The Media Party in the UK

Instead of hosting the young monarchy couple here in Canada for the past week we should have brought this guy from England over. He certainly has a better grasp of world reality. While we wring our hands in Canada about the leftards that dominate our national agenda and civil service it appears that Britain suffers the same X 10.

He diminishes his own message at the 1 minute mark when he insists that "racists and nazis are far-right".

Here's another awesome Pat Condell 6 minute video, "Let's Blame the Jews". I don't think this video will be shown at any CAIR or Hamas or CBC staff meetings.

He needs to learn the Nazis were Leftists, not International Leftists, but leftists all the same.

Additionally, *Alternative Vote elections will generally lead to the worst candidates being elected and rarely, if ever, the best.

*(Ed Stelmach was elected to be leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta through AV)

Every time he said "B",I thought "C".

BBC and CBC it seems are the same.
The Guardian and The Vancouver Sun it seems are the same.

When a Brit decides to say it like it is, it can be an awesome sight to behold.

Awesome.

"Middle-class, left-wing prickocracy."  That's going into my verbal toolchest.

Yup, two howlers there.
Nazis are "far right" on a pure totalitarian ideological spectrum only, i.e., they are of the totalitarian right, commies totalitarian left. On the full spectrum, as others have pointed out, they are hard leftists. This error really bugs me 'cos it suggests that if libertarian Me No Dhimmi continues to think the way he does, but even more so, he becomes a ... totalitarian.

AND, you think you have a problem now with vested interests? Try proportional representation. Utter disaster. See Israel. As Oz points out, you get the very, very worst representatives chosen from party lists.

He could have made the same rant about the Ceeb.

Proportional representation = minority governments

Ditzy Lizzy would be elegable for a gold plated pension by now...bad enough Hedy Fry......

That was a good rant and an British accent which does not come across as an elitist or bolshevik low class menace like Sid Ryan....

EU rear guard action.

Will it spread, or be shouted down as 'racist' by the msm.

Gee, i wonder...

http://townhall.com/columnists/douggiles/2011/07/03/the_dutch_ditch_multiculturalism/page/full/

He was talking about the CBC right?

In some ways his best yet. I love Caddell. However:

Me No Dhimmi, I think we were seperated at birth (by a few decades :-); re. Geert Wilders: I reiterate the thing about how careful we need to be about "far-right = nazi". Although socialists never feel bad about being at least a little bit of the way along the road to Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot/Kim Il-Sung/those guys who made Africa more f*($ed up/etc., which they pretty much are, no decent person wants to think "my political views are just 10% Hitler". Now "right wing" did have that connotation in Europe in the '30s and '40s, as a sort of short-hand, but it is simply not applicable anymore. Modern rightists, whether conservative or libertarian, are not on that branch of the political tree. By our terms of reference Nazism was a left-wing ideology. This is very important and we can't let it drop; this sort of thing matters more to most politically engaged people than any Laffer curve could.

Of course I realize Caddell doesn't consider himself a Conservative; I bet he considers himself a Libertarian, though.

Proportional representation, which he talks about at the end, is a terrible idea. Who wants to end up like Italy?

(Me No Dhimmi, do you have any referneces for PR in Israel? I'm curious and lazy.)

Nazis were not on the "right". They were leftists just like all other murdering totalitarian bastards.

Far right would be anarchists in the true sense of the word.

Here's one, Black Mamba. It's long!

"Israel maintains the world’s most extreme model of the proportional electoral system, and the results are nothing short of disastrous. This system has been depleting Israel’s political energies for decades: It radicalized the territorial debate, debilitated the economy, obstructed long-term planning, derailed government action, distracted cabinets, diverted budgets, weakened prime ministers, destabilized governments, enabled anonymous and often incompetent people to achieve positions of great influence and responsibility, and blurred the distinctions between the executive and legislative branches of government. Perhaps most crucially, it has led talented, accomplished, moral, and charismatic people to abandon the political arena to the mediocre, unimaginative, and uncharismatic people who currently populate it. The electoral system’s contribution to Israel’s current crisis of leadership and governance is grave and possibly decisive. Now is the time, then, to probe its flaws and consider its replacement-before it is too late."

