Aidan: >You argument relies on the highly illogical premise that selfishness is in some way proportional to risk aversion.

I'm saying that risk aversion is positively related to selfishness not the other way round. So this means that those who are selfish are always risk averse but that doesn't rule out the possibility of some people being unselfish and risk averse.

And of course risk aversion is related positively to selfishness! For if someone greatly values their life (which a very selfish person will always do) and not want to die anytime before age gets them then they wouldn't do something that is plainly dangerous, like walk an elevated tightrope or attempt a world record motor-cycle jump, because they would realise that there is a good chance that they might die. But for those who don't care if they die or not then the high risk of dying wouldn't dissuade them from such an activity.

Dear Dan,

«If you (or I for that matter) would like to open a thread on the subject, it would be more appropriate, and the discussion can resume.»

Sure. What particular aspect(s) of religion would you like to discuss?

To Aiden.

What was the full name of the Nazi Party in Germany? Awww, I think I remember? Oh yeah, it was the Nationalist Socialist German Workers Party.

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."

Adolf Hitler
Speech of May 1, 1927

Mussolini was the editor of the Italian Communist Party newspaper but he fell out with the other comrades over whether Italy should support the allies in WW1. Fascism and Communism are different branches of socialism, in the same way that Shiites and Sunnis are two different branches of Islam.

Of course, the commies have been very successful inculcating those who have little knowledge of history in pretending that Fascism and Communism are polar opposites. And you fell for it. It is obvious that your teacher either had you house trained or you slept through you history lessons.

To submit a quote from a book you never bothered to read, here is a quote from Guy Sajer, a Wehrmacht soldier who wrote a first hand account of his service on the Russian front.

"We were dying by our millions to destroy a system of government that was almost identical to our own."

Got that, Aiden? "Almost identical to our own." So Aiden, thinking cap on now I hope? What is the essential difference between communism and fascism? Racism?"

Bong. Nup.

Italian Jews were safe from Hitler in Mussolini's Italy.

The difference, my dear Aiden, is which class within society wants absolute control? For the communists it is the academic, public service, and artistic types. For the fascists, it is the upper, middle, sometimes religious leaders, and the armed forces. Both sides seek support from the working class, the left from the unions which they usually control, and the right from war veterans and other nationalistic workers

To Aiden (continued)

God, I hate this 350 word limit.

That is why in communist countries they had to have political officers at company level making sure that the armed forces did not turn their guns around onto the commissars. That is why military purges are common in communist countries. The fascists don't have to worry too much about that because they get much of their support for their totalitarianism from the armed forces.

Quoting Voltaire, "Most countries posses an army, but the Prussian Army possesses a country."

thinkabit,
>And of course risk aversion is related positively to selfishness!
There's no of course about it, and I've already mentioned the counterexample of robbers, who are both more selfish and less risk averse than the general population. So stop trying to look at risk in isolation, and understand there's a balance between risk and reward. Being selfish DOESN'T make you focus on the risk more than the reward.

________________________________________________________________________________

LEGO,
What was the full name of East Germany? Awww, I think I remember? Oh yeah, it was the German Democratic Republic. And it was as democratic as the Nazis were socialist.

As Sir Humphrey Appleby said: "always dispose of he hard part in the title".

Hitler's speeches were not an accurate source of information - for example he claimed in a speech to be a Roman Catholic despite making it clear elsewhere he was an atheist. And so it was in this instance: he claimed to oppose capitalism, but in reality didn't care if the rich were exploiting the poor (except in the cases where the rich were Jewish). Hitler used rhetoric to hoodwink the German people, not to explain what he was actually doing.

And while Italian Jews in Italy were safe from Hitler, they weren't safe from Mussolini.

>What is the essential difference between communism and fascism?
There are two essential differences: firstly communism is on the far left economically (with a high degree of government intervention in the how the economy is run), while fascism is on the right. Secondly, a very high level of authoritarianism is a defining feature of fascism; it's not a defining feature of communism, despite it having been used to foist communism onto an unwilling population.

I stand by my claim: There are no right wing socialists. Fascists hate socialism and socialists hate fascism, despite the similarity with some forms of communism.

To Aiden.

Wrong again.

I see you skipped over Guy Sajer's personnel observation that "We were dying in our millions to destroy a system of government almost identical to our own."

If Fascism and Communism are polar opposites, then there must be very significant ideological differences between them, right? There isn't. Hitler had his Gestapo and Stalin his NKVD. Hitler had his SS and Stalin his Guards. Hitler had his concentration camps and Stalin his gulags. Stalin called Beria "My Himmler."

Democratic socialism is a contradiction in terms and makes about as much sense as democratic fascism. Both are totalitarian systems who's only real differences are which demographic groups within a society seeks absolute control. On the minor level, their different economic outlooks reflect the differences between the opposing demographic groups. Communists want total economic control by the bureaucracy, while right wing socialists, who's members include leading industrialists, know that privately owned manufacturing is much more efficient.

China went from Communist to Fascist because right wing socialism is infinely more aware of economic realities than left wing socialism. Left wing socialism thinks it can create wealth by decree. That was why China threw off the left wing socialism that was still being pushed by the "gang of four" and embraced right wing socialism. Prior to Deng xi Peng's takeover, the Chinese armed forces were a joke because just like every communist, Mao distrusted his own armed forces and would not modernize them. It took the Gulf War to shock the PLA into realising just how backward their army, air force and navy really were, and it was the PLA who supported Deng xi Peng.

US military men were not happy when China went fascist. They preferred china stay communist because they wanted to Chinese to keep ferking everything up.

There are 800 billionaires in the CPA so whatever the Communist Party of China claims to be, it certainly is not a communist party. It conforms exactly with the fascist demographic's political and economic model. If you think that the CPA is communist you must have your brain wired backwards.