mlatu

weird, we didnt see the "not" there at first...

to you, a nationally limited socialism is not equal to nazism, to me the distinction is negligible. if you think we (as in all humans) are not the same, then we truly are not.

read the thread with a sober mind and point to one person other than wpb that didnt call me names or made an effort to project their opinions on my comments but rather asked what i was talking about. all in all i am left with the impression that this community seems to prefer calling names over having civilized discussions

i kept giving you the benefit of the doubt, but watching you cheer with your peers over how "this person seemingly doesnt know the difference between such distinctive ideologies" ... yeah no, i dont think i want to talk to you (plural) anymore. you (singular), kept it relatively civil, so i wish you (+wpb) a nice day.

and a whole day of 100% packet loss for the rest :3

and what makes you think i dont know that?

my point is: if he disliked communism, but flirted with fascism, perhaps he was never really talking about international communism at all but only ever conceived of the notion of a nationally limited socialism. or nazism if you like, but needless contractions of words wont get you anywhere closer to understanding what i am talking about if all you can think about is "gotcha"

to me "you can't have communism and billionaires" in reply to "you cant have both democracy and billionaires" sounds more like "but what if i was the billionaire?" than "and thats the way it should be!"

hence my comment.

confusion is one thing, replying "drop the national part" to "national socialism is not the way" is another.

have a nice day :3

heinlein was opposed to communism and flirted with fascist ideas, coming to the conclusion that when he was talking about communism it was most likely some form of nationalized subtype isnt that far off. hence the ending

now that you got that out of your system, perhaps you could think about the topic and explain what you meant to actually say instead of calling us names?

we'll wait.

please take your time, don't rush it. we know coming up with an actual argument is hard.

did you somehow read my comment as condoning the national part? if so, please explain how you came to that conclusion or simply do everyone a favour and re-read what it says

i agree, national socialism is not the way.

long live international solidarity.

you honestly think people turn to communism because they want to become billionaires themself?

good.

addendum: this is so good. read it, one chuckle after another... the sloperator even tried to get their money back. fucking hilarious.

you roll your eyes while most others are sweating profusely