They're both socialist dictatorships, only the results matter and the result was the same for both. Socialism is just neo feudalism so splitting hairs doesn't change core concepts and getting stuck up on details is what they want you to do. It's ahistorical to think they're any different because they all came from the school of Marxism and adapted it to the political system at the time. Just because socialists don't like eachother doesn't make them any less socialist. They're all neo feudalists.
This describes the practical differences between these kinds of "socialism": https://archive.org/details/rednetworkwhoswh00dillrich/page/98/mode/2up
While they appear similar in their form of governance (both are militant dictatorships), they do not have the same effects on their society. Nor are they created for the same reasons. So-called fascism exists as a reaction to communism. It would not exist without it. One system attempts to return law and order to the society (hence the name "fascism" - it evokes imagery of the Roman Fasces, which was a symbol of law and order). It will accomplish this by whatever means it sees fit. This can get ugly, but the ultimate goal is to restore the nation to a state of order, where previously chaos abounded.
The other system attempts to destroy all law and order and to replace it with the rule of bandits who murder and destroy all in their path, and who seek no order or harmony in the society whatsoever.
The methods appear similar, but the effects are ultimately different. This is borne out in studying the actual death tolls incurred by either regime, and the demographics of those death tolls (fascism is largely responsible for killing criminals, communists, and "fellow travelers"; communism is largely responsible for killing civilians, Christians / any religious believers, and nationalists).
One is largely responsible for killing elements that are not beneficial to society; the other is responsible for killing elements that are nothing but beneficial to the society.
And remember, the death toll of Germany was manipulated as per explained above in terms of that which is evidenced by the Nuremberg trials and the book that calls out the facts that the Holocaust happened in Russia and by the communists.
The differences are irrelevant they will both throw you in a gulag concentration camp for criticizing government and nationalize every corporation. To worry about the differences is pointless when they both will kill you all the same. Only the results matter all roads lead to the same end when the goal is totalitarianism. The concept is the same for both and they share the same origin. Getting hung up on the details isn't very intellectual when their intention to distract you from what they have in common. Calling it a different name doesn't change their core concepts. If you put aftermarket parts on a Honda it's still a Honda so if you change a few details with their politics they are both still socialism. No matter how you dress a turd on a plate it's still shit. Only communists or national socialists really care enough about them to differentiate them because they don't want to be compared to their enemies. Saying they're any different is one of their talking points and another thing they have in common and how to troll both of them with facts.
They don't share the same origin. As I stated, one gives rise to the other. Fascism simply never existed as such until communism came into being. And fascism is usually simply a smear for any anti-communist - which further illustrates its origin and nature as a reaction to communism. It cannot be honestly understood in any other way. To equate one with the other is ignoring actual historical facts and data. They did not yield the same results. One destroyed its economy; the other built it up. One was responsible for a death toll that is still not quite numbered to this day; the other's death toll was massively exaggerated and amplified as part of a cleverly engineered propaganda campaign. In fact, (to reiterate yet again) Stalin himself is responsible for the deaths of Jews which Hitler is usually accused of.
Only communists or national socialists really care enough about them to differentiate them because they don't want to be compared to their enemies.
That is patently false and absurd. The author whom I linked you to (Elizabeth Dilling) was not a national socialist, but a true American patriot who frankly did far more to serve this country than any of the self-styled "pedes" on here. She wrote about both systems of government contemporaneously and traveled to both the USSR and Nazi Germany in order to accurately observe and honestly compare the two systems of government.
Can you say the same?
She dedicated her life for her country, and fervently cried out for Freedom and Democracy to prevail rather than any form of militant dictatorship. But she candidly acknowledged that that latter was unavoidable unless Americans would wipe the sleep from their eyes and remove the communist menace eating them from within.
Her warning went unheeded, and just as she predicted we now find ourselves on the brink of utter tyranny. The only thing she got wrong is that there is no fascist alternative as was had in Germany. We have only a communist dictatorship to look forward to, or Civil War. And Elizabeth Dilling was far from being the only American patriot who made these same observations...
That is ahistorical, they both came from Marxism and altered it to fit their situation. I wouldn't expect a nazi sympathizer shill to be intellectually honest when you refuse to even acknowledge their involvement in the holocaust.
