Most Far-Left and Far-Right poster on Atlas?

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

I would say I'm the most Far Right poster on Atlas.
Especially on immigration,social issues & Economics!

I might compete with you on being furthest to the right.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

I'm probably one of the 10% most Far-Left posters. Surprised i'm not named yet.

[Saint Milei]

It's probably better to distinguish between social, economic, civil liberties, and cultural issues since the left doesn't want to admit people like hitler and spencer are truly lefties to the core on the political spectrum.

On social issues, I'd probably say extremerepublican based on his PM score for far right
On fiscal issues, it's definitely me for far right
On civil liberties, it's a tossup between any generic libertarian/constitutitonalist and any generic anti-statist progressive for far left
On cultural issues, no idea

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'm probably one of the 10% most Far-Left posters. Surprised i'm not named yet.

LOL no. You endorsed Trump.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I'm probably one of the 10% most Far-Left posters. Surprised i'm not named yet.

It's because you're not a hack and you come across as too reasonable to be a commie.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

It's probably better to distinguish between social, economic, civil liberties, and cultural issues since the left doesn't want to admit people like hitler and spencer are truly lefties to the core on the political spectrum.

Ah, this old mantra again.  Why do you folks seem to believe that if you repeat a lie often enough, it will magically become true?

Given what happend to actual Socialists under the Nazi regime (here's a random example), I do find the interwebs-tendency to scream that Hitler-Was-A-Socialist to be in astonishingly bad taste.

Oh for God's sake. No.

This issue seems to be raised on the forum a couple of times every year and I'm now tired of bothering to refute it in any detail, so I'll just note a couple of points:

1. No credible historian of the twentieth century believes that the Nazi regime in general or Hitler in particular were 'left-wing' in any respect. This includes some rather right-wing economic historians who specialise in aspects of Nazi economic policy, so this is not an example of a notoriously lefty profession closing ranks.

2. Nazi economic policy was geared entirely towards rearmament (which was achieved via an extraordinarily complicated form of fraud) and not towards any remotely left-wing (however defined) objective. Contrary to what is frequently asserted, the standard of living for the working class in Germany actually declined during the pre-war Nazi period as wages were kept under tight control by means of... well... authoritarian rule.

3. German industrialists (most of them) did remarkably well out of the Nazi regime and this was intentional (more so, in some ways, than in contemporary economies). The examples of Krupp and IG Farben are well known, but they were merely extreme examples of a more general pattern. The close relationship between capital and the regime was good for both of them; as profits soared, so did corporate contributions to the Nazi Party (why, yes. This was a rather corrupt regime).

4. A Trade Union controlled by the government is not a Trade Union.

Fundamentally, you can only argue that 'Hitler was economically left wing' if you define 'economically left wing' as 'prepared to intervene in the economy in order to make it grow'. Which is absurd.

Nazi underlying ideology = virulent nationalism/militarism, an especially nasty take on popular racial theories, anti-semitism (part of the former but enough of an issue, obviously, to deserve a mention on its own) and anti-socialism, combined with weird fetishes regarding leaders, action, and so on. Everything else was window dressing or a cynical attempt to win support (both electorally and in terms of powerful individuals and interest groups). If you think Hitler or any other leading Nazi gave a sh!t about whatever drivel the party adopted as its platform in its early years, then you should probably avoid further comment on the issue. Because there is just a little bit of a consensus over this.

Arguing that state intervention in the economy = Socialism isn't very clever. It means that you have to (for example) count all mainstream political parties and institutions in Europe between about 1945 (1940 or so in the case of Britain) and about 1973 or so as Socialist. Even more absurdly, it means that you have to count all European states before the rise of laissez faire as Socialist. And I think that would be a step into lunacy too far even for you.

Now, the sad thing about the internets is that these arguments are so common that you can just...

And it's worth noting how pro-business the Nazi regime was in reality. Somewhere, deep within my pile of box files, I've a little chart comparing donations to the NSDAP from IG Farben (a company critical to the implementation of the Final Solution, as it happens) with IG Farben's profits. I will eventually find it and post it here - makes for interesting reading.

