Monday, May 7, 2007

The Leftist/Islamofascist/Badwulfian Convergence

Whether your tastes in nonexistent deities are secular or celestial, whether you think women should be running reeducation camps or shut up indoors, there is something for you at Marxism 2007... for a price.

Make cheques payable to "Marxism" and send to:
PO Box 339, Station E
Toronto, ON
M6H 4E3
You say tomayto, I say tomahto; let's smash capitalism and then fight over whatever's left.


Elaine said...

They have to be kidding. In many ways it is good the glowtard/terrorist supporting lunatic left have came out of the closet to show us just how eager they are to embrace anything to obtain power, but they got to know that they are done in this country. If France, of all places, can wake up and see the light on how destructive the laziness and incompetence of left polices can make a country, you know Canada is not far behind.

mariposa said...

Wow. Unbelievable.
This statement from their ad, "...organize for a new world of peace, freedom and liberation..." By freedom and liberation, I take it they mean only as "free" and "liberated" as their rigid doctrine will allow, which really means they want to cram their nonsense down all our throats.
Just more attempts by the socialist Borgs to assimilate all of Canada into their collective. Resistance is futile.

eng said...

I always enjoy the elections when there is a Marxist or Communist candidate, and when the votes are counted they invariably lose their deposits. Make the Commies pay!

Extremists on the left think we would have utopia if everyone followed the party line.

Extremists on the right think we would have utopia if we killed all the jews.

eng said...

Yes, the new French President said he will be a staunch ally of the US, and he wants the US to take the lead in combating climate change.

MapMaster said...

Extremists on the left are willing to sacrifice the current generation for the sake of a future utopia. Repeat per generation as necessary.

As far as extremists on the right go, I've never come across any in order to form a generalization.

Elaine said...

You got that wrong eng. It is the left who are supporting the taliban, hamass, and the hezzassholes. I am very sure the only purpose of the above groups is the obliteration of all jews. Puzzling actually. The islamist would hang the left from bridges and burn them alive if they got the chance. For them all to get together for a great big group hug is making me piss my pants with laughter.

mariposa said...

eng - your comment about the far right was maybe correct several decades ago (like pre-WW2). But the anti-Semites of today definitely come from the far left. It's the lefties that are the new Jew-haters, like Elaine said.

Elaine said...

According to conference literature, the main purpose of the event, sponsored by the officially banned Muslim Brotherhood and Egyptian opposition parties, was to forge "an international alliance against imperialism and Zionism."

If coverage of the conference is any guide, delegates appear to have made progress toward that goal.

One report in Cairo's Al Ahram Weekly said the growing co-operation between "the anti-global left and Muslims" was striking. The left, the article said, "is finally overcoming its traditional resistance to the cultural conservatism of Islam, and likewise Muslims are reaching out to the left."


That is islamist talk for,"we'll use the stupid bastards, and then we'll kill them."

hahahahahahaahahahaha, the left are breaking their fucking asses supporting terrorist by any means possible, just to end up in the front of the line to be beheaded. The left in this country can't really be that fucking stupid, can they?

eng said...

Glad you neo nazis aren't in power.

How is your friend Weiche, anyway? Is he still holding his cross burnings in good old London?

Lisa said...

Eng says:

Glad you neo nazis aren't in power.

Where are these neo nazis you speak of? If you are referring to the people who post here, I challenge you to back up your slanderous accusation with some facts.

Jake said...


As a person who's relatives lived through both fascist and communist regimes, I take great offense at what you have said.

When someone on the political left doesn't have a good argument against someone on the right, the default label the leftist accuses them of being is a neo-nazi.

How is supporting limited government, freedom of the press, and allowing the individual--and not the state--choose ones social and economic destiny considered nazism?

eng said...

When someone on the political left doesn't have a good argument against someone on the right, the default label the leftist accuses them of being is a neo-nazi.

And you have a number of commenters here, presumably from the political right, that do the same in the other direction, the default label being commie. Though "glowtard" and "taliban lover" are popular here as well.

So what name do you call the new President of France? They say he is conservative because he wants to relax some of the more outrageous labour laws there, though I doubt you will see "right to work" laws that only limit how much you can people for the privilege of working for you (negative minimum wage). But he wants the US to take the lead on climate change. So is he a glowtard socialist or what?

You are very quick to call out anyone who simply reflects in the opposite direction the same rhetoric which is regularly seen here and goes unchallenged by you.

