We haven't had a good think tank topic in a few days, so here it is. In my opinion, they're both evil, but communism is slightly worse.

Communism, because for it to be effective, everyone in the world has to change, not just one country.

One thing I can't fuckin' stand is that communists have to sell their country's lands to come to power while the fascists are more willing to preserve and expand.

Oh. My. God.




This is insane this thread even exists.

By pure death toll, it would be communism IINM... not necessarily the concept itself, but the implementations of it.

Actually, I'd dispute that Oob. People dying in famines (yes, that includes the Ukranian famine that conspiracy theorists love to blame on the Communists, and yes, that does include the famines that occurred due to the failure of the Chinese government's policies) does not count as a death toll due to a particular ideology. If we were counting the deathtoll due to unrestrained capitalism in Africa, it would far exceed both communism and fascism. Again, it must be remembered that Fascism did not occur outside the West, and thus they never had food source problems.

AND WHY IS NO ONE MENTIONING GERMANY, CROATIA, VICHY FRANCE, SPAIN, BULGARIA, ROMANIA, and various German occupied territories IN TRYING TO WIPE OUT ENTIRE RACES OF PEOPLE? I thought Oob you'd at least have some intelligent perspective on that, considering your Armenian cultural experience.

Yeah it really depends on what you count. For instance, you could omit Hitlers genocides from your count of Fascisms death toll, because this was intrinsic to Hitlers Germany rather than an artifact of fascism itself, much as you might omit Stalins purges from the count of Communisms death toll, because that was an artifact of Stalin being a fuckup rather than a failing of Communism. However, it is a failing of both in that they allow such men to come to power.

That's more a problem with totalitarianism, which exists in both Fascism and Communism. Stalin killed plenty of Jews himself IIRC.

BTW, did any of the other (few as they were) fascist nations practice genocide, or just the 3rd Reich?

Not only did the communist economic policies directly and purposefully contribute to starvation, think of the millions of innocent and ordinary citizens that have died in the purges. The Nazis may have focussed largely on a race of people, but it is because of that focus that the death tolls of devils like Stalin and Mao (which easily grew beyond that of Hitler) was largely forgotten. Communism started out as an economic ideology, it became a choice for famine.

An ordinary German (Aryan) under the Nazis did not have to fear the government to the extend of a Soivet or Maoist Chinese citizen. The fascist nations of Germany and Italy certainly enjoyed their economic vitality while the Russians and Chinese that suffered under the planned economy on a daily basis.

You cannot blame the Nazis exclusively as the locals collaborated willingly in the round up and deportation of Jews. They may not be knowing of the Nazist death camp agendas but their were certainly glads that the Jews were forced out.

Stalin and the Russians hated Jews, but not to the extent of Hitler. When the Red Army was away, anti-Jewish riots carried out by locals often meant the Party had to turn a blind eye. "When our boys come back from the war, they'll certainly kill you!" was one yell said during a major anti-Semitic market riot in the Ukraine near the end of the war.

Stalin was a communist czar as he basically continued the supression of the cultures and languages of various ethnic minorities. This is one reason why some of the said minorities collaborated with the Germans during the war.


Instead of glorifying culture and customs (taken to an extreme by the ultranationalistic fascists), the communists prefer to suppress traditional culture in favor of the perverse and hardline control of the Party. Culture is seen as a distraction to the ideal set by their leader, while under the example of the Nazis, it was glorified into a propaganda weapon of superiority and identity.

Participation is word of dubious meaning in this case. The minor Axis persecuted the Jews (Slovakia certainly persecuted them on religious, rather than ethnic grounds), they were invited by Germany (with monetary payment) to deport their Jews since 1940. Many were reluctant due to disputes in pay and they also put such plans on hold as they also had to wrestle with the Reds.

The level of local collaboration with the round up of Jews contributes mainly to the manifesting anti-Semitic attitude found across Europe in that period. The French police had no trouble rounding up their Jews (they were originally interned in specialized prisons, prior to eventual deportation to the camps). Surprisingly enough, even the British police on Guernsey (the only piece of Britain to come under German occupation) did not question their new masters and rounded a total of three Jews on the island.