Because the Nazis = Socialist canard isn't worth wasting much time dismissing. No one (no one honest anyway) with a basic knowledge of early 20th century German history takes it seriously.

(for the record, IG Farben was a German chemical giant, the largest company in Europe (some of the time), a major financial donor to the Nazi regime (and as the companies profits went up, so did donations), a major user of slave labour and the manufacturer of Zyklon B. It was broken up (more or less) by the Allies at the end of the War. Krupp is another well-known example of a big company doing well out of the Nazis).

I mean, there's more but I can't be bothered to dig it up right now.

But I repeat my comment about bad taste.

Leftist economic garbage nonetheless

No. No, no; this is untrue. Nazi economic policy was categorically not left-wing. It was a very strange thing - the entire purpose was to facilitate the fastest rearmament possible, while also not alienating their conservative junior coalition partners or creating an international crisis before it was time for one - and at its core was fraud, curiously enough. Hjalmar Schacht, a banker and a former liberal who had drifted a mile to the right during the early 1920s, came up with a complex scam (there's a very readable summary here; not perfect but it gives a good general overview) that enabled them to do just that. Also critical to it was extensive co-operation with certain giant private industrial interests (I will mention again the names IG Farben and Krupp) who got from the Nazi regime pretty much everything they had ever wanted out of a government including, critically, the total annihilation of the labour movement. While the regime was naturally keen to see economic growth (what government isn't?), its policies were not redistributive and working class living standards are generally accepted to having fallen during the 1933-39 period, with the crushing of the trade unions being a major factor. And so on and so forth; the general pattern is quite clear.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

I'm probably one of the 10% most Far-Left posters. Surprised i'm not named yet.

LOL no. You endorsed Trump.

Yes, that's true. But not anymore, now I endorsed Biden. But you have a point. Also the most far-left user would not endorse Biden. Everyone has the right to vote for the candidate whoever she or he wants to vote for though, so i'm not convincing others to vote Biden and at this point i don't have to, because Biden should normally easily win this election.

I'm probably one of the 10% most Far-Left posters. Surprised i'm not named yet.

It's because you're not a hack and you come across as too reasonable to be a commie.

Thank you. You always have to stay critical to yourself and your own ideology. That's very important to me. The left is in my view often right, but certainly not always.

[UkrainianRepublican]

I am actually the most right-wing person here who hates Trump.   

[Mr. Reactionary]

I am actually the most right-wing person here who hates Trump.   

Says who? I want in on this action.

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

I am actually the most right-wing person here who hates Trump.  

Says who? I want in on this action.

Yeah, my first thought was "what about Mr. Reactionary"?

IMRIC, Trump doesn't do nearly enough deregulation and decentralization of the federal government for him. 

[UkrainianRepublican]

I am actually the most right-wing person here who hates Trump.  

Says who? I want in on this action.

Yeah, my first thought was "what about Mr. Reactionary"?

IMRIC, Trump doesn't do nearly enough deregulation and decentralization of the federal government for him. 

For me Trump  is way too left wing on economics, way too isolationist. And that's just speaking from policy-wise viewpoint

[Battista Minola 1616]

Bumping this because we have a new tankie called Saruku who might well be taking the spot of most far-left poster in the conventional sense.



[Although of course going by Cath's God/country/family vs. globalism/"progress" axis, which I don't necessarily agree with but I find fascinating, beating Blairite is almost literally impossible]

[Skye]

Bumping this because we have a new tankie called Saruku who might well be taking the spot of most far-left poster in the conventional sense.



[Although of course going by Cath's God/country/family vs. globalism/"progress" axis, which I don't necessarily agree with but I find fascinating, beating Blairite is almost literally impossible]

You know, every time I see a tankie, I wonder if these people are for real or if they're faking it.

Then I remember where I come from and the feeling goes away.

[Battista Minola 1616]

Bumping this because we have a new tankie called Saruku who might well be taking the spot of most far-left poster in the conventional sense.



[Although of course going by Cath's God/country/family vs. globalism/"progress" axis, which I don't necessarily agree with but I find fascinating, beating Blairite is almost literally impossible]

You know, every time I see a tankie, I wonder if these people are for real or if they're faking it.

