Comments by "The french are harlequins" (@thefrenchareharlequins2743) on "TIKhistory" channel.

  1. @Pep He seemed fairly angry in his speeches.
    5
  2. Intresting how you cannot provide a single fallacy out of this so called "cornucopia"... As for your screeching on "libertarianism is a relijun!", here is my response to that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDJ7NkUNYcA
    5
  3. How did you arrive at these definitions?
    5
  4. 3:52:08
    5
  5. 1) See the pinned comment 2) >r/badhistory
    5
  6.  @ScuttlersUnited  Well? Surely, under the principal of non-contradiction, TIK cannot be a Nazi, and maybe, shock and horror, Marxists are closer to Nazis than they may think?
    5
  7.  @ScuttlersUnited  Anything to stick it to the Nazis.
    5
  8.  @TheImperatorKnight  Perhaps they are anti-religion?
    5
  9.  @dwizzi1724  Getting something in return does not imply no theft took place, you must demonstrate that this was consented to in order to show it wasn't. Some unbeknownst entity expecting you pay taxes isn't proof of consent.
    5
  10. 15:01 You do too much for our sake.
    5
  11. I don't think "robbing people then selling the stolen goods to my friends" is privatisation, but sure.
    5
  12.  @guerillagardener2237  Let's take the privatisation of BT: who was that stealing from?
    5
  13.  @louplibre9734  But if Germans are supposedly "handsome", why is the specimen above seemingly a chimp that has been strategically shaved?
    5
  14. Can you cover what the cast of Cars were doing from 1939 to 1945
    5
  15. 350 hour documentary on Kampfgruppe Steiner.
    5
  16. >Hitler wanted a monarch (X) doubt
    5
  17. Correction: You cannot be a MARXIST if you don't believe in the means of production should be owmed by the workers.
    5
  18. How would a physicist deal with gravity ceasing to be?
    5
  19. Hey, maybe the Austrian School is on to something if Ron Paul, Bob Murray and Peter Schiff were able to predict a crash in the housing market using its business cycle theory.
    5
  20.  @chrisevans1255  Well you would have to be introducing some other context in order to show that Aristotle's trip to Lesbos was for something other than his love of knowledge, where none is extant. Likewise, you would have to show some other cause for Marx's continual failure to do anything productive than his belief that he deserves the fruits of other people's labour, but I do not see the context, when many others were able to accomplish this feat.
    5
  21.  @chrisevans1255  Evidently he didn't believe a word he wrote; however not everyone suffers from cognitive dissonance, such as Aristotle, Descartes, and Marx.
    5
  22.  @personaa422  Stopped associating with them after the Great War. Still Aukinleck's ghillie when we go stalking.
    5
  23. Ah, the good old "Hitler Killed Ernst Rohm" fallacy. If X killed Y, X cannot be Y.
    5
  24. ​ @Gvjrapiro  Firstly, they are public companies, and secondly, TIK has said that "the state [which is socialist] can absolutely exist under capitalism". So I doubt that in his ideal society, he would get rid of the state. No appeal to tradition or repetition ad nauseam can change the fact that conditional support of property is not supported of private property. Labour has more value to the boss than to the worker, money has more value to the worker than the boss. So they trade, nothing wrong here. A system where everyone is self-employed would in fact be more capitalist. Capitalism: Private control of the economy. What could be more private than a system in which all individuals work for themselves? You should include the full clause at least. No use quoting sentence fragments. Kim Il-Sung, a statist socialist, abolished the income tax in 1974. Italian Fascism rejected Socialism. Big-S Socialism, because the Marxist party in Italy was called the Italian Socialist Party. I said Fascism rejected Marxism. And show me, where does fascism reject leftism? And if you want me to answer your question, "Another funny addition - if you truly believed that socialism is collective (which you define as state) control, why would they need to even involve trade unions, according to your definition?", because why not involve trade unions? Trade unions are collectives, and fascists believed that including them in the running of a business would help achieve class harmony. Claiming that I don't have confidence in my definitions does not refute my answer, as trade unions are undeniable, collectives. We have been over this, "hon": A corporation gets incorporated because it wants to attract the public to fund it. A large number of private individuals make up a public, and given corporations have thousands, even millions of private shareholders, it is public. Indeed, many countries rationalised an increased tax burden as "civilising missions", yet this still doesn't change the fact that missionaries wanted the countries from which they came to conquer the territories they were in for religious reasons, it doesn't change the fact that cronies of the state wanted colonies to make more currency, and it doesn't change the fact that countries needed a place to dump their rejects. Which countries split up Germany and Italy? And their plan to get independence was to make Germans and Italians less independent? Nations and ethnicities overlapping is a European invention. Iran, for example, is a nation, but it has many differing ethnicities, including but not limited to Persians, Turks, Kurds, Gilaks, Fair, enough, fascism is nationalistic, if only in the first sense.
