Please this man is damgerous

The Sarge:

Beetlejuice:

The Sarge:
Beetlejuice - your posts seem to be childishly simplistic, as opposed to Carryfast’s ridiculously overblown copy and pasted garbage. I make no assertion as to whether that is anything to do with either of you personally.
There are many reasons I support Corbyn and Labour. I cannot think of one reason to support Johnson Or Hunt and the Selfservatives.

What drugs are you smoking …

So you can’t think of a reason to vote for the Selfservatives either?

A typical lefty reply.Again what drugs are you smoking ?

What? You’re just going to repeat a nonsense soundbite over and over, are you?
Typical right wing rubbish.

The lefty whinger Sarge:
What? You’re just going to repeat a nonsense soundbite over and over, are you?
Typical right wing rubbish.

The Sarge:
Typical right wing rubbish.

Surely that depends on your own self serving Socialist definition of left.Oh wait Socialists think that only they have the monopoly on representing the working class and if not they’ll just impose it anyway.

While it’s clear that the simplistic right v left no longer applies in the case of Nationalist v Socialist.On that note it seems strange why Corbyn doesn’t want to stand where he belongs with the Socialist Labour Party.Probably because being a typical lying Socialist he wants to hijack the Labour vote in the knowledge that not enough voters want zb Socialism.While Sturgeon goes for the other tactic of pretending that she’s a Nationalist.

Carryfast:

The Sarge:
Carry fast, what scares me is that you read that [zb] and believe it. Nazis are socialist - what a moronic statement.

It’s clearly written there in black and white within the Party Title.

That’s not much of an argument considering the so-called German Democratic Republic had “democratic” in it’s name, but nobody insists that it was democratic merely because it claimed to be in it’s title.

Moreover, the fact that the Nazis set up concentration camps for socialists, communists, and trade unionists - in fact the entire ■■■■ project was conceived as an onslaught against the growing left wing in Germany, with workers sick to death of poor pay and conditions - rather undermines the argument that they were any sorts of “socialists” themselves.

Even looking at their approach to the economy, Britain (despite making no claim to be “socialist”) nationalised it’s economy extensively at the outbreak of war so that production could be directed by government. The Nazis didn’t do this until a few years later when they couldn’t carry on with private sector contracting and needed the power to reorganise the economy in their national interest without haggling out for-profit deals with a gaggle of private owners each time.

You’ll also recall that the Nazis were in power from 1933, and they did not embark on any widespread socialisation of the economy.

Carryfast:

The Sarge:
Oh dear, in our new user-friendly TNUK environment I really can’t tell you what I think of you based on the tripe you are spouting in here.

Great.Here’s a some more inconvenient facts regarding the links between Socialist/Communist/■■■■. :bulb: :wink:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compariso … _Stalinism

Do you know what a glaring omission is from that article? Despite all the claims made by ■■■■ leaders, it never mentions that they initially set up the concentration camps and filled them with socialists, communists, and trade unionists. Nor does it mention the amount of support Hitler had from the capitalist class (and particularly the petite bourgeoisie) in Germany.

And I say this of course being someone who defends neither Hitler nor Stalin.

Rjan:

Carryfast:

The Sarge:
Carry fast, what scares me is that you read that [zb] and believe it. Nazis are socialist - what a moronic statement.

It’s clearly written there in black and white within the Party Title.

That’s not much of an argument considering the so-called German Democratic Republic had “democratic” in it’s name, but nobody insists that it was democratic merely because it claimed to be in it’s title.

Moreover, the fact that the Nazis set up concentration camps for socialists, communists, and trade unionists - in fact the entire ■■■■ project was conceived as an onslaught against the growing left wing in Germany, with workers sick to death of poor pay and conditions - rather undermines the argument that they were any sorts of “socialists” themselves.

Even looking at their approach to the economy, Britain (despite making no claim to be “socialist”) nationalised it’s economy extensively at the outbreak of war so that production could be directed by government. The Nazis didn’t do this until a few years later when they couldn’t carry on with private sector contracting and needed the power to reorganise the economy in their national interest without haggling out for-profit deals with a gaggle of private owners each time.

You’ll also recall that the Nazis were in power from 1933, and they did not embark on any widespread socialisation of the economy.

Blimey now you’re contradicting yourself even more.

You say that we rightly can’t give any credence to the Democratic label in the DDR title.But we’re then supposed to believe that your ideological adherence to the Socialist anti nation state collective,which just like Soviet Bolshevism, clearly by your own admission,trumps national self determination,is supposedly ‘Democratic’.

On that note let’s just say that the Socialist label in the NSDAP title is a lot more believable and credible than the ‘Democrat’ label in the DDR’s obviously Soviet backed and clearly Socialist regime.All based on their respective ideological actions and associations,not labels.

Also bearing in mind that not only do your lot try to pull that stunt once in the case of DDR v NSDAP.

You then try it twice by saying that the Socialist label within the USSR doesn’t fit with the CPSU one of the Russian Communist Party which founded the USSR.

Then three times by saying that what was clearly another anti nation state Socialist Collective,in the form of the NSDAP and which again,like the Soviet Union,abhorred the idea of respect of the right of self determination of the Nation State ( Poland for just one ),isn’t really Socialist it’s Nationalist. :unamused:

Then four times in the form of the clearly Socialist SNP pretending that it’s a Nationalist Party.

Then 5 times in the form of Corbyn hijacking the whole spectrum of the Labour vote instead of standing where he belongs on an honest Socialist Labour ticket.

It’s clear who the lying fascists are here and it certainly isn’t those on the Nationalist side,in the form of the Dali Lama or the Polish resistance to Soviet Socialist and NSDAP takeover of their right to National self determination.

