Anyone Here Support 3rd Position or Fascist Political Philosophy?

[BetaAsPhuck]

I messaged you privately so you wouldn't take it as an attack, but you still did.

I didn't take it as an 'attack', I just find it annoying when people write things like that to anyone. I respect people who try to engage with people, rather than simply citing credentials and saying to people "you are wrong".

you have not read or done any research in the scholarly manner, you have just watched youtube videos and read excerpts which will not inform you properly.

You are making the mistake of projecting contemporary leftist and leftist inspired understanding back in time.

You're just making statements. I would have preferred if you would have presented a case, but you are choosing not to do that.

Also, there are academics who disagree with you like I said, so your education background is not a valid part of any argument you can make.

I was going to send you a list of primary source writings (short papers and abridged works) but I guess not.

That's your choice.

[DDSF1]

I didn't take it as an 'attack', I just find it annoying when people write things like that to anyone. I respect people who try to engage with people, rather than simply citing credentials and saying to people "you are wrong".



You're just making statements. I would have preferred if you would have presented a case, but you are choosing not to do that.

Also, there are academics who disagree with you like I said, so your education background is not a valid part of any argument you can make.



That's your choice.

I didn't cite credentials. I don't know why you keep saying that?

I repeat, you have watched youtube videos and read small excerpts. You are factual wrong regarding certain things, not opinions.

You are very belligerent and a hyper-literalist. Both of which, along with no actual scholarly research, will lead you into the befuddled state you are in.

I have to do real research and prep for my classes and papers. I have no desire of getting into a back-and-forth with someone who does not have even the rudimentary understanding and foundational research necessary--youtube videos and small excerpts of papers and texts are not even remotely close to giving you a foundation to speak from.

If you would like, please private message me and I can refer you to online papers and pdf books that will be of benefit to you if you are seriously interested in researching this topic.

[-JR]

You believe those on the right support big government?

I can see why one would think that being the right is or has been:
Anti-drug
Anti-abortion
Anti-gay marriage

None of these positions align with libertarians views. Regardless of personal views or justification, these impinge on a person's liberty. I happen to agree with the top two, couldn't give a chit about the third but voted against gay marriage here when it came up because-surprise it wasn't about gay marriage but about forcing institutions to bend over for yet another group. It takes big gov to interfere with those things. Both left and right wings require a big strong government to carry out their agenda, the right is usually in total denial about it strangely. They should simply accept it and move forward in the name of a stronger country. Too late now tho....

[BetaAsPhuck]

I didn't cite credentials. I don't know why you keep saying that?

I repeat, you have watched youtube videos and read small excerpts. You are factual wrong regarding certain things, not opinions.

You are very belligerent and a hyper-literalist. Both of which, along with no actual scholarly research, will lead you into the befuddled state you are in.

I have to do real research and prep for my classes and papers. I have no desire of getting into a back-and-forth with someone who does not have even the rudimentary understanding and foundational research necessary--youtube videos and small excerpts of papers and texts are not even remotely close to giving you a foundation to speak from.

I was actually coming to apologize for being pissed off due to perceiving what I thought was an elitist and belittling attitude in your message, but what you've just written reeks to me of elitism and belittlement. (I just saw the *better than you* under your username.)

But I will say that I should have addressed what you wrote in private, because you did address me in private. So sorry about that.

(Also though, if you aren't interested in discussion and debates, why are you on here? I personally appreciate when people are willing to share knowledge and research.)

If you would like, please private message me and I can refer you to online papers and pdf books that will be of benefit to you if you are seriously interested in researching this topic.

That's what I would have appreciated you doing from the start.

Can you send them please?

[DukeOfWoodBerry]

Hey look he's back.

1. Germany had to and was going to invade other nations due to the fact that Germany was close to economic ruin under Hitler and Hitler wanted living space for his Utopian vision of Germanic folk. His focus on the military left other sectors of the economy under-funded and his autarky made sure that his economy was receiving zero foreign currency. There's only so much trading you can do before nations start demanding money. Austria, Czechoslovakia and Memel (Lithuania) kept his nation going for a while due to the fact he could loot the coffers of these territories. Hitler was going to keep going even if Poland had given him Danzig. He was gonna start bullying other nations until eventually someone stood up because there were Germans literally everywhere in Europe and most of these nations didn't dare assimilate them for fear of reprisal. Also you should read the works of Hjalmar Schacht (the economic minister) who was constantly telling Hitler how the economy was collapsing unless he eased the arms expenditure. The same chit was happening in Italy, Japan, and other nations that have adopted the 3rd position principles.

Also no other country were slaughtering Germans. That's Nazi propaganda you're buying into. Goebbels made those events up in order to justify the war effort.

2. Sankara, simply got ousted before the whole rotten structure was revealed. It doesn't matter if he advanced women rights if it's a dictatorship. Nobody has rights lol. He followed in the footsteps of all the other African Socialists and look at many African nations today. Those that embraced capitalism are doing great and those that didn't are wittering away.