How is supporting limited government, freedom of the press, and allowing the individual--and not the state--choose ones social and economic destiny considered nazism?

It isn't. Your list mixes a variety of things, some often associated with the so called right. But you try to sneak things in and claim them as right wing values, in order to discredit the left wing. I take great offense at your characterizing the left as not in favour of freedom of the press, for example.

Limited government is a tricky one. Some people simply resent having to pay even one dollar of taxation. They wish to see taxes cut so low that the government cannot do anything. Supposedly private enterprise will do it all, but usually some people end up not being helped.

Do you think we should have no government funded health care system? It might seem cheaper, until you find you must sell everything you have in order to pay for medical care. Or you do without. In such a society, crime increases due to the desperation of the increasingly deprived citizenry. What do you do? Do you decide to erase an entire group of people? Or do you just take all the money you could have spent on social programs, and instead spend them on prisons and a large security apparatus. Blaming people for their poor economic condition only works to a point. Eventually they stop obeying your laws. Today we hear of kids committing crimes because they are underage and will not be heavily punished. How about people who have diseases for which they know they will never receive treatment? They would make good killers, since they have nothing to lose. After the increasingly paranoid government brings back the death penalty, these killers will be happy to be put out of their misery, and if they can kill a few of the overlords in the process, even better in their view.

Limited government can lead to more oppressive government due to the greater need to suppress the population. To me, the welfare state is cheaper than hiring lots of goons to protect the elite. The capitalist system works best when people are somewhere between their needs and their wants. Let large numbers fall below their needs and crime by otherwise good people goes up. Some will sit on their duffs and do nothing, that is the cost of doing business. Others try to get some of their wants and in the process contribute to society.

Your framing of who chooses one's social and economic destiny looks like an either-or proposition, but there is overlap. For example, I assume you would expect the state to choose where convicted criminals live. I often see right wingers talk about the trampled rights of the individual, then they want to do just that, deny rights such as marriage rights to the gays.

Do you consider car licensing to be the nanny state? Do you consider the land registry system the nanny state? How about police services?

Ask your relatives if life in Canada in any way compares to life in a real fascist or real communist regime. You can freely start a business here. That's really the biggest one to me. You can disrespect the government as much as you like as long as you don't incite armed insurrection or riots. You can leave the country with minimal hassle. You can be arrested on suspicion of being a criminal and you won't be tortured or killed, and you have to be released in a reasonable amount of time if a case can't be made. Even if you are tried and convicted, you might be locked up for life, but you will not be killed or tortured, just kept away from everyone else.

The kinds of things we have to complain about here are nothing in comparison with everyday life in fascist and communist countries. So why continue with the theme of anyone who disagrees with you as being a commie who embraces dicatorship?

Jake said...


Now you are trying to highlight the possible ambiguity of political ideologies between both the left and the right sides of the political spectrum. To label myself as a total "nutbar right-wing, conservative, neo-con" is stating that I support a "set in stone" ideology that has nothing in common with those generally supported on the left.

If being pro choice, pro gay marriage, legalized prostitution, against the death penalty, and supporting the full legalization of marijuana are generally monopolized by those on the left wing, then I must be brushed as a lefty myself.

But remember, I also support limited government, free market economics, and rights of the individual over that of the state. Labeling me as an outright conservative is an incorrect assumption. Labeling myself as a Libertarian is more appropriate.

I may support a limited government, but paying taxes and contributing to the state is an unavoidable fact of life. Pretty much everyone in the libertarian spectrum agrees with that.

I basically, as a taxpayer, want the best possible value for my money that is given to the state. That means ending frivilous spending and pork barreling that benefits few and far between. Maintaining basic utilities and services that keep the government functional, yet non-intrusive to a degree.

As for healthcare, I support a two tier system that allows people the right to purchase medical care as a consumer good--which is illegal in Canada as of right now. Maintaining our current bureaucratic, socialist system is unsustainable as the baby boomers retire in the next few years (translation: less people paying into a system that more people will be forced to draw from with no alternative source).

You love to use these hypothetical "fear of the unknown" tactics that presume that the poor will commit crime, the elite will need more protection, or that the rich will dictate and oppress the poor. These are essentially the same arguments that those on the far left (socialists and communists) spread as a form of propaganda against those who disagree with the statist point of view. That's why I feel that labeling you as one makes sense.