Technically, we can argue that Stalin's supression of the ethnic minorities count as genocide but it was conducted on political, rather than raxcial grounds.

in my eyes they both have equal standing as being evil. anything extreme is evil in my opinion.

Despite both being evil, I rather be an Aryan living in Nazi Germany than a production line slave monitored by Stalin!

Quite the contrary. The WWII Japanese militarists shared many similarities to the fascism in Europe. Japan itself was not rich back then as many still had to worry about their next meal despite enjoying Asians most powerful industry and military. The ordinary Japanese were piss poor and it wasn't until the '60s that the country was considered Second World. Some also argue that Idi Amin's Uganda was fascist. Some critics believe that due to the level of 'exploitation' of workers in China, the CCP is a bunch of fascists in disguise, however that is not true as China nor its people posess extraordinary levels of nationalism.

Nevertheless, as awful as Stalin's anti-Jewish purges were, I think any intelligent observer can draw a difference between that and the Holocaust. What fucking infuriates me is people attempting to somehow think that living in Nazi Germany was similar to living in Soviet Russia. I'm sure at times under Stalin's reign it approached the same levels, but if you talk to people who have lived under both, anyone who even attempts to make Nazism morally equivalent to Soviet/Vietnamese/Cuban socialism ought to read up on their human history and stop looking at kill counts.

The Armenian Genocide itself had a huge impact on the international Armenian culture, did it not, Oob? Just like the Holocaust wiped out Yiddish, around about 8 million Jews slaughtered not in a famine, but in targeted murder. It wiped out generations of cultural tradition across Europe, and the Nazis destroyed the ancestral home of my great-great-great grandfather in Prussia, and probably murdered my Jewish relatives. Homosexuals were put into concentration camps, and were made to wear symbols. Communists and socialists were all dead before the WWII even started. Foreigners were put into concentration camps. Gypsies were put into concentration camps, and the Nazi plan for them was to retain several thousand to be put into a national park-zoo sort of arrangement, where Aryan Germans would be able to watch them through glass walls in their 'habitat'.

Get the fucking picture, Adolf, that this is still recent history for many European people, and as much as you are unable to comprehend the anger this creates in us, you need to fucking learn to have some respect for modern popular reactions to pro-fascists. It utterly sickens me this discussion is even occurring, not because I am a bleeding heart 'omfg I'm AN ANRCHIST PUNK FUCK OFF NAZI LOLZ!!11' but because of the reasons I stated above: that Nazism destroyed Europe, and was the reason that there was no opposition to Stalinism and American Capitalism being imposed on respective portions of the continent.

Just like with Mao, we don't run around saying that Mao was the bees-knees, and even I think in the darkest days of those of us who were socialists, we always acknowledged that Mao seriously damaged China's social fabric and effectively wiped out generations of real people, and also generations of Chinese history.

But again, these are artifacts of Nazi ideology rather than fascism itself (and could well have happened under any totalitarian government, as was the case with the Armenian genocide), hence why we don't find barbarism of that scale in any of the other fascist nations. Communism however, has caused large scale suffering in several of its implementations.

Slovakia managed to kill 277,000 Jews. Croatia managed to wipe out 40,000 Jews very gladly, as did Vichy France with 83,000 Jews. In Holland, collaborationist authorities enthusiastically slaughtered 106,000 Jews. in Belgium, that figure was 24,387 (again, collaborationist authorities). the General Government of southern Poland killed 2,284,000 Jews. The Government of the Eastern Territories (German local military government that wasn't technically responsible to the central German government) killed 420,000 Jews. The Romania Fascists enthusiastically killed 40,000 Jews.

And we can't forget the millions of Jews that were killed in direct German military controlled territories, can we Adolf?

Read my post above, and then try and imply that again :).

Were these not all nations occupied by the Nazis, or following Nazi ideology?

