They all flipped out and acted like faggots.
-One said Night of Long Knives was proof NatSoc is far-right.
-Anothet said ISIS is Authoritarian Center.
-Another said China was all wrong, because it's a sueveillance state.
-Anothet said Russia was all wrong because it is an oligarchy.
Thoughts?
Comments?
Post thread.
UK for example is far more authoritarian than what the picture suggests
great banter mate
have a beer on me
1. The political compass isn't a terrible method for diagramming governments or ideologies, but it's not perfect. In fact, at some point it gets a little autistic trying to determine what is more "left" or "right", given that you can have a government that is very economically left, while socially right, and still authoritarian in nature.
2. I probably would be China further right and further authoritarian, it's economy has been quite liberalized, while still under the thumb of the government.
3. ISIS is kind of hard to diagram, it really is just traditional Islam. Remember, when Islam first emerged from the desert and began taking over the Mediterranean, it was an all encompassing religion, the truth definition and example of totalitarianism/theocracy. Under a traditional caliphate, there isn't really a church and a state, or even a state controlled by the church. It's just Islam, all of it. I would almost put ISIS northeast of where you put SA.
Really I think people get way too bogged down and offended trying to diagram and calculate where all these things line up, it really doesn't matter which slightly different ideology you think is a hair to the right or the left of another slightly different ideology. The other thing to remember is that most Americans still view American conservatism as "far right", when in fact it's basically old school liberalism, closer to the center than anything else. Not that long ago the DNC and RNC were the American version of "right" and "left", but both parties were relatively centrist. We have kind of a warped view on right, left, liberal, and conservative compared to the rest of the world.
Yeah this is all wrong. If you posted this to bait them good job, but if you believe your chart is right you don't have a good grasp of politics.
>ISIS
ayy lmao
>ISIS left
>While Saudi on right
Oh god what literal retard made this?
Why
As far as ISIS, it depends on from what perspective. If you are not in the party or whatever, you are subject to all kinds of taxes.
And this image is 1st result on google.
it's pretty spot on, tbqh.
I don't think UK is on there...
This is nightmare fuel
>One said Night of Long Knives was proof NatSoc is far-right.
Nazis were economically leftist but socially far-right wingers. Why is that so hard for people to understand?
>If you are not in the party or whatever, you are subject to all kinds of taxes.
I refuse to believe that someone can unironically be this retarded. It is very hard for me to fathom whether you're actually this stupid or if you're just trolling. And in case you're trolling then good job, you sure got me.
>nazis prevent a coup, therefore cant be left wing
Checks out.
What are you talking about, dog rapist? Articulate why you are saying these things.
Understanding the daesh economy
scholar.princeton.edu
>Not using the political triangle
>Expecting people to believe in your political compass
Your first assumption is assuming that they have the same mental capabilities as you when they clearly don't. But yes as you've said, the National Socialists were right-wing socially (anti-immigration, very nationalistic, traditionalists, family values, race realists, very nativist, etc) while being left-wing economically (paid a lot of taxes for things like public healthcare, public education, social programs for the poor, etc).
There is no point in explaining this to you because you have no idea how the left and right diverge. To you the left is "anything bad", and the right is "anything good". So what's the point? Calling ISIS, an ultraconservative fundamentalist religious group, a lefty group, when lefties hate religion, just makes you look like you have a sub 70-IQ. Understand?
And to complement your severe mental retardation, you also have a meme flag. Seems like you're not trolling, just legitimately dumb.
because that's also not right... it's called third position for the reason that it kills the left right dichotomy
Ah, so the Economic Left/Right can't because the Left hates religion... I'm so glad you fleshed it out and showed just how stupid you are.
NatSoc took the best aspects of the left and the right to create the best system. As a Canadian I enjoy the "leftist" aspect of the economy and programs like universal healthcare, public education, good social mobility, etc.
But what I don't like is the leftist aspect of politics. I don't like all this immigration, LGBT, anti family values, etc. Nat Socs had the right system.