I do not consider licensing a car or the police the nanny state. Those are considered essential functions of the government. I'm not supportive of total anarchism as your previous comment implies or having a weak central government that cannot maintain order for that matter. We obviously need a set of laws and a good legal system to maintain order.

When I stated that "How is supporting limited government, freedom of the press, and allowing the individual--and not the state--choose ones social and economic destiny" was asking you how those things correlate to me being a neo-con, far right wing, neo-nazi from your previous comment that labeled all London Foggers as such.

Elaine said...

Eng, well you are a taliban supporting glowtard commie. Everything you write or respond to points in that direction.

How could someone on the right be a nazi? Nazism, communism and fascism are the offspring of socialism. Read a book.

That glowtard commie stuff comes from you agreeing that you would like to see a government that feels it has some sort of right to tell us how much toilet paper we can use to wipe our asses. That is way too much government for my liking.

eng said...

Thank you elaine, for demonstrating my point. 36 hours pass, and not one rebuke of your hateful words towards me.

Jake, I suspected we have similar general views. Our differences appear, at least to me, to be relatively minor. Certainly enough that we might support different political parties, but not outside the assumption of democracy. That of course is assuming that your insinuations that I crave dictatorship are just rhetoric.

There is quite a bias here, where elaine type statements go unchallenged. And further, my words get embellished. I did say "neo-nazi". I did not say neo-con, nutbar, conservative, or far right wing. One epithet was sufficient to cause three comments, each with numerous words of the same general type that you are claiming I called you.

Your challenging what you called my "fear of the unknown" argument is the most interesting part. Stripped of the claim that "this is an argument used against those who oppose a statist point of view", an actual discussion could ensue.

Calling someone a statist for having a view that you say statists have given does not make sense. For example, I am a vegetarian. Hitler was a vegetarian. Does that make me a nazi?

Elaine said...

You are welcome there eng. I just call them as I see them. Challenge away eng, I would rather argue than eat. Though I like eating too, that is more than likely why my arse looks like I should be dragging a cart behind it. I know this though, I know if you eat too much you get a big bodacious type arse. I understand cause and effect, but you apparently don't. Stop your goddam terrorist supporting glowtardy commie whining. There ain't no femi-banshee types on this site that are going to come rescue you.

eng said...

Do you find spewing tired slogans like "Stop your goddam terrorist supporting glowtardy commie whining." burns more calories than actual thinking?

I read someplace the human brain consumes 20% of the body's energy. So if you actually try to think of good counter arguments, instead of parroting mindless, baseless rhetoric, you will not only have less time to spend eating, you will burn more calories in the process. And you will see the cause and effect.

Elaine said...

I happen to like having a big arse. See I think that is your problem eng, you are only using 20% of your brain. You watch a movie made by a christian doomsdayer, and the next thing you know you are eating it up, and preaching it like it was gospel. Well it is gospel, it is religion, something that has been used to control and oppress the sheeple for a very long time.

eng said...

Couldn't you try a little harder? I mean you could do more than simply take my words out of context, to make an insult of it? It is getting a little smelly here though, probably because you've put out so much bait, and it isn't being taken. I guess I am supposed to make a fat joke.

Your insults aren't even good enough for a warm up act, let alone Don Rickles quality.

Anonymous said...

Hey Eng, who is bigger in the world of politics Hegel or Locke and who is on which side? If you can figure that out then you would conclude that the national socialists and international socialists are all socialists....

eng said...

No, I conclude that the self described "national socialists" and self described "international socialists" are dictatorships.

Do you conclude that the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" is in fact democratic. They claim they are, your logic would be to take their word for it. I find their one man one vote system is great for the one man who gets a vote, but for everyone else there, it is a totalitarian hell.

USpace said...

STOP KUFFARPHOBIA Demo in London Friday 10/26!

I think we all must start calling the hateful Left and Islamofascists ‘racists’. We should scream that they are hateful towards the Christian race, and the Jewish race, and the Hindu race, and the Atheist Race, that they are Christianityphobiasts. They will scream that Christianity is not a race, and we’ll say:

“See, Islam is NOT a race either.
And by the way, the Bible doesn’t say to convert, conquer or kill non-Christians; like the Koran says to do to non-Muslims. So there YOU RACIST hater of non-Muslims!”

Stay safe in London everybody!!

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
don’t call a spade a spade

Islamist terrorism
not related to Islam

absurd thought -
God of the Universe wants
many Taliban planets

stonings and beheadings
billions killed daily