The end of capitalism is NOT the beginning of free stuff. You can never kill capitalism. There will always exist black markets

No they can't think. If they could think then they would not be socialists or communists or support fascism or Nazism. That is WHY the 'something for nothing' and authoritarian-leaning leftist IS a leftist in the first place.

Oh you didn't know that? Perhaps you could explain the difference between Socialism and National Socialism. Apparently Hitler really wasn't much of a "National" socialist because he wanted to take over the world which would make Hitler a global socialist or in other words just another socialist.

Not to mention, American Progressives, prior to Hitler invading Poland, used to think that Hitler (along with Stalin and Mussolini) were the "men of the future".

a0rqe1.jpg (click to show)

the nazis were NOT socialists.
the were FASCISTS, which can occur from both ends of the political spectrum, ( sorry libs,but it can come from the lefties too).
this is not really debated among scholars.
but it IS hotly debated in online echo chambers.

a reference source my good man, for your perusal:

https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists

Go back 100 years and no one will tell you that fascism is on the right. All of the variations of socialism are and always have been on the extreme left. That includes fascism, nazis and communists.

What change is when WWII started. The Progressives rapidly divorced themselves of Nazis and fascists and then to save face they started promoting the idea that fascists and nazis are on the extreme right. And they were very successful of pushing that lie.

The problem is Nazi is an acronym for National Socialist German Workers Party. Just because they were "national" socialists means nothing. They're still socialists. They had all of the same ideals that other socialists believe in. They promoted free healthcare, free education, income equality through wealth redistribution, social justice, and everything else that AOC, Bernie Sanders and the rest want to see happen in America.

Mussolini was a socialist before he became a fascist. The reason it was easy for him to switch is because fascism is socialism with a little (very little) lenience on businesses. Mussolini saw how Lenin (self proclaimed Democratic Socialist) and Stalin (self proclaimed International Socialist) nearly starved the Soviet Union to death by throwing farmers of their land and business owners out of their companies and put their "experts" in their place. Fascism is socialism that lets farmers stay on their farms and business owner run their businesses. Both lose property rights and both are micromanaged by the government but that is the only real difference.

Obviously how each nation implements their version of socialism will be a little different because no two dictators are the same. But the core of all of the above is identical. Socialism = fascism = nazism = communism.

If you put two at either end of the political scale with them all nearly being identical then where does freedom lie? You have to put them all on the total government control side and anarchy (i.e. no government at all and no plans to install any kind of government) on the other side.

It's the only political scale that makes any sense. The one promoted by academia is hogwash.

Hitler only hated communists because they saw Moscow as their ideological home. He was a socialist with shared ideological roots with the communists.

I agree, but it depends on the scale you use. It's actually better to use a 2d grid rather than a line. The you have 4 different descriptors rather than 2.

Is that the libertarian Nolan chart? That works because it puts all authoritarians on one side and libertarians on the other. But it puts conservatives and liberals opposite of each other but equally between libertarians and authoritarians. That is wrong. Liberals are all authoritarians, even if they don't understand just how authoritarian they are. The Democrat party has decided to go full on socialist now.

The other problem is that chart doesn't even consider anarchists. Anarchy needs definition because there are a lot of people running around talking about anarchy when all they want is to use anarchy to destroy capitalism and the current government with the ultimate goal of authoritarianism. But there are anarchists who aren't about bringing a government down. They just want to live without a government at all. Some talk about small neighborhood sized local governments where everyone knows everyone. There are those who prefer voluntaryists over anarchist.

Those people are even more freedom minded than libertarians.

I'm neither libertarian or an anarchist but I understand and respect their point of views.

I am just a conservative. I'm not a big government conservative, I am not a war hawk conservative. I am a "I want to be left alone conservative". I do not want the administrative state that Woodrow Wilson started. I don't want the federal reserve and I believe taxation is theft.