Okay, I'll play along. Fine, you said that ISIS was left-wing because of taxes right? So if taxes is what makes you left-wing, then why did you put all the high-taxes Western European states in the far-right section of the political compass? You are living proof on why eugenics is very badly needed. The very fact that stupid people like you are allowed to exist does not bode well for the future of the human species. Please do not reproduce.
They were not in any measure.
They did everything they could (and succeeded) in destroying the remaining influence of the nobility and traditional bourgeoisie. They had a vision of creating the new man. all German kids were taken into intensive forced socialization, education was entirely controlled and the influence of the pater familias was destroyed for the state. You could go on and on on every specialized topic.
>inb4 postmodern bizarro decadent mores question
If you think about faggots (common theme of people complaining about 'far right'), just look what happened to them under other leftist regimes.
>traditionalists
Nazism is an explicitly anti-traditionalist ideology. Nationalism has nothing to do with any left/right divide in general, and in Germany it was certainly a leftist demand as unity of the German people against the liberties of independent lands and of the nobility. you really need to be ignorant of the history of Germany to imagine national unity to be a 'right wing' demand in the 1930s.
The nazis didn't celebrate family values outside of propaganda posters, they had plans to bring up kids purely through state institutions.
Bringing race as a divider in the first half of the 20th century in also not a very strong point. We are talking about times where men like Clemenceau or Roosevelt, over white supremacists, were the darling of the moderate left.
Most of your 'social' points are found more under various communists regimes than anywhere else. Left wing doesn't mean Trudeau, leaf.
What, Norway? Maybe because those tax-dollars are put in that savings account for each citizen. They are like faux-taxes, and are more like payouts. Idk.
Switzerland? Personal income tax rate doesn't exceed 40%. Try again, faggot.
>and in Germany it was certainly a leftist demand as unity of the German people against the liberties of independent lands and of the nobility.
That's entirely wrong. Hitler looked up the older German heroes like Bismarck as unifying forces for Germany, and Hitler has always said that his most hated enemy was not capitalist Western European states, but rather the Communists taking up root in Eastern Europe.
Hitler's entire hatred was concentrated on communists in Eastern Europe. Hell, Hitler hated Slavic people even more than Jews considering that he gave the Jews a chance to leave Germany in peace while the 20,000,000 Slavs he killed got no such chance.
It seems obvious that you've been drinking too much of the Dinesh D'souza kool aid claiming that both Nazis and Communists were the same, when in reality Nat Socs considered communists to be their worst enemies.
>Most of your 'social' points are found more under various communists regimes than anywhere else.
I'm going to assume you're talking about the social points of National Socialism, but correct. The communist states of Eastern Europe were very conservative socially. This divide is most easily seen in Germany where Eastern Germans are very very conservative socially compared to Western Germans. No, the Poles didn't become anti-immigration nationalists overnight, nor did the Russians. You rarely find countries where both the economy and social life are both on the same side of the political spectrum, but you usually categorize them as "left" or "right" depending on which side is the most dominant. In the case of Eastern European communist countries, their leftist economic policies push them far more to the left than their right-wing social policies do.
>They are like faux-taxes, and are more like payouts. Idk.
You're still making excuses. Western European countries pay the most taxes on the planet, and nobody else comes even close.
worldatlas.com
nomadcapitalist.com
Isn't it funny that the countries with the highest taxes on the planet dominate your right-wing side of the spectrum? Now just admit that you were wrong and apologize for being stupid.
Nice post, idk how I missed this.
>"dominate"
None of the top 10 in your first link are even in the OP, you fucking cuck. Idk what to say about France though, you got me.
>There is no point in explaining this to you because you have no idea how the left and right diverge. To you the left is "anything bad", and the right is "anything good". So what's the point? Calling ISIS, an ultraconservative fundamentalist religious group, a lefty group, when lefties hate religion, just makes you look like you have a sub 70-IQ. Understand?
You goddamn fool.
Leftists don't hate *religion*, they hate competing ideologies.
Left and Right don't have proper definition, they are empty tokens that used to describe the seating positions in parliament, that's it.
Economicly it is somewhat defined, but socially? Hiw would that work... By which principle?!