The lack of large scale success of fascism under anyone but the Nazis makes this a difficult question.

The big question is, if Germany did not lead anti-Semitism by example, did the minor Axis nations have the balls to carry out such killings? The Nazis inspired anti-Semitism in other fascist nations.

If we're referring to economic policies, fascism was more prosperous to ordinary citizens. Communist economic policy involves the complete drafting of a population in the work force and poverty where as fascism simply wiped out smalls business and trade unions, but generally one is still capable of making money.

Fascism only existed because of the Nazis. Fascism no longer exists in any countries apart from groups of people who have nostalgia toward slaughtering foreigners, gays and Jews, and who are obessesed with holding memorabilia of the Nazis and dressing like them.

The only pro-Jewish fascism that ever existed temporarily was under Mussolini during the 1920s and early 1930s, but any nostalgia can get wiped away when you see how awful the country was during that time.

I refute your claim that Nazism was the orignal fascism as the Nazis had in many ways copied the Italian Fascists (even the salute and Hitler's hand gestures when speaking). Hitler himself had admired Mussolini at one point. Franco did not persecute Jews (although I could be wrong) and neither did Mussolini, until when Italy reached a new low during the war and Il Duce believed the only way to succeed was to mimic the Nazis.

From the original Italian point of view, anti-Semitism is not an essential part of Fascism, while it is central under Nazism.

You're lucky that you're arguing with someone (myself) who is well read on fascism. Before discussing your statements about Italian Fascism, let me point out to you that Franco's regime is not regarded as a prime example of Fascism, as fascists were simply only an element of his government, and even during the war he grew very sick of the insane Spanish fascists.

Just to note, as a little know fact, Franco did persecute Jews, and did kill a decent number of them.

By the mid 1930's, where Italy was moving closer to Germany, anti-Jewish laws had been passed and there was considerable anti-Jewish sentiment occurring amongst the masses of the fascist party. 8000 Jews were killed in Italy, though the Italian authorities did manage to stop most murders before the grip of Nazi Germany got too strong in Italy. By pure luck, one or two pro-Jewish people managed to stop Vichy France and Croatia from slaughtering groups of Jews at various times during World War II. But these were exceptions to the reality.

Fascism lives on in the various dictatorships throughout Africa, including Algeria and the Ivory Coast. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't followed the news from that area of the world.

Anti-Semitism was a part of Hitler's regime because he needed a scapegoat for the Germans to unite against, and hence unitying them, bringing Germany into a cohesive country. He could have picked Russian Orthodox or Rastafarians. The Jews were picked because they were there, and there was already centuries of resentment (Germany being Protestant? from memory for quite a long time, and Jews tradtionally having lots of $$$ - Christian jealousy).

The other thing that I think we're kinda overlooking here is that we tend to compare the implementations of these systems rather than the ideology. Ideologically, and going by Marx, Communism is a far better bet than fascism, but if you consider the average case in the Real World, it's much harder to call.

Communism by Marx is basically collectively being stupid into accepting that you're poor and find it a wonderful experience to have.

Ideally, fascism promised economic certainty, harmony, national security and freedom from communist threats. During the war however, that was hardly the case.

What? "From each according to his ability, to each accoring to his needs"?

Some Christian socialists argue that there's a Biblical passage of a similar meaning. I can't remember which one.

“There is a road to freedom. Its milestones are Obedience, Endeavor, Honesty, Order, Cleanliness, Sobriety, Truthfulness, Sacrifice, and love of the Fatherland.”

— Adolf Hitler

Hitler said "freedom", how ironic.

.... Japan was rich enough that no, Junichiro-average citizens weren't worrying about where their next meal was coming from - and they built the three largest warships ever made (The largest of which, the Yamamoto, never even sunk a ship. To give you an idea of how large it was, its main gun turret weighed more than our entire navy does put together)

Ahem, the "second world" was bascially the Soviet Union (over 1/6th of the world) which was too developed to be credibly labelled as third world, but which obviously could not considered to have a standard of living comparable with the West. Japan at no time belonged in this category. I would argue that Japan has really belonged in the First world club of Nations since before WW1 (before people even dreamed up the label first world), which they supported the Allies in. Japan has had a modern military and economy for a long time.

