Originally Posted by Ezekiel
Please tell me that someone with your education is joking. That is utter nonsense and you know it. What are you trying to prove?
Zeke, I'm trying to hold the mirror so you can see it, but you have to look at it in order for it to work. You have expressed here extreme left views and said anyone who doesn't agree isn't credible. You seem to dis anyone who doesn't hold with your views. You "pronounce" who is, or is not, "progressive." Well, my friend, you are not the arbiter of who is "progressive." I have provided independent sources for all of my claims about people's political views, yet this is not "proof." You see why I have difficulty swallowing the labeling? What, pray tell, is the difference between your labeling and a Tea Party adherent? Seriously.

Originally Posted by Ezekiel
If you believe in capitalism come out and say it. Ideologue bullshyte again? Anyone who disagrees with you is an ideologue. .... You are trying to pin a label on me.
Mirror? Anyone? I've got label printer here in my office you can borrow. Feel free to continue to label everything...

Originally Posted by Ezekiel
There is a clear distinction between the two and if you don't believe me PLEASE read history and don't make it up as you go along. ...
Your claim flies in the face of history, my friend. I am disappointed.
My god, man, I'm talking about history. AS I SAID - both communism (under Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, pick your poison) and Fascism (whether Mussolini, Hitler, or Franco) are totalitarian systems. It has nothing to do with the "philosophy" underlying how they got there. As I said "Fascism and communism may start from opposite ends of the spectrum, but they get to the same place by different paths."
Quote
Totalitarianism is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible.
Some have argued that Hitler was not totalitarian "enough" because he allowed private companies to continue to exist, so he was only "authoritarian" - allowing some semblance of a private life. As I also said, I doubt the victims recognized the niceties of their political positions. "The state" seeks complete control over the lives of their subjects - they just give their excuse for seizing such control different labels. What, pray tell, distinguishes a gulag, a reeducation camp, or a concentration camp? Do you think the internees cared?

My use of the term "ideologue" is self-defensive. It is because of your persistent discounting of any opposing view, or even, it seems, just a more subtle view. I've consistently said I agree with many of Bernie Sanders' goals, yet youwant to label me (let me make a list)capitalist, warmonger, Hillary sycophant, ignorant, retrograde, non-progressive....)
Go back, read the thread. I'll wait. I'm just trying to inject a little perspective.

A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich