('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
>Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 13:38:10 -0400
>From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <retroman@turbont.net>
>To: extropians@extropy.org
>Subject: Re: GUNS: Re: Those Damm Democrats
>Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org
>
>
>
>Joe Dees wrote:
>>
>> >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:33:15 -0400
>> >From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <retroman@turbont.net>
>> >
>> >Considering that Nazis are in fact SOCIALISTS, your claim that McVeigh and/or
>> >Christian Identity is 'conservative' is disengenuous at best, and a total lie at
>> >worst, but thats never stopped you before. In fact, the ease with which most
>> >socialists fit in with the eco-fanatic primitivist types demonstrates that his
>> >drift toward Kazynskism is not that far of a reach for him.
>> >
>> So, you would not consider either those trying to conserve racial/ethnic purity (not a laudable goal) or those trying
>> to conserve environmental diversity and cleanliness (a more laudable one) as conservative? Interesting. Equally interesting is the specific claim that Christian Identity is not conservative. On the bipolar conservative-to-liberal spectrum, I sincerely doubt if either they or social liberals would care to be associated with each other.
>
>If you actually study the economic planks of neo-nazi groups, as well as their
>attitude toward internationalism, what you will find is a very
>populist/socialist platform that would not be out of place at the Green Party
>Convention. Remember that the KKK's political base prior to the 60's, dating
>back to Resconstruction, was entirely in the Democratic Party. If you read
>Bellamy's novel, Looking Backward, which is considered a landmark American
>Socialist novel, and which kicked off Nationalism movements throughout the
>western world (which were always socialist oriented), you will see that it is a
>socialist platform. The religious right, that originates in the Southern US, was
>originally solidly Democratic, but split (as part of the Dixiecrats, originally)
>over things like civil rights, gay/lesbian rights, separation of church & state,
>etc. Them joining the Republicans is about as logical as Buchanan joining the
>Reform Party. I just wish he had done a better job of drawing more bigots away
>from the party.
>
Being a lifelong southerner, I have personal knowledge of these particular matters. The Republicans actually lured the Dixiecrats, who were traditionally democratic because Lincoln and what they called the War of Northern aggression (as well as the carpetbaggers and Grant's punitive crackdown) were all Republican associated, away during the 60's and 70's by means of the cynical employment of implicit and covert "code word" appeals to racism and sexism (and lately, homophobia). "Law and order" was one code phrase; "welfare cheat" another, playing to the perception, in bigoted southern white minds, of minorities as disproportionately criminal and lazy, even though most criminals and welfare recipients are in fact caucasian. "Family values" is a code both for christianity and against gay rights, as the pro-choice and pro-life positions on abortion have become litmus gauges for support of or opposition to gender egalitarianism in general. As for the nationalist, and in fact se!
lf-contradictorally at the same time anti-government and jingoistic cast of many of the neo-nazi groups, this reflects their distinction between the (caucasian) people and land of the US, to which they pledge chauvinistic fealty, and the (supposedly ZOG) government of the US and their supposed black and jewish clientele, with which the neo-nazis consider themselves at war (RAHOWA) to free their land and people. They are superficially nationalist rather than internationalist (they like to refer to themselves as the 'real americans'), but in fact their alliances with hate groups in other countries are stronger than their allegiancs to people in general in their own country, and in that sense are ideologically internationalists and intent upon world domination, the very mirror of that propagandistic forgery THE PROTOCOLS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION upon which Henry Ford based his misguided screed THE INTERNATIONAL JEW.
>
>Socialist liberals do not like neo-nazis only because they actually compete on
>the same arguments to different constitutencies. This was evident during the
>Weimar Republic, where Brownshirt and Communist groups would wage streetfights,
>not because they opposed each other ideologically, but because they competed for
>the same constituency. If you study the propaganda put out by communists,
>socialists, and fellow travelers during WWII, you (and George Orwell noticed
>this) will notice that what they publicly think of Hitler was directly reflected
>by the day by day status of the secret alliance between Stalin and Hitler. When
>they split poland, Hilter was a friend of socialism. When he broke the treaty,
>he was a bad guy again. Communists and socialists in the US were brought up fed
>the pap put out by the Soviet propaganda machine about the 'Great Patriotic War'
>against Hitler, and try to deny that Stalin was ever in league with him.
>
But in the contemporary US, the constituency of the social liberals is comprised in large part of exactly the people that the neo-nazis would like to see deported or exterminated.
------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:37:54 MDT