As for Chinese not being patriotic. Thats just total bullshit. Don't you remember what happened to the US embassy in Beijing when there was that air crash incident a couple of years ago, when a Chinese jet fighter collided with a US spy plane? Have you not seen the outrage on the streets in Shanghai at the Japanese history school books which gloss over ww2?

Grrr.

Life was actually fairly tough for many Japanese prior to the '60s, which was one reason for their aggression. Recruitment posters for the Japanese military had a common theme regarding the sort of pay soldiers will receive. It may have the industrial capacity but living standards, particularly in rural areas at the time were better than their fellow Asian countries but by no means comparable to the West.

The Soviet Union may not be at the point of starvation, its people had jobs and TVs by the 1960s. The living standard however, could not match Western Europe due to the low numbers of car ownership and disposable income. Communism does not tolerate a consumer society. Due to it's title as a military superpower (like America) the Soviet Union was classed as First World nation.


The Chinese are very unpatriotic due to the incredible levels of corruption as well as many social problems that plague their nation. This is proven by the sheer number of emigrants. Patriotism is something that the Chinese government absolutely fears (but dare to manipulate in order to divert public anger over internal issues). For example, despite the shit that Japan imposes on China, protests are still the subject of police permission. The patriotic Chinese who were send back from Diaoyutai by the Japanese 'coast guard' risked police interrogation. The government don't like patriots because patriots dispise the government's endless appeasement towards Russia, Japan and America.

Nationalism may be growing but it's always the dollar sign that acts as the strongest motivation. If the Chinese are a race of patriots, that does not explain why there were traitors to the occupying Japanese forces numbering well into their millions! The government is very fearful of patriots. Patriots tend to criticize the problems on their country- ultimately targetting the problems induced by the government. The Belgrade embassy bombing may have angered many Chinese but what you didn't see on CNN was the police arresting the protestors afterwards on false charges! Real patriots are willing to defy government orders that bar him from expressing his views and feelings; when they began arresting people for burning the Japman's flag, nobody had the balls to go burn another one!

Sure, most of the cheap shit you own is made in China. In China however, locally made goods are considered low class and everyone strives for foreign imports (entirely opposite to the Japanese who embrace their own products). This mentality of local industry being shit had left little room for improvement.

Joining the military has been a traditional outlet of nationalism in many countries, in China, army enlistment is an option mostly for poor farm boys. They serve for two years, and with the shit pay, they don't bother to stay once their contracts are up. This leaves the PLA in a backward position where the NCO to soldier ratio is low compared to the Japanese or Americans.

True nationalism comes from within the heart, not from the arse of the Party! Another reason why the Chinese turn their back on their homeland is because no matter how the developments are occuring, it's still an international loser that gets fucked by Japan and America on a daily basis. Only through a holy war of defense of their Motherland shall patriotism be the guiding doctrine of the Chinese race.

You may find that some overseas Chinese have a sense of pride for China, this can be explained by basic cases of homesickness, binded by the constant suffering of racial discrimation (since you're White, you'll never understand this personally). Will they fight for the Motherland is an obvious no answer as the Chinese government still suspects overseas Chinese as foreign agents. One example of such suspicion would be the refusal to recognize dual citizenship (although there are some talk of change). Ultimately, if a Chinese person with foreign citizenship returns to China, the locals regard him as hua qiao (overseas Chinese), rather than zhongguo ren (what the Chinese call themselves, with emphasis to Chinese citizenship).

There's a fine line between racist and nationalistic (which leftists often fail to recognize). If a race is devoid of nationalism even in the approach of its darkest hour, that race would be doomed to fail. When an American waves his flag, it's considered normal, but when Mr. Chink in the Orient tries to do the same, the Western smeat campaign of the Yellow Peril turns the entire world against China. It is because of this lack of nationalism that the Chinese are unable to stand up against this hostile world that is plotting their demise.

