ABC’s Brian Ross struck out hard when he tried to smear the Tea Party after the Colorado Batman shooting, on national television.
ABC didn’t fire him for making a boob of himself and making the network look biased and amateur. Heck, behind the scenes the suits probably praised his “investigative instinct,” which consisted of Googling a name and saying whatever he found on the air, since it momentarily made the right look bad. His heart was in the right place.
Well, now Ross has found his right-wing killer, in the form of the Sikh temple shooter.
After explaining Wade Page’s links to violent, bigoted groups, Good Morning America co-host George Stephanopoulos wondered how this murderer could have purchased a gun, Ross insisted that the FBI did not have “enough evidence to open a full field investigation because of his links to these right-wing, neo-Nazi groups.“
Nazism is a form of socialism (national socialism), which is a species of the left. Always was. The Nazis were slightly to the right of the communists, but not a whole lot. I guess in Brian Ross’ world, anything to the left of communism is “right-wing.”
You have to understand that anyone who does anything with a gun HAS to be right wing. Left wingers use bombs and poison. Ergo this neo-nazi is a right wing nut. If he had thrown a bomb he would have been like the unibomber and become a lefty hero who was only trying to rid the world of more odious religion.
Until June 1941 Great Britain was guilty of “premature anti-fascism”.
Afterwards it was vital to differentiate among the several forms of Marxism.
Those distinctions are as relevant to the American Founding as the distinctions among the various faces of organized crime (Yakuza or Sicilian Mafia or the Medellin Cartel).
Maybe a problem for the Democratic Party is where Tammany Hall and the Ku Klux Klan fit into all of this.
You hear anout Stephanopoulos’ mental issues? Tragic when they occur, no doubt…
“about”. Apologies.
– dick.
Mr. Ross easily could have been one of the next casualties if that murderous thug had had his way beyond the Sikh temple, particularly if his neo-nazi ideals could, somehow, have been enacted in our society as a result of his rampage. And Mr. Ross would have been able to count on a free market, right-wing individualist carrying a firearm to save his pathetic backside from the same leftist thug(s) trying to kill him or his way of life. The dolt likely still would not be grateful for it, either.
Nazism is a form of socialism (national socialism), which is a species of the left. Always was.
I know that this is a common meme these days, especially here at PJM where I see it regularly. It’s wrong though.
Consider the simple fact that Hitler LOATHED the Communists. Let’s consider just four of the ways in which he demonstrated that:
1. He chose to include red in the Nazi flag. (For example: http://mrbrownww2.pbworks.com/f/1269556426/nazi%20flag.jpg). That was purely and simply a deliberate insult to the Communists who considered red THEIR colour. I know this because I read Mein Kampf once. Amidst all of his delusional ravings, Hitler confides that he deliberately added red to the Nazi flags to irk his Communist enemies.
2. Hitler’s goons, the Brownshirts, were notorious for “mixing it up” with Communists in bloody confrontations. The Nazis even wrote a song about one of the Brownshirts who fell in a street battle with the Communists. Here’s a video with English subtitles: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mb5MjWZ7kxk
3. After the Reichstag fire, Hitler arrested all of the opposition politicians including the Communists.
4. In June 1941, Hitler sent 299 Divisions against the Soviet Union in the largest invasion in history.
Now, tell me how Nazism is a species of the Left when its primary focus seemed to be DESTROYING THE LEFT.
“Now, tell me how Nazism is a species of the Left when its primary focus seemed to be DESTROYING THE LEFT.”
The new left of the 1960s were bent on destroying the (comparatively) earnest liberals of the New Deal era. They were still both on the same side of the aisle.
Sorry, I’m not following the logic of that. Can you please clarify that, particularly its relevance to the (literal) war between Nazism and Communism from 1941 to 1945?
H Reardon:
The national socialists of Germany were very intent on destroying the communists, as you noted. But the communists were not THE LEFT, but one TYPE of a far left dictatorship. The national socialists were trying to destroy their competitors on the far left, the communists.
Stalin and Hitler were both fascist far left dictators, the key difference is that Stalin slaughtered more people.
