Savant's Words

Empty right wing rhetoric. The government, unfortunately, is largely an extension of the corporate structure. Actually, one is then "shackled" by corporate power indirectly when one has a government job, and more directly in the private sector. It's a form of corporate serfdom. The equating of the "left" (itself an often vague notion) with "plantation owners" is simple, mindless pish posh. There are no plantation owners in the 21 st Century, or so few you can easily count them. When there WERE slaveholding plantation owners, it was mainly from the AMERICAN LEFT---the ABOLITIONISTS and rebel slaves themselves--that the staunchest opposition to the plantation owners came. The plantation owners themselves were the most RIGHT WING element in American political life. Hence your equating of the "left" with real or imaginary plantation owners is sheer fabrication. But while the dominant class in America was once the planterrs, they are today the CORPORATE oligarchy. The corporate 1% are the nearest equivalent to planters of yesteryear.

And BOTH parties are in bed with the corporate elite to some extent. But the Democrats are more like the corporate mistress, while the REpublicans are more like the WIFE. It is from the LEFT that the main opposition to corporate power comes. And the largest single ethnic basis of progressive opposition to corporate power in the national Black Community.

-Savant


http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/TBBSGBNC4UKMRJNQM/p4
______________


Ron and Rand Paul's opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (except in Federal employment) puts them on the Right, even as it put Barry Goldwater on the Right during the 1960s. Rand Paul's opposition to the achievements of the New Deal and all the accomplishments of the 1960s, also put him on the Right.(Oh yes, there were also those racist articles that Ron Paul now claims to know nothing about, which would put him pretty squarely on the Right. LIke father, like son? I wonder). I think I can infer Rand's attitude toward universal healh care. I think that would put him on the Right. Two things which seem not to put him on the right is his stated opposition to the war on drugs and the military industrial complex (first denounced by Eisenhower, but now mainly opposed by the center left). And, of course, Rand Paul like libertarians in general (at least in America), is very pro-capitalist. Which in REALITY means wealth and political power concentrated in the elite hands of the 1%. It certainly has nothing to do with "free enterprise." Again, that seems pretty right wing to me.

-Savant
___________________ One day we will tell you what life was like, especially for Blacks, when power rested more in the individual states. Suffice it do say that indivicual states didn't voluntarily end De Jure Jim Crow or political disfranchisement. They didn't voluntarily end slavery either. In fact, some states (especially in the South) were/are far MORE REPRESSIVE than the Federal gov. As for Ron Paul, I'm not sure that he isn't a racist. But I'm not buying the line that he only supports peoples right to be racist, Imagine telling a Jew you support peoples (or individual states') right to be Nazi even though you're not a Nazi. Of course, I can't stop someone from having racist or nazi opinions. But I can prevent states from acting on them, which is what the Civil Rights acts opposed by Ron and Rand Paul were about. Opposition to such laws does amount to support for racism and oppression. I suspect even YOU know that. And I'm still waiting to see your reply to Masud, or even to Ron Paul's racist articles. You are going to have to grow a backbone and become a man rathern than a racist. That, too, is FREEDOM!

-Savant

 _______________________


 That's sort of like the Stalinists referring to East Germany as the "German Democratic Republic". Oh, do you believe in democracy. Like most fellow citizens of the USA, you are a political ?lliterate. That shows how corrupt our political culture is. The Nazis were no more socialist than the Stalinist were democratic. It's probably only in the USA among richer nations that such sophomoric errors as yours could be commonly made. Unfortunately, it would require another thread to instruct you about the principles of socialism and democracy. Perhaps in the meantime you might read a book called BIG BUSINESS AND FASCISM. Oh yes, NaZism and Fascism are extreme RIGHT WING ideologies. Just about everyone knows that Savant is a man of the left. I expect morons to call me a Communist, but it's a new kind of simpleton who call me a fascist--not to mention a Nazi given what I KNOW Nazis did to Black people.

-Savant

 ____________________

First of all, the largest opposition to fascism in much of Europe were SOCIALISTS. If you don't know the difference between socialism and fascism (even when a variety of fascism calls itself "national socialist"), then you're politically illiterate. I thought you'd see the analogy between considering Nazis (who KILLED socialists and other leftists)who CALLED themselves "socialist" (mainly to deceive workers) and Stalinists who CALLED themselves "democratic". If Nazis calling themselves "socialists" meant they really were, then Stalinist East German calling itself "democratic" would mean they really were. The important thing is not lexical meaning of the acronym "Nazi", but the actual SUBSTANCE of their ideology--militant reactionary nationalism and racism. Now, socialism would involved democratic cooperative economy and democratic governance by the COMMON PEOPLE (especially working class folks). CLASS has a priority in socialist discourse even though they are aware of racism, sexism, etc.

But socialism, a child of the Englightenment & democratic revolutions of the 18th & 19th Centureis, is in principle ANTI-RACIST, and considers its main adversary to be the privileged CLASS (or classes) Nazism is COMMITTED TO RACISM, to the division of humanity into a MASTER RACE (Aryans, white and ideally blonde) and supposedly INFERIOR non-Aryan and slave races (including ALL Blacks, Jews, and many non-Aryan whites). The SLAVE RACES, according to the Nazis were to be exterminated (which was the intended fate of all Jews) or enslaved (e.g. Slavs and nearly everyone else nom-Aryan) Search through the writings of socialists or communists like Marx, Bakunin, Rosa Luxemburg, Martin Buber, Martin Luther King, Jr, Emma Goldman, Erich Fromm, Fanon, Kropotkin, Albert Einstein, Oscar Wilde, or whatever socialist you choose. You will find that they are EGALITARIAN--in contrast to the anti-egalitarianism of Fascism and Nazism---and they are committed to a certain humanism. Which contrast with the anti-humanist ideas and sentiments of extreme rightists such as one finds among Italian, Spanish & German (Nazi) fascists. It stands to reason, if you're not politically illiterate, that neither I nor any other socialist, could be at one and the same time FASCIST and SOCIALIST. A socialist might eventually become a fascist, as a liberal might eventually become a conservative, or a theist an atheist.

One cannot be BOTH fascist and socialist at the same time. Hence your claim that I, a KNOWN democratic socialist and anti-racist can be a fascist---even a Nazi fascist--is a patent absurdity reflecting either ignorance or mental incompetence. And as an African-American I have as much chance of being a Nazi as I do of becoming a Klansman,even assuming I were mentally unbalanced enough to want to become such.



-Savant