Sometimes, I wonder, will there be a day where true nationalists lead China by a form of nationalism reminiscent of that employed by the Nazis (without the anti-Semitism), the Americans or the Japanese militarists... Right now, Chinese is more of a timid, naive little defenseless panda rather than the Eastern Dragon portrayed by the scare mongering Western media.

(Note to Scuzza: Please don't judge on what you don't understand.)



Typical White man's reaction to the above images:

"OMFGz!!! t3h C|-|1nKs w1ll cUm & k1ll us all!!!!!!!11111one111"

Yeah, I've noticed this mentality. I've noticed that there's nothing my girlfriend hates more than finding that something she really likes or admires is made in China... I have no idea why that is. Often the stuff is pretty damn good. I guess there's no point posting a gift back to someone in China when it was originally made there in the first place...

What kind of holy war are you proposing, or predicting?

You mean China might have a nationalistic, militarised, autocratic leadership system? That'll be a big change then... :P

I agree with you though that a lot of people see the rise of China as a new "yellow peril" scenario. Uneducated people in New Zealand have always had a terror of hordes of Chinese pouring in, right from when the first miners from Canton hit the goldfields in Otago. It's stupid and ill-founded, but it's a myth that seems to die hard.

Adolf, please don't judge on what you don't understand. What's a typical white man again? Or are we meant to describe a typical Chinese man here, too?

And which right-wingers often fail to recognise to. Just like yourself, as you seem to think that talking about Jews being murdered by fascist regimes in figures is a funny game. I am very much a nationalist, and my understanding of nationalism is that you want to see your nation prosper and present a united front to the world as much as possible, without creating artificial divisions inside it (by exploiting racial tensions, etc).

Note to Adolf: Please don't judge on what you don't understand (Fascism).

What the fuck are you talking about? Do you understand race =/ nationalism? I am a New Zealand nationalist, does that make me a racist? Of course not. Racism is nothing to do with nationalism, and quite frankly your language is insane, as if 'races' rise and fall' like empires.

One thing I can't believe that you can't even see past your snout that Labour has a nationalist foreign policy in New Zealand. Can't you understand that nationalism, and even fascism, is not signified by the jackboots, nor the black uniform? Fascism exalts the nation, and does not need to exalt the race. If you even knew shit about fascist history, you would know that people like Oswald Mosley (the famous leader at one time of the British Union of Fascists) and the Brazilian Integrationalist movement for most of their existence rejected racism.

I can't understand how you think that allowing foreign domination of our economy, by weaking foreign investment laws (as National has promised to do), nor further liberalising the economy to allow our basic services to be exploited by predator mult-nationals is somehow conducive to New Zealand nationalism...

Thats purely wrong. The whole point of the classification system First/Second/Third world was to re-enforce the neo-imperialist mindset that the West was "first".

The Soviet Union was never, by definition and by politics, capable of being first world.

That was 60 years ago. My examples were relevant, as they were 1) this millenium 2) post-Mao. The whole country has changed in every imaginable way except opening up to democracy, since the thawing of relations between China after Nixon's visit and the tenure of the pro-sanity Deng Xiaoping.

Please make the US "Patriots" start criticising their Government, please. The fact is, China puts great stock in its own citizens' pride in China, and is actively pursiung "grand projects, like going to the moon, to inspire awe in Chinese ability.

Ah, the Chinese army is actively downscaling. It has fired 1.5 million people in the last decade - they've figured out that they need to have quality, not quantity. I wouldn't question however that rural people are more likely to join the army.

Fuck you, I'm Jewish - and yes I have experienced racism personally. My dad has had a lot of Chinese student boarders over the last few years, so I've actually had more contact with genuine Chinese, from all over China, than you'd expect. I'm pretty sure he had the son of a senior Communist Party Official staying once. I've met Chinese who at once say "I want democracy, like New Zealand" and then will be watching the basketball world cup against NZ, and screaming for China to win. I've also met Chinese students who think Democracy is a complete farce, and that the Chinese system is better.