In the end it boils down to just the economics. Everything else grows out of that. Even Authoritarianism isn't except.
A extreme right wing party in this sense would collect little to no taxes and where the state has no money to police whatever laws written there can't be authority.
What fans under socially left wing ideology would not flourish without the backup of force.
Idk what to say about your second link, but it's only Japan, Israel and France that are mapped on the OP. "Dominate"
Just die.
>unifying forces for Germany
If you had at least read my post, you would have realized this is precisely what the German left wanted.
After the KPD was discredited in the PR nightmare that were the micro civil wars in 1920s Germany, the nazis became the united banner of moderate leftism. Their internal struggle was against the nobility, the Catholic church and libertarians. All the people that will dominate West Germany after 1945.
>The communist states of Eastern Europe were very conservative socially.
The absolute state of 'socially left/right' posters. I'm sure destroying any form of tradition, molding people into the new socialist man, nationalizing education was top conservatism.
Besides, I think you project some sort of Anglo post-1960s bullshit on times that were very different. The ultimate problem of the time was about the status of man against the collective, both 'economically' and 'socially'. Saying that Mao promoted Han domination inside his country doesn't make him right wing.
You bring again nationalism, which is not at all a left/right position. The French revolution is the single most nationalist movement in history, and the blueprint for nationalist movements after it. Was it right-wing? Were the king they beheaded and the manlet that put an end to it left wing?
You are confused about what you want too. Apparently you'd like that 'leftist economy and right society', whatever the second term means, then state that commies in the east had just that, and so did nazis, then complain about them being assimilated.
>ISIS are the real communists
Stop being a nigger.
>they hate competing ideologies.
Yes but who doesn't.
>Left and Right don't have proper definition
Actually, it is liberalism and conservatism which don't have a proper definition around the world. Per example conservatism in the US is supposedly about more "freedom", while conservatism in say Saudi Arabia, is more about religion in politics and authoritarianism. But when it comes to the left and right there are ideas we do most often associate to one side. And it just happens that ideas like anti-immigration, nationalism, traditionalism, religion, etc are associated with the right. And rest with left.
An extreme right wing party could collect a lot of taxes or could not. Republicans still need to collect taxes for things like funding the military and providing corporate welfare. The left vs right dichotomy is based off much more than taxes.
Most of your "far-right" countries are Western countries (except for Japan and Israel) with high taxes. That's the point you dimwit.
This is a good thread.
>ISIS, the farthest of religious fundamentalists
>left
op is just a retard who treats the 2s map as a 1d scale of top-left bad to right-down good, thus he places everyone he disagrees with to the top left
>Their internal struggle was against the nobility, the Catholic church and libertarians
Yes, hence why Hitler cuddled with the Catholic Church and corporate oligarchs (who were allowed to keep their private industries) while declaring genocide on communists in the east, right? It wasn't the nobles, Catholics and libertarians who were the first to be purged by the Nat Socs, it was, you guess it, the commies. So yeah, so much for "banner of leftism" when both the Nat Socs and the communists were in open warfare in the streets of Berlin.
>I'm sure destroying any form of tradition
Most cultural elements were preserved. The social life of the communists would be considered far-right by our standards. As I said, they were extremely anti-immigrant, extremely homophobic, bullied minorities, etc. They did have some leftist elements (albeit imposed on them) such as moving away from religion but it was limited. Nationalizing education was an example of leftism as I mentioned earlier (public education).
>The French revolution is the single most nationalist movement in history
Nationalism is not the same as patriotism. Nationalism involves dislike for other countries. The French revolutionaries were patriots (as they called themselves), not nationalists, as patriotism involves loving your country while nationalism is disliking others. The French Revolutionary Wars were an example of nationalism, but the French Revolution itself was patriotism. Important to know the difference.
>Apparently you'd like that 'leftist economy and right society', whatever the second term means, then state that commies in the east had just that, and so did nazis, then complain about them being assimilated.
Yes, both Eastern Europeans and Eastern Germans were right-wing socially. They still are today. Why can't we be like them socially, and like Western Europe when it comes to the economy? Best of both worlds.
that bench is a photoshop.