Then I remember where I come from and the feeling goes away.

Choose: MAGAzolanos or Venezuelan tankies?

[Ancestral Republican]

I've long been bent to extremism. At various times in my life I would have described myself as someone worthy of the moniker on either end. But as you can see by my matrix scores, I'm probably fairly conventionally on liberal side of things, at least by European standards.

Of course, in America where GeneralMcArthur's "poor people having healthcare will make ME die" ideology is still mainstream on the so-called "left", I would be considered radical.

[Skye]

Bumping this because we have a new tankie called Saruku who might well be taking the spot of most far-left poster in the conventional sense.



[Although of course going by Cath's God/country/family vs. globalism/"progress" axis, which I don't necessarily agree with but I find fascinating, beating Blairite is almost literally impossible]

You know, every time I see a tankie, I wonder if these people are for real or if they're faking it.

Then I remember where I come from and the feeling goes away.

Choose: MAGAzolanos or Venezuelan tankies?

MAGAzolanos, probably. They can be pretty awful (they like to say Venezuelans for Biden are closet chavistas, which is a pretty shameful lie), but at least they don't spend their afternoons defending the regime that destroyed my country. For most Venezuelans abroad, the boat to try to reason with chavistas sailed a long time ago.

The MAGAzolanos thing is pretty interesting, and I find it a bit surprising too since some of my friends have turned into them. But it's what you get when there's such a drastic change from the Obama administration's behavior towards the Venezuelan issue, to the Trump administration's. Some are with Trump just because they believe it's in the best interest for Venezuela, others, you'd find it difficult to tell against your average American MAGA types. However, their discourse has turned extremely toxic, so it's not like I have a positive opinion of them.

[Battista Minola 1616]

I've long been bent to extremism. At various times in my life I would have described myself as someone worthy of the moniker on either end. But as you can see by my matrix scores, I'm probably fairly conventionally on liberal side of things, at least by European standards.

Of course, in America where GeneralMcArthur's "poor people having healthcare will make ME die" ideology is still mainstream on the so-called "left", I would be considered radical.

Let me be picky... "liberal side of things, at least by European standards" in the context of your politics does not make much sense because liberal != left-of-centre in Europe.

[Ancestral Republican]

I've long been bent to extremism. At various times in my life I would have described myself as someone worthy of the moniker on either end. But as you can see by my matrix scores, I'm probably fairly conventionally on liberal side of things, at least by European standards.

Of course, in America where GeneralMcArthur's "poor people having healthcare will make ME die" ideology is still mainstream on the so-called "left", I would be considered radical.

Let me be picky... "liberal side of things, at least by European standards" in the context of your politics does not make much sense because liberal != left-of-centre in Europe.

I know, but you wouldn't find a Liberal party in general, that opposes (at least on paper) things like universal healthcare and living wages, and increased social welfare spending. Of course, how that works in actual practice is a different matter entirely as we've seen with Macron's government and the Cameron-Clegg coalition.

[Big Abraham]

I've long been bent to extremism. At various times in my life I would have described myself as someone worthy of the moniker on either end. But as you can see by my matrix scores, I'm probably fairly conventionally on liberal side of things, at least by European standards.

Of course, in America where GeneralMcArthur's "poor people having healthcare will make ME die" ideology is still mainstream on the so-called "left", I would be considered radical.

Let me be picky... "liberal side of things, at least by European standards" in the context of your politics does not make much sense because liberal != left-of-centre in Europe.

I know, but you wouldn't find a Liberal party in general, that opposes (at least on paper) things like universal healthcare and living wages, and increased social welfare spending. Of course, how that works in actual practice is a different matter entirely as we've seen with Macron's government and the Cameron-Clegg coalition.

Sure you would. The FDP in Germany opposed the introduction of a minimum wage law in 2015, and far from wanting to increase social spending, many call for privatizations and more laissez faire policies, not welfarism.

[SevenEleven]

[Although of course going by Cath's God/country/family vs. globalism/"progress" axis, which I don't necessarily agree with but I find fascinating, beating Blairite is almost literally impossible]

Forgetting someone?