China is actually screwing the US over, to the extent that the US is giving foreign policy concessions in exchange for the Chinese moving on its "unfair" trade practices which have led to massive balance of trade deficit. China (along with India) also holds most the the US Federal debts.

Err, why should race be the guiding doctrine of Chinese patriotism? That statment along is indicative that you believe race is very important thing.

As above, I don't think you know where that line falls at all.

I don't the "militarism" "employed" by the Americans is comparable with that of Nazi Germany. I sincerely doubt a "nationalist" Government could come to power now; if the Communists fell and China went into Civil war, the West would ensure a pro-Western faction won.

Fortunately for you, I do understand some things about China.

Haha. Marx thought that there were several historical economic states, and that we were actually heading towards a state where there is so much wealth that class no longer matters. So inherently, Marxism cannot be about accepting your poor. Where Marx ran into trouble was his desire to liberate the Proleteriat by force from the clutches of the bourgois industrialist model.

Since I've got an exam today, I won't bother until probably later t'night at the earliest. When I come back, I WILL come back fighting!

(*Waits in silence for the "Seig... heil! Seig.. heil! Seig... heil!"* like Hitler after giving a crazy speech.*)



*Just kidding! I sure like to take the piss out off the Nuremberg Rallies.

You ALWAYS come back fighting. That's why you got nameraped...

*Listens to some 'C&C: Generals' orchestral music to get psyched up for this big argument.*

I never lied about coming back fighting!

Quite the contrary. The Soviet Union did not have a second world living standard for most people, but it was clearly a superpower, as examined by its military, nuclear weapons and global influence abilities. First world means being a superpower- one that capable of matching the United States. The Soviet Union was clearly a first world country.

Most other Western countries are second world, given that they have the economic prowess (thus the living standards), military firepower (although Britain and France will have a real tough day should they choose to attack China or Russia) and the industrial capacity (including WMDs should they choose to). This does not mean that all nations of the West exactly fitted the bill. South Africa, with so many people living in poverty obviously didn't, Greece has been overtaken by China in all aspects of the above competition (so much for the cradle of Western civilization) and Protugal has always been the poor neighbour of Europe. Not all countries that are "White" are prosperous, like those ones formed after the Soviet breakup, life is still tough for their citizens on a daily basis.

Only two Asian nations have clearly made it into the second world. Obviously they are Japan and Singapore. These nations have the economic power (although Singapore's have been wavering in recent years), eliminated widespread poverty (most importantly) and their people clearly have a second world lifestyle.

China is still third world for some obvious reason, it's only got a handful of nukes (no silly dreams of messing with Uncle Sam), widespread poverty in the countryside (although not to the point of starvation like a century before), despite economic growth at a geometric rate (in some cases falsified figures), it still does not approach that of Japan. It'll be a long time before China can reach the second world.

You know why there's so much corruption? One reason being that the corrupt officials place themselves before the cause for their country. If they're so patriotic, would they realise what they've done is similar to betraying their Motherland?

Democracy will be a plague for China as wev'e examined in a previous thread using India as an example. Such heavy population levels will be fertile for civil unrest should the nation go polling.

If the communists realize the shit they were getting up to with their Great Leap Forward and Cultural Genocide (what I term the Cultural Revolution) decades ago, the country's developments would not have been put on hold.

China's space program was around since the '60s (they lauched a satellite not long after the went nuclear). But Mao's actions changed all that. Soon, scientists were persecuted for being accused as traitors of the Party, etc. It was not until Deng that China went back on track. The consequences for scientific projects and weaponry (conventional and WMD) is clearly irreversible. Right now, the Chinese military still posess large numbers of '60s Soviet clones, the ICBM count has shifted little from the 1970s number of 20 and its almost impossible to catch up to the West. If Mao didn't go about with his ideological madness, developments would have continued as the Chinese certainly had the brains and resources and would perhaps become the second Soviet Union.

