Karl

Ah the foundations are creaking. There is no confusion. There is not a better form, there are degrees of creeping socialism/fascism, but the intention is the same. To use the government to enact socialist reforms. We already have soft fascism and soft socialism. We are heading back towards totalitarianism. The state has gained more power and has intruded far more into people's lives than it ever has. The new form is very apparent in the treatment of Greece.

Did I say 'all' as in everyone. I meant all that went if that clarifies that for you. I'm glad you don't support torture and enslavement of other humans. What about theft and kidnapping ?

And let's not forget that Marx said that capitalism was doomed to failure and the eventual move to communism. In other words there is no need to do anything at all, it will happen all by itself. Yet the socialists are intending to do by force what was intended to be by natural evolution. Same as religion. God will strike you down, but we will get to you first.

Which was what exactly? That the Nazi party used propaganda ? We knew that already. Our propaganda was busy exposing their propaganda. We won the war so we get to write about their propaganda machinery as if we didn't have any. However, the Russians also won the war and so we don't have quite as much to write about them. All the learned professors and academics used to make their pilgrimages to the USSR and come back saturated with the ideology. They thought it was the greatest thing in human social engineering, behaviour and efficiency. They couldn't wait to promote that message in the West. They even accepted the millions of murdered and imprisoned Russians as a worthwhile price to pay for such wonders. One by one they now deny they believed in it at all. A failed experiment creating hell on earth for millions upon millions who suffered terrible deprivation, hunger, starvation, torture, death, mutilation, forced marches, forced labour, overcrowding, disease and poverty. All the while the West with its relatively free capitalism was leaping ahead further and further whilst the soviets stagnated and suffered. You support that do you ?

Are you still implying that I am unable to apply critical analysis ? :-)

You don't think we can choose how we act ? Or that you are superior to simpletons and such like and this is only resident in such glorious people as yourself ? Careful, your narcissism is showing.

How about a nice comparison of German and Russia propaganda posters http://www.rferl.org/media/photogallery/24934238.html oops look, identical except for the military uniform and the cartoon cut out leader. So, very sinister, both of them.

Your repeated ad hominems really don't flatter you. It would seem likely that we all 'think' so what is your point ?

I said I was just above mud, that's kinda lower than a simpleton. Can you give me the names of those others I feel the need of company :-)

Well it's a pity you couldn't have provided two straight definitions and made it easy for both of us, but as you are unwilling we will have to do it the long way. You have given a description of a typical facist state and I say upfront that I'm prepared to accept that there are some differences between facist if states as we see with Italy and Germany, there are also differences between the Russian and Chinese States but certain things remains common to them all. 1. A dictator and a totalitarian government. 2. The means of production controlled by the government. 3. The institution of price controls-the governments sets all prices, determines all quantities, distribution, method and wages. 4. The use of secret police to enforce the regime and harsh punishment for those who do not. 5. The use of broadcast information for the purposes of propagating the state message. Altering films etc to show a positive slant. 6. The use of symbology (Nazi swastika/USSR hammer and scythe). 7. Public works programs with use of hard labour. 8. The existence of a black market in goods. 9. A privileged class of government, state, forces officials loyal to the dictator and the regime. Anything you don't agree with there ? Then identify the differences: Fascist -Racism, nationalism. Communism is generally tolerant of wider groups/countries. The differences economically is the communism does not hide its state control of the means of production whereas fascists preserve a facade of private property. The Nazi party was called the national socialist German workers party. If we really needed anymore proof, there it is in black and white. Socialist- couldn't be clearer, says it on the tin.

Now, now, don't be hastily jumping to conclusions until all the evidence is in.

Fascist, socialist it's all the same thing. It's a state controlled healthcare system which appropriates money from the producers by force. In a socialist system the government forces people to work for the good of the group(state). In a fascist system taxes are coercively appropriated for the good of the group (state). The state controls and takes payment for the health care in both cases.

No, not a creationist. I know you would like to pigeon hole me for your mantle shelf or wall of stuffed trophies, but I'm a far more elusive creature to bag :-) The universe is, that's all. Through it, through us runs reality. What is, what is. This isn't something that you are unaware of, but you are not situated in self, so you close your eyes to it. Reality is what we seek if we are adventurous enough to approach it. I don't want your views on fascism. I want to know how you define fascism and socialism in order that the differences can be exposed and the similarities noted. Come on Ralis, experiment a bit. It was you who said they were entirely different, so now you should prove me wrong. I'm game :-)

I can't keep up with this landslide of posts :-) As I said 'fact' and 'opinion'. I haven't ever found a history book written like a list of facts. Why was pearl harbour bombed ? is the question that history tries to answer. You know all that anyway so I've no idea why you started off like that. In what way did Pythagoras theorem succeed ? Do you need to measure every triangle on every planet in the universe to know it is true? Some things are apriori by deductive reasoning. It does not mean it leads to accurate forecasts of quantities or time frames. Socialism fails because it requires violent force to make it happen. Capitalism requires no force, it's as natural as breathing. Are you for force Ralis ? Do you think people should be forced to do things that are not natural to them-for what you believe is for their own good? Are you trying to impose your version of order because you fear the alternative is chaos ? If you believe in critical thinking and rationality would it not be better to try and help people gently expand their conscious awareness instead of shackling them to a totalitarian ideology. Your here on this forum, surely your aim here is not to spend your life trying to oppress people ?