[SNIP].

"Indeed, the basic reality of most Western democracies, in which political careers begin with, and depend on, constant dialogue with local voters, has yet to arrive in Israel."

Me: That last is the core problem. The candidates are derived by back-room lists made by the party. I got a good chuckle out of that 10% Hitler. Very clever way of putting it, Black Mamba!

I googled: "Israel proportional representation". Lotsa stuff.

LOL. A quick review of the Telegraph piece excoriated PR 'cos it meant that there could be no coaltion without the "hard right" who refuse to make territorial concessions, what we Israel-supporters call, "land for nothing" (in polite company).

So, in this instance, yet a new meaning: "hard right" means anti-suicide.

He learned NAZIs (National Socialist Workers Party) are right wing from the BBC, no doubt.

Pricks, prickocracy and prickery!

I suspect most of us know the or have even used the word "prick" ourselves in the same context, but it is refreshing to hear an articulate conservative Englishman use it so colour fully on the deserving.

I tried, Black Mamba, but nailed by the spam filter.

Labels, who cares we all know what they are, "the enemy".. For more on the Brit situation, Melanie Phillips latest comment.

Good rant. I like the term "prickocracy" and will probably appropriate it for future use.

Like others have commented, I disagree with his characterization of Nazi's as "far right". For too long the self-styled elites have defined political terms and utilize an overly simplified metric of political views. The primary difference I can see between National Socialists and Stalinists is that the National Socialists were more honest in the application of their politics as well as nationalistic. Stalinists were pretty much the same but claimed to be working for a better world for the working class.

I think we need to call out totalitarians and statists wherever we see them and reject the conventional labels which are so 19th century. Members of the prickocracy tend to be statists as well as irritating morons.

'Nazis' are right-wing.

The fact that they have the word 'Socialist' in their full name, is no more significant, than East Germany was called 'The German DEMOCRATIC Republic'

Wording doesn't make Nazis 'socialist' or East Germany 'Democratic'.

Let's show some intellectual honesty here: Nazism was an extreme right wing philopsophy.

'Nazis' are right-wing.

The fact that they have the word 'Socialist' in their full name, is no more significant, than East Germany was called 'The German DEMOCRATIC Republic'

Wording doesn't make Nazis 'socialist' or East Germany 'Democratic'.

Let's show some intellectual honesty here: Nazism was an extreme right wing philopsophy.

Nazism was an extreme right wing philopsophy.

Posted by: Observer at July 4, 2011 6:21 PM
.............................................

By whose definition? Right Wing, from my understanding, focuses on individual rights and free enterprise......the Nazis wanted neither and were closer in philosophy to the all-controlling Soviets, with whom they fought a 'turf war'.

The Nazis & Soviets were as similar as the Crips & Bloods.

Observer@6:21 Just what are you smoking? There was none more socialist than the nazis. If you don't fallow their ideas they kill you. That's the way the left allways works. Hate and kill what they can't understand or agree with.

I don't give a crap what a group/movement calls itself. It's their actions I measure.

Any totalitarian philosophy is left-wing.

Me No Dhimmi is usually spot on, but he whiffed on this one.

Observer, in order to find out how socialist the "right wing" Nazi's were, I suggest your read the book "The Nazi war on Cancer". All of the policies implemented by the German government are identical to what the Canadian government currently uses; universal medicare, population screening for various diseases, demonization of tobacco etc. I have no doubt that if Hitler had dropped dead of a stroke in say 1937 he'd now be viewed favorably in leftist circles as one of the pioneers of socialized medicine.

There was a time when the word "liberal" was used in reference to a political philosophy in which freedom was paramount and rights of the individual were considered fundamental. Some Libertarians refer to themselves as "classical liberals". IMO, the totalitarians have redefined terms and I refuse to go along with their butchery of the English language and hence look at politicians in terms of their statist bias. On this metric, National Socialists and Communists are identical. I don't like the term "Conservative" either as it implies an unwillingness to accept the new. In reality, the self-styled "progressives" are the most wedded to ancient discredited theories and the "Conservatives" are the most ready to make fundamental changes in systems of government that just don't work -- pretty much every "Conservative" on this site would be quite happy to see the size of government slashed by 50% or more.