All thanks to Mao, China has shifted backwards, again! As for the Three Gorges Dam, the first man to propose that idea was actually Sun Yat-sen. It was not until the Deng Xiaoping era that there was serious consideration for such a dam to be built. What is awe inspiring is that in a meer 25 years after the announcement Deng's Reformation, China managed to become Asia's most powerful country, with incredible levels of corruption resulting from the profiteering through power by greedy officials.

Actually, with the current 2-2.5 million, another separate 1.5 million in reserve and 1 million in the PAP (Paramilitary Police), I'm sure you can do the math. Their aim is to downsize the main force about 1.5 million at a similar size to the U.S. for better equipment. There's been debate on the level they should downsize to, as opponents of downsizing argue that since China's technology is unable to match that of the U.S. at present, numerical superiority has its benefits.

Large numbers of the retired PLA are likely to get a similar job with the Paramilitary Police. Contrary to the Western media, China cannot be a police state given that it has a skyrocketing crime rate due to having one of the world's lowest police ratios.

Young people can be so naive, which is why anything Western in China will go along way. This also results in the admiration for democracy in China amongst some people who are fed up with the government. Overall, revolutions are tricks that only benefit the plotters since the most recent example would be Mao proclaiming that when he comes to power, China will be democratic. We all know that it's one of the biggest lies (the world's biggest population fell for it). Don't get me started on those 'student heroes' (as portrayed in the West) in 1989, they were hypocrites too.

Uncle Sam knows that the Chinese are not as weak as they were decades ago. It's not the new Soviet Union but they have to be careful. The US can make a few concessions now and then, but it's clear that they maintain their supposed upper hand in issues like human rights (a global hypocrisy) and Taiwan.

In China, "nationalism" translates either as Ãñ×åÖ÷Òå (which emphasises culture and ethnicity, but not in a racist way, it means that as a people, with Ãñ×åÖ÷Òå, you should stand your ass up, fall in line and fight those that are shitting on your country), or ¹ú¼ÒÖ÷Òå (which is more extreme that patriotism).

Ãñ×åÖ÷Òå (min zu zhu yi) can expand beyond established borders to branch out to all members of that race, like the Austro-German Anschluss in 1938 being an example of German nationalism (those two country's had similar customs and spoke the same language). Min zu zhu yi in China doesn't have to be Han exlusive since Tibetans, Uighurs, Manchus (very few now) all all of it's 56 ethnicities are Chinese- they make up China. If China is powerful enough as the spiritual home of the Chinese race, then surely there wouldn't be troubles like the Taiwan issue and Singapore may even seek an Anschluss with China. Of Dr. Sun's Three Peoples' Principles, Min zu zhu yi was considered central.

Min zu zhu yi cannot be directly translated back into English since it can be misintepreted (by the characters) to mean racism/racialism (ÖÖ×åÖ÷Òå). America can have ¹ú¼ÒÖ÷Òå (Guo jia zhu yi) but no way will it have Min zu zhu yi since America is a multitude of very different races that make up its culture. Min zu zhu yi for a place like NZ would mean that we have to stick close to Mother Britain again since that's where most of the people's ancestry is.

Since you're Jewish don't you feel that Israel is your spiritual home?

America isn't militarist since has never been a clear culture in America that determines that those who served in the military are better than those that didn't or that there's emphasis on rigid public discipline. In America, you hardly see a man in khaki everyday unlike in WWII Japan or Germany. The US isn't all about conquest and bloodshed unlike the Germans or Japanese during their wars.

Have I ever promoted the idea of a civil war? The Communists can fall if they don't have enough support from the military. Some generals will grow impatient with the constant appeasement in foreign affairs adn refusal to expand the defense budget despite eminent danger.

Technically any military action over the Taiwan issue is purely a domestic affair, which the Americans appear willing to lose more of their boys over. Should they be involved, it will be a holy war for the territorial integrity of China and the survival of the Chinese race and Volkgeist (national spirit).