3. The homogeneity of a country is not a valid indicator for success. Japan was homogeneous and yet they were stuck in the Samurai age. Only when America came did they become something. France was divided among religious lines and formed a vast empire. The Germans only became strong when they merged together. German is not a synonym for homogeneity because Bavarian Germans and Germans in Prussia are different. Spain wasn't a homogeneous place and yet they formed a huge empire. Rome lasted for 1000+ years and they were extremely diverse. Rome collapsed because of crappy management of its economy (corruption), cronyism, and a failure to adapt to new changes. The barbarians didn't end Rome if thats what you're trynna insinuate. They were happy to become Roman citizens and wanted a bigger say in the Empire. Unlucky to them Rome was already in the process of collapsing and they simply looted what was left.

Genghis Khan's empire collapsed because of himself. He had too many heirs and the empire was simply too vast to manage. So it promptly collapsed afterwards.

Like I said, the 3rd position is nothing but folks who are closet nazis that believe White people should have their own country. And they do have their own countries. Their have never been more whites in the worlds history. Contrary to popular belief European history is not just white history. Rome was a mixture of peoples from Africa, Asia and Europe. Austria Hungary was a mixture of Central Europeans and Slavic groups. England's history is a mixture of european, indian, african and asian history. You think cricket is a European invention? Russian history is a mixture of European and Asian history. The same thing applies to Africa. There are sometimes more than 200 ethnic groups in a single african country. Quit acting like History more specifically European history is a purely White thing. Which is what the 3rd position and Fascists try and do. They've muddied the water so much that it's impossible to prove them wrong. We're all a mix of cultures whether we like it or not.

I rest my case. If you believe in the 3rd positions principles good for you. You're nothing more than a National Socialists who would happily deport millions of folks back to nation they escaped for a better life. It's time you own up to that fact and quit hiding behind fancy labels like your Marxist brethren do.

Germans were being killed, that's a historical fact. You want to talk about propaganda? Consider your sources because history is written by the winners.

Rome may have had other people but they didn't have the same rights. The Roman military went to chit when they tried to diversify it.

You're bit about Europe not being European is laughable. Some crazy left wing talking point.

[Robert00]

I didn't look at any of the videos you posted. They look interesting, but I don't have the patience right now. I also didn't read any responses to your OP. I am just taking your question at face value. The mechanism that is in place to prevent another system like North Korea ultimately relies entirely on the populace. It reminds me of what Kanye West said a few months ago: "Slavery is a choice." It's a compelling statement about the very essence of human nature. How a populace that far outweighs the controlling populace becomes subservient even in the face of deep, real oppression. You think way too much bro, but your question had me thinking as well...

[BetaAsPhuck]

I didn't look at any of the videos you posted. They look interesting, but I don't have the patience right now. I also didn't read any responses to your OP. I am just taking your question at face value. The mechanism that is in place to prevent another system like North Korea ultimately relies entirely on the populace. It reminds me of what Kanye West said a few months ago: "Slavery is a choice." It's a compelling statement about the very essence of human nature. How a populace that far outweighs the controlling populace becomes subservient even in the face of deep, real oppression. You think way too much bro, but your question had me thinking as well...

I don't think mass revolt is a good enough check and balance for the centralized power proposed by the 3rd position.

This is how a modern centralized state works through information control, subversion and suppression of dissent, and mass surveillance.

Have you see what the State has been doing to people in Victoria Australia who try to organize protests? They literally have the power to walk into people's homes without warrants, and drag people out of their cars by force if they don't answer a question...



This youtuber's Chinese wife talks about how she went from the Mainland to Macau and experiences open internet for the first time and got exposed to different ideas and perspectives, then she went back to the mainland and realized how brainwashed about the world people in the mainland were...



I don't know if you are aware, but in China people get arrested if they post anything on social media that is anti-state. People are financially rewarded for spying on people, and software also monitors people. Like here...



We also know that intelligence services subvert and monitor non-mainstream groups, online and offline. GCHQ has a division dedicated to online political subversion...
https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/

The FBI were caught encouraging 8chan users to blame Russia for a mass shooting...
https://ceinquiry.wordpress.com/2019/06/17/fbi-8chan/

Relying on mass revolt as a check and balance in the 21st century, IMO is very poor way of preventing malevolent regimes from rising to, or maintaining power. State's have learned from history, and now also incorporate technology. I don't see a mass violent revolt doing anything.

From what I can see too, a lot of mass revolts have had a lot of outside funding, organizing, and arming. The 3rd position government honestly seems like a 20th century creation, which doesn't take into account modern technology and the ability that Technocrats and Intelligence services have to monitor, subvert, and shutdown dissent. (Look at what happened to the Alt Right, that rose and fell very quickly after the state and corporations targeted them using media and social media).

[BetaAsPhuck]

Ok but nobody really gives a chit about Chile, it's as irrelevant as chithole third world marxist countries like Venezuela and Nicaragua. Pinchoet still gave communists what they deserve, and for that he deserves praise. But at the end of the day it's an irrelevant country.

OK, but you were the one who wrote #teampinochet, I was just pointing out that he was a right-wing Free Market Capitalist dictator, not 3rd position.