I’m beginning to get a glimmer of the reasoning now. Maybe.
Are you saying they were close together in many things but had a couple of superficially minor but ideologically insurmountable ideas that just couldn’t be reconciled? Something like Trotsky and Stalin’s differences? Or even the ones from Emo Philips’ famous joke as presented by Philips in this video? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBKIyCbppfs
For Hitler, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. Thus he formed an alliance with Soviet Russia that allowed him to develop the capabilities to become a major world pain in the @$$ prior to his turning on his erstwhile communist compadre (shortly before said compadre turned on *him*, I ‘spect, it’s what totalitarian dictators *do*.)
What part of NAZI (the German acronym for: Nationalsozialismus)are you not understanding. Socialism is not a ‘rightist’ ideology. Although it might be slightly right of Communism they’re both Gummint power good, people power bad ideologies.
Of course Mr. Ross is going to chalk up the killings at the Sikh temple to right-wing extremism, because white supremacy is what he considers right-wing. The killings really should be chalked up to xenophobia and stupidity and malice. The Sikhs appear to be the most white among immigrants today, and probably the most benign.
Ross exercised uncharacteristic restraint in trotting out his assessment blaming the right wing — the bullets had already stopped flying.
@6: “Consider the simple fact that Hitler LOATHED the Communists.”
Henry, hatred between two groups does not mean those groups are unrelated. Indeed, infighting between two very similar groups can be the ugliest kind of fighting. Northern Ireland’s Protestants and Catholics are both Christian, and Sunnis and Shi’i are both Muslim. On the political scale, recall the animosity in 2008 between the Clinton and Obama camps- it was the Clinton side that started the whole “birther” thing, not right wingers. Witness the animosity between the “Tea Party” and “RINO’s”
In the middle east, various factions of Palestinians have killed more of each other than the Israelis have. The “Enemy” in Mao’s Cultural Revolution were mostly other communists.
Monty Python’s Life Of Brian spoofed this brilliantly with the many different “splitter” groups of the “People’s Front of Judea”.
If there’s one thing a visionary fanatic hates (and in a nod to Python, Really, REALLY hates,) it’s another visionary fanatic, who does not recognize the supremacy of the first fanatic’s vision.
Hitler’s hatred of Communists wasn’t even unusual, given this history. Par for the Course.
Okay then, that’s perhaps the clearest answer yet to my question over how Nazism and Communism could be considered synonymous.
I’ve had trouble with this claim ever since I first saw it here simply because it did not seem to jibe with the actual events of history. I have asked my question a few times but today is the first time that I can recall anyone giving me any answers that actually made sense.
So you’re picturing this as a Bloods vs. Crips kind of thing; there’s no great difference between the two but neither wants to see the other as Top Dog….
I’m going to need to think about this a bit.
Henry, you sly dog. You teased the correct answer out of of Swami, although, JWJ and Ed Driscoll also did really well. Swami hit thed nail on the head. I have seen some old pictures from a Communist gathering in Munich? (not sure of the actual location). Hitler was a participant and is seen in a group photograph with other German Communist Party members. Hitler was probably a Communist Party member before he started his own gig.
Hitler had an animosity for the Communists, probably because he was too extreme even for them. They most likely pitched him out of the club. Thats my guess. As to why he blamed the Communists for some of Germany’s problems, the Nazi’s had a patent on how to exploit a scapegoat. Sorry I can’t provide the links to the commie group photo of Hitler and his comrades. Diligent research could likely turn it up.
Commies and Nazi’s are both leftie movements. Have you ever noticed how the LSM types refer to hardline Communists as right wing or conservative? Their is no such thing as a right wing Communist. Hard liners are further left than than a run of the mill commie, which again makes them both: Communists
During my time on active duty my understanding of Sikhism didn’t include the concept of ‘peaceloving’. They seemed a quite militaristic religion. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
The US Army was quite happy to enlist Sikhs, even allowed the eccentric hair/turban rules until not too long ago. Having said that it’s fortunate that that cashiered bastardi is worm food. Saves us great expense and the hand-waving angst of the media.