I never said killing Jews was funny. I have great respect for the Jewish race personally. In fact, I admire their undying will to have their own state again. If the Chinese race has the same level of Min zu zhu yi as the Jews, you wouldn't see shit happening like the Taiwan issue.

Please scroll up to see the Chinese definitions of Min zu and Guo jia. Some races had fallen. It's a matter of fact. Like how the Indians were conqoured by British and China nearly suffered a similar fate. This is because they did not discover science and industry. Those civilizations in South America have been wiped out and the Maori here have been largely acculturated. As for "NZ nationalism" that would be doubtful since a majority of this country's people came from their Mother Britain. Since this country is made up of a multitude of ethnicities, the nationalism (guo jia zhu yi) is taking a sense of national pride (which as a proud New Zealander, I believe we should enjoy more often outside the time frame of an All Blacks match).

A holy war doesn't have to be all focussed on religion. I see that every nation or race has its national spirit, some call it the Volkgeist. Should there be an attack on China or foreign interference in the territorial integrity of China in the farcical claim of democracy and Abu Graibh style 'justice', it will be a holy war of defense for the Chinese race!

(Remember, I tend to use religious words to glorify certain political beliefs. There's nothing more powerful and inspiring than the feeling of divine support.)

That's my definition of a more perfected China- one that can stand up to the world and say "nobody fucks with the Red Banner with Five Stars!"*

There needs to be a bit of tightening of the reins since there's too much corruption and perversion in Chinese society at the moment. A more authoritarian (not totalitarian) yet benevolent, nationalistic leadership would indeed be beneficial.

(*Parody of a famous American redneck quote.)




This has been a five-page document and thank you for reading!

I can't be bothered to get into this with you. But how long did it take you to write that?

About two hours, especially with my breakfast on the computer desk, and texting on the phone periodically. Writing something like this has made me feel like a BA student.

I'm off to play some 'C&C: Generals' since listening to the music all morning has tempted me greatly.

I've seen longer posts in my time :imaracist:

i.e. you think nationalism is based around race, which is wrong. I am a New Zealand nationalist who thinks that cosmopolitan multi-culturalism is better than dismal, introverted mono-culturalism. I contradict your thesis, thus your thesis is false. Very few ideologues, apart from some Nazis and Fascists, agree with you that nationalism is racially based.

And if you can't handle us being proud at an All Blacks match, we can't understand you enjoying feeling proud listening to recordings of big nazi military rallies and enjyoing Chinese sports etc on TV.

WTF? I'm an All Blacks supporter. During an a rugby match involving our national team, I clearly sense patriotism, but at other times, there's not so much of that feeling. We need to look at other great NZer apart from athletes, like Freyberg, Rutherford, Upham, Kippenberger and Pickering.

I never listen to Nazi music, I may not understand a word of German, but my ears are too good for filth about killing Jews! I never watch Chinese sports on TV either, apart from a few glimpses of Yao Ming here and there when they're covering the NBA.

Since I'm not living in China, Chinese nationalism should be none of my business.

I never said that under my belief of nationalism, we can't tolerate other cultures. I suggest that the Chinese should keep their culture and prevent it from being lost. Chinese culture itself can be diverse as China itself is not just inhabited by the Han.

Instead of being wannabe Americans or Westerners, they should exalt their culture and country, buy their own products and believe in themselves as a people.

Sure. So that explains why almost all of Europe is considered First World, despite USA having more nukes than Europe combined?

Jesus, I can't believe the ignorance and blatant overlooking of others' reasonings in this thread.

European nations themselves don't have the level of influence on world affairs nor the conventional military might to match America. Please note that even the with the EU combined, it is still unable to match the United States.

It's called sarcasm. They cannot match the US, yet they are still First World. Hence, that isn't the correct definition of First World.

The definitions I remember go as follows:

Third world: undeveloped
Second world: planned economies
First world: developed, market economies

None of the second world countries had a planned economy.