All apriori. I don't have a belief system as such, mises put into words what is already known to you, if you would only look. It's the same thing everywhere. I didn't get it from a book, although sometimes it's necessary to discover the words that must be used in order to communicate. There is really no need, we gaze on exactly the same stream, we are built from it, everything comes from it. Yet we must engage in word play and concepts like a pair of wonky radios. That's why I said you should make the effort to define socialism and fascism for yourself without reference to books or other work. That way you have to dig really deep and the deeper the better. Of course you probably won't, but such is life.

And yet they are absolutely needed to dispute Maxist theory. I'm not going to point to a passage or phrase Ralis. What's the point ? 'Man acts' that's all that is required to end any philosophical discussion on socialism. Apriori is what the universe is built on. You simply want to win the argument by any means possible, but you will have gained nothing. If you are as bright and educated as you say then try producing a definition for socialism and one for fascism. If you learn that these two ideologies are twins then you have discovered something you didn't know before. I personally can't see the point in discovering what I think I already know. I might as well stick my head in a bucket and shout 'I'm right' to myself over and over. I like to discover I'm wrong, it's a fantastic feeling because I peel back a bit of the onion and get a shiny new bit. What's the worst you that can happen if you discover socialism is incompatible with humanity ? Nothing will break. You aren't going to get beaten, or laughed at. Nothing will happen at all, you will have gained a valuable insight. I'm not as educated as you are, so possibly I have less ego invested in that belief. I can just be a Klutz and pay no mind to it. I've been proven wrong before, I like it :-)

Who is suffering ? Find that one. For a long time I understood the same, then there was nothing to understand, I had deceived myself. That you know and understand the transcendent self, means there must be someone to whom that understanding arises. Can you notice that subtle distinction ? In the self there can be nothing to realise. If you know all about the self then who is doing the knowing of the self ? Are there two, self and another who is other than self ? It seems like it's all just in the words and it's annoying to have it pointed out, but it has to be resolved and it's stubborn. I don't mean to give a lecture here, I'm just making an observation, which may or may not be helpful. If it isn't then please ignore it.

OK it is true that reasoning powers have been deliberately suppressed because it suits the state to prevent thinking, yet how does that feed into your argument ? History IS opinion and not simply facts. It's easy to find revisionist histories in all contexts. This is why praxiology is used by mises in economics. This was my analogy to that of geometry. A praxiological analysis isn't dependent on graphs, charts, histories or measurements. All that is required are the basic rules and the rest follows. I agree that personal opinions are not required, this is what Mises set out to do and succeeded. Of course that's my opinion, but based completely on logical reasoning and I can see no serious flaws. It's sound logic. If you work with logic then it won't take long to see the validity of it. It's really quite inescapable.

Is that your definition of socialism : the idea that the goal of political organisation is social good for all LOL that's most certainly begging the question: what you are saying in essence is socialism is socialism. I can agree that this is true but can you define socialism without resorting to petitio principii.

I would agree with that. There is also no reason why, in a free society that socialist societies and groupings should exist happily and side by side with everyone else. We have cooperatives and communes and they would be most welcome as long as they don't go forcing their ideology onto others.

I'm replying in the same manner that's all. I don't mean to patronise, but shouldn't we be here to bottom things, to find out the truth, what is real. Isn't that our cause and method. We can argue on the surface, win points, but none of that will help is uncover what is.

Get to work then. Stop making excuses. If you can then you will. If you can't, then it will be clear to all that you are unable to support your propositions and you can stop clanging like an empty can. I believe in you, I know you can do it. You told me you were well educated-all I'm asking is you demonstrate your competence. It's just a simple challenge. I'm just a self taught muppet. Never had a university education. It should be a walk over for you. Me, well I'm simple minded and stupid, just above mud really. Go on teach me a lesson. :-)

Free does not imply that at all. If it did we would use it in a sentence 'free to do what one likes'. We are not free to do as we like because it is inherently harmful to us to do so. That's why we have reasoning powers, we have the free will to choose how we act. It begins from the basis of private property and that is our minds and bodies. Who said the U.S. Was a free market, it isn't. There are parts which are nominally free, but to all intents and purposes it is a fascistic economic model. That's why I think the excessive of defining it is important. It gives insights than cannot be had purely by reading books on the subject. You have to define it for yourself.

none of us do, so use that time productively :-)

No, that's not what I asked. I don't need to know what you have read. I'm interested in your own personal definition of fascism and socialism/communism. You do the work because otherwise we are getting nowhere fast. I could put up two definitions, but it's better if you make the effort to define them and go through the process which reveals much. The process is all. It's not easy to do. See if you can beat the current efforts.