<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
Saundra is right, and Roger is wrong. I only hope that in continuing, however absurdly, to insist that the Nazis were "on the left," he's not mistakenly conflating the Third Reich's "social Darwinism" and "socialism" with, say, Darwin-as-anti-Biblical-creationist and "socialism" as any attempt to establish a genuine social safety net for the poor, however limited. Words and labels are often dead wrong when applied out of context -- especially the ones that are today incendiary.<br><br>After all, "Darwinism" and "evolution" are, to the Right, ugly liberal ideas. Ditto for the "socialism" of idealistic, maybe even scruffy, college kids who flirt with the Socialist
Workers' Party and dream of living on communes, co-ops, and
collectives. That's not how the Nazis used those terms. Far from it. But I've seen some conservatives make the mistake of borrowing words from the Nazis' own 25-point political ideology and latching on to the ones that sound "liberal." I'd like to think that Roger isn't one of them, but I'm losing hope.<br><br>And yes, Roger, I'll accept my National Review subscription, although, darn it, I really wanted a pony . . . <br><br><font style="" color="#8064a2"><font style="font-size: 12pt;" size="3"><font style="" face="Verdana">Keely<br>www.keely-prevailingwinds.com<br></font></font></font><br><br><br><br>> From: v2020@ssl.fastmail.fm<br>> To: lfalen@turbonet.com; kjajmix1@msn.com; bear@moscow.com<br>> CC: vision2020@moscow.com<br>> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Say What?<br>> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 17:14:30 -0700<br>> <br>> Roger,<br>> <br>> You wrote:<br>> "The Nazis are on the left."<br>> <br>> Come one, now -- as informed as you claim to be, you simply cannot expect us to accept such a ridiculous statement from you. You can't post definitions (sans quotation marks, BTW) and then expect us to accept your definition of the definitions This kind of flatly irresponsible statement reminds me of your Bushian/Cheneyian/Rovian claim that waterboarding isn't torture. <snort><br>> <br>> I suggest you check this out to see the grave error in your thinking:<br>> http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> HTH,<br>> Saundra Lund<br>> Moscow, ID<br>> <br>> My doctrine is this: that if we see cruelty or wrong that we have the power to stop, and we do nothing, we make ourselves sharers of the guilt.<br>> ~ Anna Sewell<br>> <br>> <br> <br /><hr />Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox. <a href='http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2' target='_new'>See how.</a></body>
</html>