Howard names his three towering heroes

[Contra Mundum]

Definitely left wing. Socialist Workers party!!

If that doesnt give a decent hint, here's a few more for you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program

The 25 point Program of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei NSDAP was proclaimed by Adolf Hitler at a large party gathering in Munich on February 25, 1920 when the group was still known as the German Workers Party.

Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes.
Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits
We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).
We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare
We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms
We demand a land reform suitable to our needs,
We demand substitution of a German common law in place of the Roman Law serving a materialistic world-order

A very left wing agenda. Nationalisation, banning unearned income, land reform, communalisation - SOCIALISM



Not long bows at all. The depression was caused by the imposition of trade barriers. That is most certainly not in the tradition of neo classical/laissez faire economics.

Mao and Stalin were most definitely left wing.

Still pushing that barrow - how is the Will to Power and the Fuerher as the embodiment of the State consistent with Communist/Socialist ideology. Keep trying comrade

 

[Contra Mundum]

Howard might worship JP II but he is obviously unfamiliar with his encyclical "On Human Work":

Yet the workers' rights cannot be doomed to be the mere result of economic systems aimed at maximum profits. The thing that must shape the whole economy is respect for the workers' rights within each country and all through the world's economy. On Human Work, #17.

 

[evo]

And so Medusala should.Will to power is consistent with communism CM.You saying Mao wasn't a communist?

If the Fuerher was a Darwinist,you may have a point.

 

[stompie]

No, unfortunately you are simply incorrect. You can make things up all you like and rail on about a 'persecution complex' that doesn't exist, but remember this:

Just because you say they're 'very alienated and widely disliked' doesn't make it so.

Less extremely biased hate-speech and more facts would go a long way to making your arguments less ridiculous.

But I notice that you can't provide any evidence to refute my claims.

 

[Contra Mundum]

And so Medusala should.Will to power is consistent with communism CM.You saying Mao wasn't a communist?

If the Fuerher was a Darwinist,you may have a point.

I don't understand your question - is'nt it axiomatic that Mao was not a communist. The Cult of Personality is anti-communist by definition.

 

[CoggaRules]

Look out Johnny, guess who is beginning to loom large dude.
You gotta do better than a Neil Mtichell bitch in the Hun, Johnny boy. Lets see if you have any idea at all when you are front and center with someone that rattles off figures and %ers like a computer.

 

[Contra Mundum]

No, unfortunately you are simply incorrect. You can make things up all you like and rail on about a 'persecution complex' that doesn't exist, but remember this:

Just because you say they're 'very alienated and widely disliked' doesn't make it so.

Less extremely biased hate-speech and more facts would go a long way to making your arguments less ridiculous.

The Culture Wars are a distraction for working class people to convince them to vote against their economic interests - ever read Thomas Frank What's the matter with America?

 

[evo]

I don't understand your question - is'nt it axiomatic that Mao was not a communist. The Cult of Personality is anti-communist by definition.

If cult of personality is so axiomatic,why then does occur in nearly every communist attempt thus far?

As Henry George predicted it would ,over a 100 years ago ,after reading Karl's fine work, I may add.

Deploring the "philo-communism" of the 1950s and 1960s, Mr Howard pilloried historian Manning Clark for likening the ideals of Lenin to those of Christ, and Vietnam War opponents who "fed the delusion that Ho Chi Minh was some sort of Jeffersonian democrat intent on spreading liberty in Asia".

correct weight.

 

[Contra Mundum]

If cult of personality is so axiomatic,why then does occur in nearly every communist attempt thus far?

As Henry George predicted it would ,over a 100 years ago ,after reading Karl's fine work, I may add.

You should have written "communist" - the Trots have been calling those States "State Capitalist" for years






correct weight.

You should have written "communist" - the Trots called those States "State Capitalist" for years.

The error was with Lenin and the Dictatorship of the Party as soon as you intellectually accept that the Party has a monopoly on correct proletarian thinking demagogary and oppression ensue

 

[stompie]

I don't understand your question - is'nt it axiomatic that Mao was not a communist. The Cult of Personality is anti-communist by definition.

