Comments by "Historia, Magistra Vitae" (@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.) on "Piers Morgan Uncensored" channel.

@Oxygen_1992 : I know, and they have an incorrect defin ition. If people are interested in the proper, historical def inition they should read the "doctrine of facs ism" instead, written by Mus solini and Giova nni Ge ntile.
3
乂 ƁƲiԼƬ ԼiƘЄ Ă ƁĂƓ ƠƑ MiԼƘ 乂 : "rig ht-win g system of go vernment ... ext reme rig ht-wi ng ... tot alitarian ri ght-win g " Nope, nope and nope. Fa scis m had nothing to do with righ t-wi ng politics of any kind whatso ever. On the contrary, fas cism was a bran ch of soci alism which rejected individualism, capitalis m, liberalism/democr acy, and marxi sm, in which the means of production was organized by national work er syndic als (i.e. tra de unio ns), and the guiding philosophy of the state was Actual Idealism. The fundam ental differen ces between lef t-win g and rig ht-wi ng ideologies center around the the rights of individ uals vs. the power of the gover nment. Left-wing beliefs are libe ral in that they believe society is best served with an expanded role for the govern ment. People on the right believe that the best outcome for society is achieved when individual rights and civil liberties are paramount and the role — and especially the power — of the gove rnment is minimized.
2
@Josfur Gaming : "this is why you never fully privatize what is considerate a country essential service." So you are pro shareholders pocketing the money from workers then? Because that is what your sentence means ... fully private company is not publicly owned by shareholders u know. The most obvious example would be Twitter, which before was a public company owned by shareholders while now it us fully private and owned by Musk.
1
@josfur1977 "if that's your take from what I wrote" That was your take hun ... you whine about shareholders but yet in the next sentence you take a stance in favor of them. Make up your mind.
1
It's not supposed to be a pure talent show anyways. We have other programs for that and which is why you never see "big names" in there to begin with.
1
@Mr Popo : Both are equally gar bage soc iali st ideo logies.
1
@mrpopo8298 "One of them goes against human nature, the other does not." Both of them go against human nature by being so ciali st ideologies.
1
While you are correct that Ukrainian 2022 win was rather political and could hurt the integrity of the contest, your first mistake was the assumption that Eurovision is some kind of pure talent show. It is not. People don't participate in the hopes of getting a record deal out of it ... it's a song contest. Simple as that. Could be a funny song, could be a generic pop song. Depends on the audience what they prefer this time around.
1