Nice to hear what our eyes have been telling us for years.
The CBC is no different.

SDH: I think you may have misread me, or perhaps I misspoke myself.
I'm with you: all totalitarian groups are left wing. All I meant was that nazis are right wing ONLY on a purely totalitarian spectrum. On the full spectrum, clearly they're left.
Put another way, commies thought of themselves as left wing and their rival nazis as therefore right wing. They hated them so much 'cos they were so much alike.

Observer: One simple guide is to see the ideological spectrum as separated by two poles: collectivism at the left, individualism on the right. Clearly, all totalitarian regimes, fascist, nazi, islamist, commie, are hard left. As someone observed above, far right (extreme individualism) would be anarchy, which properly understood means spontaneous order not violence.
So you're left-leaning if you favour state solutions in s status-based society over individual solutions in a contract-based one.

Just to add, I loved Condell's piece notwithstanding the definitional flub. He's a stand-up comic after all, not a political philosopher. I laughed out loud at every use of the P word.

Black Mamba, another try -- it's kinda long

SDH: I think you misread me.
YES, all totalitarians are leftists. All I was trying to say is that commies, self-identified as leftists, hated their rival nazis/fascists, and called them right wing. As loki says they're basically the same. Oh, and that's why they hated each other so much: competing for the same space.
Put another way, nazis are right wing only from a commie's perspective on a purely totalitarian spectrum. On the full ideological spectrum, which we refer to, all authoritarian regimes are LEFTIST.

Observer: a simple guide is to think of collectivists as leftists and individualists as rightists. The former prefer state solutions in a status-based society, the latter, individual solutions in a contract-based free-exchange society.

As someone pointed out above, the far right would be extreme individualism or anarchy, which properly understood means spontaneous order not violence and thuggery.

I like loki's point about using the word STATIST. Mark Levin does that in this book.

I also really like what the Sultan Knish says: be identifies two ideological groups: LMA (leave me alone) and MIB (make it better) -- Individualist, statist.

Yep. I whiffed. Me No Dhimmi was spot on as always. Sorry 'bout that.

Observer, the Nazis were socialists.
They didn't only have the word 'socialist' in the name National Socialist German WORKERS Party.

The political slogan Workers of the world, unite! (German: "Proletarier aller Länder vereinigt Euch!", literally "Proletarians of all countries, unite!") is one of the most famous rallying cries of communism, found in The Communist Manifesto (1848), by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.

Volkswagen=People's Car.

Ein Volk! Ein Reich! Ein Führer!: "One people! One state! One leader!
Collectivists?
You better believe it.

Originally the Free Committee for a German Workers' Peace, in 1919, Anton Drexler with Gottfried Feder, Dietrich Eckart and Karl Harrer, changed its name to the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (German Workers' Party, abbreviated DAP).

In early 1920, DAP member 555 Adolph Hitler brought up the idea of renaming the party, and he proposed the name "Social Revolutionary Party".
They finally settled on the NSDAP, National Socialist German Workers Party.

Stalin and Hitler were mutual admirers, and watched and learned from each other, even to the point of Soviet training of German officers until the souring over Spain( although the lovers made up over splitting Poland ).

( I suppose Lenin was far right when he 'privatized', during his New Economic era? )

Whatever. Lefties.

Perhaps Mr. Condell should review his history (RE: Nazis/socialists).

But he is right about the pricks.

And the prickery.

Australia's national broadcaster suffers from the same disease. Our taxes at work....transpose "ABC" for "BBC" and we got the same multiculti, leftist middle class pricks down here too! Pandemic.

Condell is great ... he's been posting scalpel witted rants for about 5 years now.

I don't understand why he'd be confused about nazis though.

