Ah, I see you are a Marxist of the Groucho persuasion.
And don't forget the reassuring warm fuzzy feeling one gets from the oversight of the courts and Congress... Evidently, we were shook up over nothing.
Oversight as in... Oops we forgot to oversee this here TLA.
Aka, tying the cat to the bacon. Clearly self-regulation is the way to go, after all it worked wonders for the financial sector.
Playing the devil's advocate, when was the last time you got sued for malpractice for bugs in your code?
What is wrong with that concept, really?
I've no problem hearing Kaching! every time I get a blue screen.
Just wait until your code is driving a car and crashes. I predict the lawyer scum will keep afloat.
Wait, surely you didn't read my post about classical interpretation of the left/right wing politics as somehow praising the accomplishments of Stalin and Mao?
Also, regimes such as the Soviet Union and East Germany were not exactly known for actually putting workers in charge of anything. They arguably abused the Socialist moniker even worse than the nazis.
I don't know who wrote that paragraph I cited, probably a dozen or so individuals. More importantly it has been *read* by very many people, all of whom could've flagged any errors.
So I'm going to go ahead and put more trust in Wikipedia than a pamphlet of the Nazi propaganda czar, but thanks.
Clearly I'm not denying that the nazis tried to appropriate some of the momentum that (internationalist) Socialism was having in Mid/East Europe. But in practice they never were left wing, in the parlance of their times nor ours.
If you can cite any credible historian who argues that the nazis were left wing, I'd love to hear about it -- and I'd be quite surprised.
I get the feeling that this meme originates with modern right wingers in the USA. Either because they understandably do not want to be associated with the third reich and/or because they want to associate their nemeses on the left with it.
Goebbels would be proud.
For what it's worth, I think it's fair to say that in much of the rest of the world, Left and Right are about wealth distribution, and about who should be in control of means of production (investers or workers). Not saying this is better, or worse, just noting the difference. That said, it is probably also fair to say that most international observers, assuming they use this classical economic notion of left/right, would consider the US to be pretty far off to the right. Again, just saying.
The National Socialism party was left wing.
No. It wasn't. It really wasn't. Don't take my word for it:
Nazism, or National Socialism in full (German: Nationalsozialismus), is the ideology and practice associated with the 20th-century German Nazi Party and state as well as other related far-right groups. Usually characterised as a form of fascism that incorporates biological racism and antisemitism, Nazism originally developed from the influences of pan-Germanism, the Völkisch German nationalist movement and the anti-communist Freikorps paramilitary culture in post-First World War Germany, which many Germans felt had been left humiliated by the Treaty of Versailles. Prior to the emergence of the Nazi Party, other right-wing figures had argued for a nationalist recasting of “socialism”, as a reactionary alternative to both internationalist Marxist socialism and free market capitalism.
source, emphasis mine.
You're welcome to disagree, of course -- if you're a complete idiot.
Even if a Left wing Socialist group like the Nazi party was voted in they could never get a foothold on an action that would harm other races.
You realize that the Nazis are about as RIGHT wing as you can get, I hope. Yes, yes, I know they abused the word, but they were Socialist in much the same way that North Korea is Democratic.
We have the constitution.
Not with Richard Feynman, but instead with William Hurt and Blair Brown, I rather enjoyed "Altered States", even though it was filled with William Hurt pretentiousness - it fit because he played a pompous academic.
Sorry for off topic, but just to come full circle here: there is a rather good movie about Feynman's involvement in the Challenger investigation, where the great man is portrayed by one William Hurt.
I remember reading abobut this in Feynman's autobiography. IIRC he wanted to experience some halucinations without subjecting his brain to any chemicals. I've always wanted to try it, but have never had access to a sensory deprivation tank. Fortunately there were plenty of chemicals.
USA, a country full of control freaks and paranoia.
They do often go hand in hand. But that's true everywhere, not only USA.
That the intelligence community is created in its present form as a means to fight the cold war.
Even in the last decade or so before the Wall fell and the Cold War was over, if not long before, spending on military and intelligence has been primarily another channel for shoveling public funds to private contractors. Notice how spending did not decrease post-1989, when the alleged threat had evaporated. They badly needed a new threat to justify the outlandish "defense" budgets and sure enough a decade later one presented itself. The amounts are way out of proportion to the actual danger, just as before.
You sir, do not understand the word paraphrase. He very plainly pointed out AGW proponents using the same ploy as opponents and made a presumption as to their underlying reasons.
Paraphrase: to say the same thing in different words. That's not the problem here, I think. The problem is that I apparently misunderstood the original poster, and thus ended up saying something that did not reflect his meaning. I stand corrected. And moderated.
In fact, it seems that even my own admission of having blundered is deemed trollworthy by some moderator or other. Oh well, karma to burn, as they say.
Um, okay. I thought I just paraphrased what he had said, no twists intended. Guess I misunderstood his post, then. Out of curiosity, though, how did you read it?