While true to form it’s you who’s making all the fuss about wanting to install a pan European Socialist Soviet regime to replace Europe’s nation states and with it their right to national self determination.Then like the DDR you call it ‘democracy’. :unamused:

As I said the Socialist MO has always been one of do whatever it takes whether lie and/or infiltrate,and/or just use subterfuge and force to close down free speech and opposition against it,to get into power.We can arguably now add Corbyn and Sturgeon to that list of liars together with Stasi plant Merkel.

As for the fact that both the Soviet Union and ■■■■ Germany zb on the working class,that they claimed to represent in the name of Socialism,in addition to the dictatorial,anti nation state,exploitative regime of red China,actually just adds weight to the fact that stinking lying Socialism is all about power for those at the top of its zb pile,not doing what’s good for the working class.While obviously flying under any flag of convenience when it suits its purpose to divert attention from its true colours.

While what is certain is that Communism and Socialism are the same things and that the NSDAP was just another faction of the Socialist spectrum.With the Democrat label in DDR being as believable as your idea of a so called ‘democratic’ Socialist collective in the form of an EUSSR.Or for that matter the SNP,let alone the NSDAP,being a Nationalist Party.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison … m#Unionism

Carryfast:

Why not just accept that the label given to something, by whomever, is no guide to its substance?

We only have tins that do what they say on the label, because the Victorians introduced consumer protection laws to uphold standards and truth in the marketplace (with the clout of the state to enforce them). Before then, something sold as bread may well have contained more plaster than flour.

No such laws exist for labelling in the political arena.

Rjan:
Why not just accept that the label given to something, by whomever, is no guide to its substance?

We only have tins that do what they say on the label, because the Victorians introduced consumer protection laws to uphold standards and truth in the marketplace (with the clout of the state to enforce them). Before then, something sold as bread may well have contained more plaster than flour.

No such laws exist for labelling in the political arena.

Yeah right.We’re supposed to believe that the Soviet Union wasn’t a Socialist institution set up by the Russian Communist Party.Or that Goebbells never actually said that ■■■■ Germany is a Socialist People’s State.Or that both didn’t predictably then live up to that in the form of an ideological abhorrence of the rights of the individual and self determination of the Nation State and national borders.In favour of the Collective with that being all about making it easier to impose and implement the Socialist system of government which you predictably then obviously support.

The only exception being the laughably named soviet socialist puppet state of the DDR which,like Corbyn’s hijacking of the Labour vote rather than standing where he belongs in the SLP and the SNP claiming to be Nationalists,just shows that the only mislabelling here is that which the lying Socialists want to apply when it suits them to fool a wavering but gullible electorate,so as to seize power.Nothing new there.

Carryfast:

Rjan:
Why not just accept that the label given to something, by whomever, is no guide to its substance?

We only have tins that do what they say on the label, because the Victorians introduced consumer protection laws to uphold standards and truth in the marketplace (with the clout of the state to enforce them). Before then, something sold as bread may well have contained more plaster than flour.

No such laws exist for labelling in the political arena.

Yeah right.We’re supposed to believe that the Soviet Union wasn’t a Socialist institution set up by the Russian Communist Party.Or that Goebbells never actually said that ■■■■ Germany is a Socialist People’s State.Or that both didn’t predictably then live up to that in the form of an ideological abhorrence of the rights of the individual and self determination of the Nation State and national borders.In favour of the Collective with that being all about making it easier to impose and implement the Socialist system of government which you predictably then obviously support.

The only exception being the laughably named soviet socialist puppet state of the DDR which,like Corbyn’s hijacking of the Labour vote rather than standing where he belongs in the SLP and the SNP claiming to be Nationalists,just shows that the only mislabelling here is that which the lying Socialists want to apply when it suits them to fool a wavering but gullible electorate,so as to seize power.Nothing new there.

I love your faith in the “foolish” and “gullible” common man whose democracy you claim to be defending.

And like I say, nobody would dispute that the Soviets had some sort of pretense of taking care of workers. But they had no pretense of democracy - it was a dictatorship from its very inception.

As for Hitler, I guess when he put all those socialists and trade unionists in concentration camps in the mid-30s, he was just protecting the “wavering but gullible electorate” from their folly eh?

How bad things may have turned out had Hitler not acted to protect them!

Rjan:

Carryfast:

The Sarge:
Oh dear, in our new user-friendly TNUK environment I really can’t tell you what I think of you based on the tripe you are spouting in here.

Great.Here’s a some more inconvenient facts regarding the links between Socialist/Communist/■■■■. :bulb: :wink:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compariso … _Stalinism

Do you know what a glaring omission is from that article? Despite all the claims made by ■■■■ leaders, it never mentions that they initially set up the concentration camps and filled them with socialists, communists, and trade unionists. Nor does it mention the amount of support Hitler had from the capitalist class (and particularly the petite bourgeoisie) in Germany.

And I say this of course being someone who defends neither Hitler nor Stalin.

Another glaring omission also being the bankrolling of Germany by Harriman,Keuhn&Loeb,Krupps,essentially Rothschild subsidiaries to enable Germany to re.arm and ultimately defeated by zio capitalists in return for Palestine.The Bush crime family were deeply involved courtesy of Prescot Bush the head of aforementioned cartel.

Just so you know, this thread is incredibly difficult to masterbate to, but I shall struggle on.

Dipper_Dave:
Just so you know, this thread is incredibly difficult to masterbate to, but I shall struggle on.

Go for it Old Lad. I’m trying not to yawn. The only w3ay to tell if a politician is lying is to watch his/her lips. If they are moving…