Send him an email.....

loki,

It seems everytime the public catches on to what communists are they change the terminology.
Their labels are a moving target that is hard to stay ahead of.
Whereas they were once communists, they became leftists, hippies, liberals and now progressives.
Or even community organizers.

It's analogous to global warming morphing into climate change.

I am a tad distressed the Pat Condell mistakenly thinks that Nazis are right wing fascists ... he is absolutely right about every other thing he has ever ranted about.

Fascists, especially Nazis, were National Socialists. Communists were International Socialists.

You see how that works?

loki and Oz as well as others, exactly.

It is not only Pat Condell that make this error. I run into this misconception constantly when discussing politics with friends and acquaintances.

Fred - demonstarate, don't merely assert. In the '30s in Europe "right" and "left" was a useful shorthand, sure; but what does it mean in terms of ideology? How will conservative ideas lead to fascism?

And how do you live with your "guilty consience" re Stlin, Mao etc. (I assume you're a socialist of some type)?

Black Mamba, it's that "nationalist" bit that seems to get people upset. I'm sure it makes a huge difference in peoples lives if they're invaded by a totalitarian state because they're considered untermenschen rather being invaded by a totalitarian state that seeks to liberate the proletariat (at some upspecified future time when "real communism" will be established). I've had arguments with people who have argued that communism is better using essentially the above argument; my response has been that if the final results are identical then the ideologies responsible for those results are also identical.

I couldn't believe that people actually believed crap like this, but then came the CAGW religion. So it appears there are some people who will believe anything and the only explanation I have for it is perversion of the brains religious centers which are most likely located in the temporal lobes. That suggests that perhaps there may be a cure for statists and religious fanatics.

Me No Dhimmi - I like your LMA and MIB classifications of people. There's nothing more dangerous than an energetic MIB type with no insight.

You're right dance, the totalitarians keep changing the language and the best thing for us to do is to refuse to utilize their terminology. That's why I no longer use the terms "right" or "left" any more preferring to utilize a multidimensional metric similar to that of the worlds smallest political quiz. Just because Aristotle liked dichotamous classifactory schemes doesn't mean we have to unthinkingly use them everywhere.

A little reminder...
(originally) Posted by: Joey at April 23, 2011 4:27 PM

Hitler was named "Man of the Year" in 1938 by Time Magazine and they noted Hitler's anti-capitalistic economic policies:

"Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany's bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on others what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for food- stuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism."

(Source: Time Magazine; January 2, 1939.)

No confusion here. Nazis were/are extreme right-wing. End of story.

Fred - People here at SDA are always open to a good debate. If you believe this. please explain your reasoning for this belief. You must do more that drop the statement and accept that we will believe it.

Many members of the Nazi Party would often say
"First Brown and then Red".
No mistaking their intent there.

William in Ajax, thanks for the reference. That is exactly what Thomas Sowell wrote in "Intellectuals and Society". The left like DuBois, Bernard Shaw and Russell in the 30's praised both Germany and Russia as the two most socialist countries in the world. Once Germany's true intentions were revealed by attacks the left to distance themselves from their former bright light called Nazism a right wing party.

ET has covered this very well in noting it is all about the individual and the collective. The more the country is right wing the more rights the individual has, the more left wing the less rights to the individual and the more control and power the state has. Pretty easy to understand, unless you are a lefty of course.

observer @6:19 & 6:21 - "'Nazis' are right-wing.

The fact that they have the word 'Socialist' in their full name, is no more significant, than East Germany was called 'The German DEMOCRATIC Republic'"

So your point is that the NSDAP were merely claiming to be socialist? But... you're conceding that they claimed to be socialist? Most of us have an idea of how the GDR failed to be "democratic"; how did the Nazis fail to be socialist?

And thanks Me No Dhimmi.

One last waste of bandwidth: Explain to us please how the Nazis were either a)Libertarian or b)Conservative. How were they trying to get the State out of people's lives? Otherwise, what aspects of German culture, or of the broader culture of European civilization of which Germany was a part, were they trying to preserve? (A fondness for vague misty made-up notions of ancient Teutonic mythology does not constitute German or European culture or civilization.)