Just trust me on this one. Fair or not, no one gives a damn about the phrase "National Socialism". It's immediately translated into "Nazi" regardless of what you meant. I had a (former) friend who would go to these meetings trying to disassociate it from Nazism. No one bought it. No one is going to try to parse it into "National" and "Socialism". No "socialist" is ever going to refer to himself as a "National Socialist". And no, it didn't "work" under Mussolini. He was hung upside down and stoned by his own people, so they must not have felt it worked too well. It's just a hot-button issue. It's considered a failed, corrupt, evil ideology. Few are going to entertain the concept that Hitler/Mussolini got ANYTHING right.
Well, to me, there is a big difference. There would be no Hitler without National Socialism, but there would be National Socialism without Hitler. And BEFORE Mussolini teamed up with Hitler, Italy was doing great, many famous people respected him and liked the government of Italy. If you want to, I can say I like Socialism, not National Socialism, but not the one with "Proletariat of all countries unite", which they had in Soviet Union. The one in Soviet Union definetly did not work. They supported small 3rd world countries and wasted a lot of money. For example, they bought sugar from Cuba, for much more then it was actually worth, and spend several billion dollars on installing weapons in Cuba, while people in Soviet Union had little food to eat. There is still minor versions of Socialism in some countries that work great, for example Labour Party of Norway, and Sweden. Also Progressivism and liberalism are decendants of National Socialism, albeit less ugly one, and many people do not want to accept it. For example war-on-smoking and drinking. Nazis also were organic crazy.
Maybe this is the problem with free speech? Stupid kids like me can talk bullcrap and say stupid stuff that smart grown-ups don't agree with. It also encourages rather extrimistic groups to arise and come to power.The people who want the 'gray race' are advertisers and the companies who rely on advertising. And the Xenophobes. But multiculturalism can and does work under the right circumstances and creates a more vibrant, successful society. But multiculturalism requires some integration, the key I think is to have a small number of ideas/activities that make up a national identity these permit new comers to integrate and feel part of their new come without giving up their own culture.
Yes, it does seem to work now, but we only had it for less then 40 years. America used to be racist, segregating country, until about 40 years ago. This may not work out in the long run. We want peace, and "they" want war. Think about Native Americans when Europeans came here. Native Americans welcomed them, and were nice to Europeans, but Europeans started to take there land, kill there animals, and destroy there culture. Look at Native Americans now, living in small conservation areas.
Most of the 3rd world countries have a fast growing populations and most European, developed countries have decreasing one. I am an Immigrant myself, I came from Ukraine (a crappy small East European country that probably have the highest rate of drinking related death after Russia, and the only thing it is famous for is Chernobili). But because there is not that many Ukranians here, most of my friends are American, and I am forced to learn English in schools, and I am losing my Ukranian "heritage". What's the result? I came here 3 and 1/2 years ago, and I had a Hispanic friend from Mexico, who lived here 1 more year then me. We used to go to the same classes for non-English speaking kids (we had to go), and I went there only for 1 year, and he still goes to that class (it is determined by English Test results). In that class ALL the kids were Hispanic, exept me, and another Turkish kid that went to a school for only 3 month and then moved back to Turkey. Teacher was Hispanic, and she told all the instructions in Spanish, and then some of the Instructions to me in English. I felt left out, and while in that class I learned (was forced to learn) a lot of Spanish. By the rules she was not supposed to speak in Spanish but she did anyway. And instead of helping those kids learn English, it only made them not learn English for even longer. So as I see it, a country can handle relatively little number of immigrants. Beyond some point it starts to lose its own culture. And I think I somewhat agree with Anders, that it is better to have a closed to immigrants country like Japan or South Korea. But it should be done by laws, and there still should be no segragation or racism. For example Russia has a small number of Immigrants because in Moscow there is many group of racist nationalists who beat up black, Azerbaijanian, and other minorities. Government sometimes arrests those people, but not often, because they don't want many immigrants either. I think this is unnacceptable way to do it. Azerbaijanian immigrants work probably 3x harder and cheaper then the Russian workers, who are always drunk. And they are really nice people too.
You cant deny the fact that there is more blacks and hispanic people in jails than white. Is that because hispanics/blacks are by nature stupider then white people? No! It is because most of the immigrants come from poor countries like Mexico, which have a higher crime rate, and worse education systems. Does it mean colleges should reserve space for hispanic people just to try to not look racist? I don't think so. I don't think so. It it no one's fault but the individual's. Every person have every resources they need to succeed in this country. They should not be discriminated but the idea of the "white sin" also really annoys me. That was all in the past, and we live in the present. I don't see how we can have equality if we change discrimination from black/hispanic/asian/woman to white males.
Also, I don't like all the "gay" stuff. I think it should be TOLERATED, not encouraged, with all the gay parades and things. I think the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" was absolutely perfect, and if someone is found to be gay they should not be kicked out of military but not encouraged to be gay. It also violates the evolution. If everyone was gay, than the humanity would die out. I don't see how destroying humanity by means of not reproducing is any better then other methods.
By googling "heterosexual" the second result I saw said "Heterosexuality is the most common sexual orientation in the world (but by no means "normal". It is simply more common than some variations of human ..." ( www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=heterosexual )
How the F* is it not normal??? It is unnatural and we will die out as a species if it was most common sexual orientation. But because there is not as many gays as normal (notice the word normal) people, I think it may be tolerated, but it should be a privilage, not a "right".
This is my views, respect them, and I will respect yours.