One way to distinguish a communist from a Nazi, is that communists tend to identify with humanity as their social group, while the Nazis identify with their country. (Socialism vs national socialism.) Mao was communist in the sense he was committed to the deconstruction the national identity in favour of identifying with world humanity. In fact, such was the absence of national pride, he once favoured implementing esperato as the national language of China. Although that idea never flew, he did implement the cultural revolution that had some similar ideals.

 

[evo]

as soon as you intellectually accept that the Party has a monopoly on correct proletarian thinking demagogary and oppression ensue

Well derr.

Bit like your mate Thomas Frank really.

 

[Contra Mundum]

Well derr.

Bit like your mate Thomas Frank really.

But it does subscribe to the homo economicus idea because why would you vote for people that would destroy your jobs and diminish your pay ?

It made perfect sense to me - the other thing that he tracks quite convincingly is the opinion pieces that denounce the "Liberal Elites" in exactly the same terms as the Rich used to be in the early 20th Century - it gave his thesis more explanatory power

 

[just maybe]

But I notice that you can't provide any evidence to refute my claims.

Because your claims are opinion. I can't prove a negative.

It is up to you to provide evidence that backs up your opinion, and you can't and won't.

 

[evo]

But it does subscribe to the homo economicus idea because why would you vote for people that would destroy your jobs and diminish your pay ?

It made perfect sense to me - the other thing that he tracks quite convincingly is the opinion pieces that denounce the "Liberal Elites" in exactly the same terms as the Rich used to be in the early 20th Century - it gave his thesis more explanatory power

The prols are more aware than you or Frank are willing to give them credit.You never know,maybe they can see the big picture.

Unlike IR lawyers bogged down in the minutae of class struggle.

 

[stompie]

Because your claims are opinion. I can't prove a negative.

It is up to you to provide evidence that backs up your opinion, and you can't and won't.

My posts are fact, not opinion. Look at election results, winners of Australian of the year, faces used in tourism campaigns etc. Then contrast these displays of respect to the left's complaining of a 'tall poppy syndrome' each time they are ignored.

You can't counter because you know that the left has done nothing worthy of respect in Australia, and are widely persecuted.

 

[Contra Mundum]

The prols are more aware than you or Frank are willing to give them credit.You never know,maybe they can see the big picture.

Unlike IR lawyers bogged down in the minutae of class struggle.

Black armband baby!

 

[just maybe]

My posts are fact, not opinion. Look at election results, winners of Australian of the year, faces used in tourism campaigns etc. Then contrast these displays of respect to the left's complaining of a 'tall poppy syndrome' each time they are ignored.

You can't counter because you know that the left has done nothing worthy of respect in Australia, and are widely persecuted.

You haven't presented a single fact at all.

Election results would suggest, then, that about 50% of Australia is 'left'.

Still waiting for any other evidence to the contrary. EVIDENCE, stompie, not your opinion.

 

[stompie]

You haven't presented a single fact at all.

Election results would suggest, then, that about 50% of Australia is 'left'.

Still waiting for any other evidence to the contrary. EVIDENCE, stompie, not your opinion.

Evidence: Case study one

Just Maybe- a left wing poster on Big Footy, who some weeks ago found himself complaining that he was being victimised as an entire thread was devoted to attacking him. (Unfortunately, the site crashed so I am unable to retrieve your posts. I do remember the emotion you displayed as you complained about how unfair it was)

Case study two - ABC Australian Talks

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/australiatalksback/stories/2000/198653.htm

On the site, a left-wing broadcaster draws people together to discuss why the left is so unpopular in Australia. The broadcaster was concerned that the left was ignored at the closing ceremony of the Sydney Olympics. Instead, the ceremony celebrated the likes of Hogan, and Norman.

