on it, I bet. ;)

Just as a reminder that Democracies are NOT killers, R.J.Rummel compiles the hideous death toll reaped by Leftist governments and their handmaidens.


what do you mean, democracies are not killer?!?!?!

:eek:

http://img467.imageshack.us/img467/1003/3dpoliticalchartb8kb.gif


You guys did a great job on this. I just wanted to say that.

Is there a site that automatically graphs in 3D? I have done the political compass one before, but that is 2D.

Not that I know of, you can score yourself though

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/1231/quiz16ea.gif

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/5272/quiz28xe.gif

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/8018/quiz38iz.gif

total up for each axis

(these questions are from the site below, I do not necessarily agree with the weighting he assigned to the questions)

http://www.friesian.com/quiz.htm