    5
  25. You forgot "lol nope here is a 5 minute video from 3 years ago DEBUNKING the idea of Hitler was a socialist"
    5
  26.  @fun_ghoul  According to you it isn't collectivist to speak of the "common weal" in the manner he does and promote the collectivist idea of nationalism?
    5
  27.  @fun_ghoul  Premise 1: The above is not a set of reasons to prove that Hitler was a socialist, but a plain assertion that the interlocutor doesn't understand what words mean. Premise 2: Plain assertions are not arguments. Conclusion: This is NOT AN ARGUMENT.
    5
  28. Thing is, you have to look at the action as well, hence the discussion of the Nazi economy
    5
  29. Hitler actually used the word "gleichschaltung" meaning co-ordination and "zwangswirtschaft" meaning forced economy to describe what he was doing to industries, since the SA marched into the industries and took over the businesses from within. Slave labour has been used in every socialist state, and having the support of industrialists is in no way related to whether someone is a socialist or not. Guess who else was supported by an industrialist? Marx.
    5
  30. The Nonce Brigade.
    5
  31. Okay, the German Empire helped and funded the Bolshevik Revolution, so I suppose Lenin is a monarchist now? Further, your definition is not commensurate, since the "workers" are not a hivemind who are able to act as one to control capital goods, meaning that when a dispute arises some workers would end up controlling the capital goods and others wouldn't, and thus your definition would exclude nearly every example of socialism, even the ones where "the workers" were somehow in control.
    5
  32. It was every branch of the German Armed Forces.
    5
  33.  @elijahrivera2858  Well you have already burned up 60% of the total amount of replies.
    5
  34.  @dr1flush >see y'all keep proving to me how childish you are I am suprised it took you this long to figure out this is the YouTube Comments section.
    5
  35. that doesn't fully explain it either, because America is the greatest country on earth
    5
  36.  @florintanase9348  I only ever said that it was suspended. And hey, if you want to claim that private property was not infringed, well all I can say is sit down and have a tea with Hugo Junkers and Frotz Thyssen.
    5
  37.  @lorddwarfking7767  I'm not excusing Soviet sexual crimes, I am pointing out the Nazis also committed sexual crimes (at a larger scale). History isn't a game of football.
    5
  38. "Many capitalists" not including Hugo Junkers or Fritz Thyssen.
    5
  39. Classic TIK W
    5
  40.  @HDShayThePro  Yes. TIK is the good kind of liberal.
    4
  41.  @guerillagardener2237  Well, I have always understood capitalism as private direction of capital goods and socialism as collective direction of capital goods, but point me to the true source which contradicts all the mainstream sources.
    4
  42.  @guerillagardener2237  Interesting I wonder what one of these websites have to say about socialism: "Socialism is a populist economic and political system based on collective, common, or public ownership of the means of production." Ah.
    4
  43.  @guerillagardener2237  Last time I checked a British chap was in charge of BT
    4
  44.  @guerillagardener2237  Well the a member of the British public directs it, so what is your problem?
    4
  45. This is Hitler basically saying "Marxism isn't REAL socialism, REAL socialism is racist" Here is the specific reference from Mein Kampf saying he wanted to implement full socialism: Hitler, A. 1925. Mein Kampf. Munich: Jaico Publishing House, Page 410.
    4
  46.  @sirherbert6953  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDJ7NkUNYcA
    4
  47.  @bghyst  Why not both?
    4
  48.  @bennymassimo3195  The church of the NHS strikes again, anyone who doesn't like it must have financial interests in doing so!
    4
  49.  mike mcmike  Never heard of minarchists, have you?
    4
  50. ​ @keefymckeefface8330  500 is the limit on replies on every comment. It was racial socialism, which naturally follows that it will have a planned economy. The economy was owned by the state for the race. Second, if socialism was for all, nobody has ever been a socialist, since socialism requires a group to be dispossessed of their property. For Marx, it was capitalists and for Hitler, it was the people who I can't say in this comments section. Socialism is just about the communal control of the economy.
    4