Case study three – Tasmanian Forestry Workers

“The contrasting images of Latham saving trees not jobs and Howard being glad handed by hundreds of burly loggers for putting jobs ahead of trees must have sent a chill through every blue collar worker in the country. It was a perfect Howard wedge. Tampa in Tassie. For Latham it was surely the tactical blunder of the campaign. He could have offered three billion bucks to retrain the timber workers. It would not have mattered a dot.” From http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2653

Howard’s dividing of Labor voters by evoking the working man’s prejudice towards the lefties is widely recognised as the decisive strategy of the last election.


Now it is your turn. Care to show any evidence of the lefties being respected in Australia?

You are making a fool out of yourself here trying to argue that lefties are not a persecuted minority. But if it makes you feel better, I'll humour you. Yes, Australia loves lefties! They are wonderful wonderful people that are truly celebrated, that children rush to get autographs from, and that tourists flock to be photographed alongside of.

 

[just maybe]

So you just posted me a bunch of opinion, labelled as 'case studies'. The first and second don't even have a thing to do with the left. The third to do with Latham, who was more right than left.

So none of which have anything to do with the 'left'. Silly stompie. Silly stompie.

Oh dear. Stompie, it's not 'my turn' until you can come up with some facts.

Do you get that? Facts.

No more opinion, please.

 

[stompie]

So you just posted me a bunch of opinion, labelled as 'case studies'. The first and second don't even have a thing to do with the left. The third to do with Latham, who was more right than left.

So none of which have anything to do with the 'left'. Silly stompie. Silly stompie.

Oh dear. Stompie, it's not 'my turn' until you can come up with some facts.

Do you get that? Facts.

No more opinion, please.

Scientific theory: You don’t prove anything. You disprove it, and by a process of elimination you are left with the best guess. Facts do not exist.

 

[Daytripper]

So you just posted me a bunch of opinion, labelled as 'case studies'. The first and second don't even have a thing to do with the left. The third to do with Latham, who was more right than left.

So none of which have anything to do with the 'left'. Silly stompie. Silly stompie.

Oh dear. Stompie, it's not 'my turn' until you can come up with some facts.

Do you get that? Facts.

No more opinion, please.

Hang on - previously you stated that nearly 50% of the population was left.
Considering that the ALP with preferences had about 47% of the vote at the last election that statement is broadly correct.

Now you are saying that Latham was more right than left. So that 47% 'left' vote now diminishes sharply.
If 50% of the ALP vote identified with Latham (and I think that's a pretty reasonable conservative estimate) the remainder (23.5%) would be the true left vote.

Stompie was right. The left are a minority.

 

[evo]

Black armband baby!

Indeed.

If Howard and his buddies at Quadrant were fair dinkum about their faith in invisible hand maybe they should be discussing how it is that oil is making 52 week lows a few weeks prior to U.S mid term elections.

Call me a tin foil hatter-but coincidence?I think not.

 

[just maybe]

Scientific theory: You don’t prove anything. You disprove it, and by a process of elimination you are left with the best guess. Facts do not exist.


Of course we don't always need to take the scientific approach for we all know that it is fact that you are a moron.

Oh dear. Resorting to personal abuse because you can't produce a shred of evidence to support your silly opinions?

Oh dear. Oh dear, stompie. Poor form.

 

[just maybe]

Hang on - previously you stated that nearly 50% of the population was left.
Considering that the ALP with preferences had about 47% of the vote at the last election that statement is broadly correct.

Now you are saying that Latham was more right than left. So that 47% 'left' vote now diminishes sharply.
If 50% of the ALP vote identified with Latham (and I think that's a pretty reasonable conservative estimate) the remainder (23.5%) would be the true left vote.

Stompie was right. The left are a minority.

Who said it meant they identified with Latham? Labor in general is considered the 'left' party, but it contains factional divisions in it as with the Liberals.

According to your logic, we can therefore say 50% of the Lib vote identified with Howard, and therefore the remainder is the left vote.

So we end up with the same figure.

Come again?

 

[MrMeaner]

Stompie was right. The left are a minority.

So are the 'right'. Most people are somewhere in the centre.