[Ancestral Republican]

I've long been bent to extremism. At various times in my life I would have described myself as someone worthy of the moniker on either end. But as you can see by my matrix scores, I'm probably fairly conventionally on liberal side of things, at least by European standards.

Of course, in America where GeneralMcArthur's "poor people having healthcare will make ME die" ideology is still mainstream on the so-called "left", I would be considered radical.

Let me be picky... "liberal side of things, at least by European standards" in the context of your politics does not make much sense because liberal != left-of-centre in Europe.

I know, but you wouldn't find a Liberal party in general, that opposes (at least on paper) things like universal healthcare and living wages, and increased social welfare spending. Of course, how that works in actual practice is a different matter entirely as we've seen with Macron's government and the Cameron-Clegg coalition.

Sure you would. The FDP in Germany opposed the introduction of a minimum wage law in 2015, and far from wanting to increase social spending, many call for privatizations and more laissez faire policies, not welfarism.

Hmm, I guess it depends on the country and where the party falls on the liberal axis.

[parochial boy]

I've long been bent to extremism. At various times in my life I would have described myself as someone worthy of the moniker on either end. But as you can see by my matrix scores, I'm probably fairly conventionally on liberal side of things, at least by European standards.

Of course, in America where GeneralMcArthur's "poor people having healthcare will make ME die" ideology is still mainstream on the so-called "left", I would be considered radical.

Let me be picky... "liberal side of things, at least by European standards" in the context of your politics does not make much sense because liberal != left-of-centre in Europe.

I know, but you wouldn't find a Liberal party in general, that opposes (at least on paper) things like universal healthcare and living wages, and increased social welfare spending. Of course, how that works in actual practice is a different matter entirely as we've seen with Macron's government and the Cameron-Clegg coalition.

Opposition to welfare spending or increasing the wages of low earners is basically the standard position of European liberal parties. None would actually come out against universal healthcare, but that it is because it would be so suicidial as to not even be worth thinking about. When we say Euro liberal parties are on the right of the political spectrum, it isn't a "US politics is more right wing thing", it is genuinely that in (non-anglophone) Europe, "Liberal" means being in favour of deregulated capitalism, low taxes, low welfare spending and the whole package.

Or - to develop things further, back when Macron was at least pretending to be anything other than a right-wing politician, it tended to be the term "Social Liberal" that was bandied about, rather than liberal.

[Battista Minola 1616]

[Although of course going by Cath's God/country/family vs. globalism/"progress" axis, which I don't necessarily agree with but I find fascinating, beating Blairite is almost literally impossible]

Forgetting someone?

Lololol

No. I think you may be close second. Quite aptly you are both from Los Angeles. It must be endemic.

[Ancestral Republican]

I've long been bent to extremism. At various times in my life I would have described myself as someone worthy of the moniker on either end. But as you can see by my matrix scores, I'm probably fairly conventionally on liberal side of things, at least by European standards.

Of course, in America where GeneralMcArthur's "poor people having healthcare will make ME die" ideology is still mainstream on the so-called "left", I would be considered radical.

Let me be picky... "liberal side of things, at least by European standards" in the context of your politics does not make much sense because liberal != left-of-centre in Europe.

I know, but you wouldn't find a Liberal party in general, that opposes (at least on paper) things like universal healthcare and living wages, and increased social welfare spending. Of course, how that works in actual practice is a different matter entirely as we've seen with Macron's government and the Cameron-Clegg coalition.

Opposition to welfare spending or increasing the wages of low earners is basically the standard position of European liberal parties. None would actually come out against universal healthcare, but that it is because it would be so suicidial as to not even be worth thinking about. When we say Euro liberal parties are on the right of the political spectrum, it isn't a "US politics is more right wing thing", it is genuinely that in (non-anglophone) Europe, "Liberal" means being in favour of deregulated capitalism, low taxes, low welfare spending and the whole package.

Or - to develop things further, back when Macron was at least pretending to be anything other than a right-wing politician, it tended to be the term "Social Liberal" that was bandied about, rather than liberal.

Thanks, my impression was that Liberals tend to be more left-wing in their platforms than in how they actually govern, but I was basing that primarily on France and the UK.