They're both socialist dictatorships, only the results matter and the result was the same for both. Socialism is just neo feudalism so splitting hairs doesn't change core concepts and getting stuck up on details is what they want you to do. It's ahistorical to think they're any different because they all came from the school of Marxism and adapted it to the political system at the time. Just because socialists don't like eachother doesn't make them any less socialist. They're all neo feudalists.
This describes the practical differences between these kinds of "socialism":
https://archive.org/details/rednetworkwhoswh00dillrich/page/98/mode/2upWhile they appear similar in their form of governance (both are militant dictatorships), they do not have the same effects on their society. Nor are they created for the same reasons. So-called fascism exists as a reaction to communism. It would not exist without it. One system attempts to return law and order to the society (hence the name "fascism" - it evokes imagery of the Roman Fasces, which was a symbol of law and order). It will accomplish this by whatever means it sees fit. This can get ugly, but the ultimate goal is to restore the nation to a state of order, where previously chaos abounded.
The other system attempts to destroy all law and order and to replace it with the rule of bandits who murder and destroy all in their path, and who seek no order or harmony in the society whatsoever.
The methods appear similar, but the effects are ultimately different. This is borne out in studying the actual death tolls incurred by either regime, and the demographics of those death tolls (fascism is largely responsible for killing criminals, communists, and "fellow travelers"; communism is largely responsible for killing civilians, Christians / any religious believers, and nationalists).
One is largely responsible for killing elements that are not beneficial to society; the other is responsible for killing elements that are nothing but beneficial to the society.
And remember, the death toll of Germany was manipulated as per explained above in terms of that which is evidenced by the Nuremberg trials and the book that calls out the facts that the Holocaust happened in Russia and by the communists.
The differences are irrelevant they will both throw you in a gulag concentration camp for criticizing government and nationalize every corporation. To worry about the differences is pointless when they both will kill you all the same. Only the results matter all roads lead to the same end when the goal is totalitarianism. The concept is the same for both and they share the same origin. Getting hung up on the details isn't very intellectual when their intention to distract you from what they have in common. Calling it a different name doesn't change their core concepts. If you put aftermarket parts on a Honda it's still a Honda so if you change a few details with their politics they are both still socialism. No matter how you dress a turd on a plate it's still shit. Only communists or national socialists really care enough about them to differentiate them because they don't want to be compared to their enemies. Saying they're any different is one of their talking points and another thing they have in common and how to troll both of them with facts.
They don't share the same origin. As I stated, one gives rise to the other. Fascism simply never existed as such until communism came into being. And fascism is usually simply a smear for any anti-communist - which further illustrates its origin and nature as a reaction to communism. It cannot be honestly understood in any other way. To equate one with the other is ignoring actual historical facts and data. They did not yield the same results. One destroyed its economy; the other built it up. One was responsible for a death toll that is still not quite numbered to this day; the other's death toll was massively exaggerated and amplified as part of a cleverly engineered propaganda campaign. In fact, (to reiterate yet again) Stalin himself is responsible for the deaths of Jews which Hitler is usually accused of.
That is patently false and absurd. The author whom I linked you to (Elizabeth Dilling) was not a national socialist, but a true American patriot who frankly did far more to serve this country than any of the self-styled "pedes" on here. She wrote about both systems of government contemporaneously and traveled to both the USSR and Nazi Germany in order to accurately observe and honestly compare the two systems of government.
Can you say the same?
She dedicated her life for her country, and fervently cried out for Freedom and Democracy to prevail rather than any form of militant dictatorship. But she candidly acknowledged that that latter was unavoidable unless Americans would wipe the sleep from their eyes and remove the communist menace eating them from within.
Her warning went unheeded, and just as she predicted we now find ourselves on the brink of utter tyranny. The only thing she got wrong is that there is no fascist alternative as was had in Germany. We have only a communist dictatorship to look forward to, or Civil War. And Elizabeth Dilling was far from being the only American patriot who made these same observations...
That is ahistorical, they both came from Marxism and altered it to fit their situation. I wouldn't expect a nazi sympathizer shill to be intellectually honest when you refuse to even acknowledge their involvement in the holocaust.