Profane MuthaFucka's Journal: Laughable logic

An example of the kind of shit logic that Jonah Goldberg uses in his stupid book "Liberal Fascism":

1. Nazi is shorthand for National Socialism.
2. Socialism is a left political philosophy.
3. Therefore the Nazis were leftists.

Using this same logic:

1. USSR is shorthand for Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
2. Republic (the root of Republican) is right there in the name
3. Therefore the Republican Party is Soviet.

No further refutation of "Liberal Fascism" is required. The entire book is filled with that same logic, impressive only to children.

Follow-up in the same vein

[damn_registrars]

The word publican [merriam-webster.com] is an old term for a tax collector.

The word republican has publican right in it.

Therefore republicans just want to re-collect your taxes and give them back to the wealthy.

Re:

[Profane MuthaFucka]

You don't read me much, do you.

Shallow and petty politics? OK then, lt's go. What is the foundation of all politics. Name it.

Re:

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Nope, Reich is talking there about fascism. I'm talking about the foundations of all politics, which I've discussed at length in journal entries going way back.

Another journal entry on this will appear, so try again there.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

The foundation of all politics is managing the mismatch of desires to resources.
Money and/or power are certainly common instances.
As far as your crayon-level oversimplification of LF, it really helps to understand that Goldberg is showing historical overlaps and connections far more than tossing out syllogisms.
If you can show a specific instance of an erroneous historical assertion, that would lend some mass to your highly accelerated argument, which currently has zero force.

Re:

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Anyone who reads the book and knows a few things can see that Goldberg is full of shit, and will feel quite sorry for your inability to also see it.

But BZZZZT, wrong answer on the foundation of all politics. I think I'll make another journal entry for that topic, so don't try again in this one.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

OK, I'm genuinely interested in what you think more foundational than my answer.

Re:

[Profane MuthaFucka]

You are beating around the bush on it, to give you a hint.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Definitions, then?
Or, the authority to make them stick?
Discussion shifts to your JE.