Do you know any rightist politician?
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: General World History
Forum Discription: All aspects of world history, especially topics that span across many regions or periods
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13887
Printed Date: 23-Apr-2024 at 18:50
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Do you know any rightist politician?
Posted By: Guests
Subject: Do you know any rightist politician?
Date Posted: 09-Aug-2006 at 17:55
| tell me famous and good rigtist politician |
Replies:
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 09-Aug-2006 at 18:40
|
Well, here are some: French Tocqueville, De Gaulle, Simone Veil, De Maistre, Clemenceau, Mirabeau Greek Most of the Greek politician would have been rightist nowadays England Tatcher, Churchill USA Nixon, Reagan, Giuliani, Milton Friedman (more a economist), Lincon Germany Kohl, Adenhauer Nice bunch of successful rightists. ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: Tobodai
Date Posted: 09-Aug-2006 at 22:24
|
The best rightist politican for the US was senator Barry Goldwater, the one who was famously defeated by LBJ with an attack ad claiming Goldwater would start nuclear war. ------------- "the people are nothing but a great beast... I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value." -Alexander Hamilton |
Posted By: BMC21113
Date Posted: 09-Aug-2006 at 22:46
-Giuliani is a moderate (he really only takes a conservative position on crime...not much else) and I dont believe Lincoln was a rightist either..... ------------- "To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace"-George Washington "The art of war is, in the last result, the art of keeping one's freedom of action."-Xenophon |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2006 at 01:01
|
I agree they are both quiet liberal yet both are republicans. Giuliani is a supporter of Georges Bush which makes him a rightist at least by proxy. The same with H Kissinger, he is not properly rightist but still he supported a rightist government. The same again with Eisenhower.
------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2006 at 02:17
|
Do you consider liberals right-wing or left-wing? ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2006 at 18:53
right wing
|
Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2006 at 19:49
|
American Liberals or British Liberals?
American Liberals are free marketeers and very right wing.... British Liberals are intellectual freedomneers but market champaign socialists and considered neither left nor right but centrist. ------------- Light blue touch paper and stand well back http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2006 at 21:11
|
Australian Liberals are Conservatives, the opposite of a liberal
------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2006 at 07:33
|
You'd have to tell me what you mean by 'rightist'. I don't mind how you want to define it, but we have to first agree what we are talking about. ------------- |
Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2006 at 09:24
|
Sure, my OD Management tutor was the Liberal Party member for one of
our city's seats for 7 years until she got voted out. Today she teaches
us about the finer points of corporate consulting.
------------- |
Posted By: BlackRaven135
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 09:13
| I think we should define rightist. Are you referring to Hard Right (Communism) vs. Hard Left (Fascism)? Or, are you thinking of something more mild like the American right (George Bush) and American left (Bill Clinton), for instance? |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 15:38
It's the other way around. ------------- |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 16:14
Just depends where you are watching from... ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: Tobodai
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 17:54
|
Those things come full circle. Hardcore fascism and hardcore communism are completelty indistinguishable. ------------- "the people are nothing but a great beast... I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value." -Alexander Hamilton |
Posted By: Barbarroja
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 07:21
|
I think liberals are of right wing, the therm liberal is more to the market. The last Spanish president Aznar was a good politician but his decision of suport Iraq invasion was so bad. But in other political themes like economics was very good, he had as a Economical Minister Rodrigo Rato, the actual president or FMI (IMF?) ------------- I'm sorry but my English is not very good. I'm from Vila-real (Valencia, Spain) |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 18:05
What are you talking about? ------------- |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 18:10
Err, are you sure about that? In a hardcore fascist system state is god, and in a hardcore communist system there is no state... From my point of view Stalinist Soviet Russia was more like a mixture of fascism and socialism, never mind hardcore communism. ------------- |
Posted By: Tobodai
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 23:22
|
well then there has never been a communist nation has there? They are all fascist. They start out on the left and then just move into totalitarian sphere.
So theres two options communism=fascism or communism=nonexistent! ------------- "the people are nothing but a great beast... I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value." -Alexander Hamilton |
Posted By: Barbarroja
Date Posted: 21-Aug-2006 at 05:43
|
It's curious that all bad systems are of right wing and never the left have done anything bad. The extremes are all bad, right and left, lets see China or North Corea, they are Socialist and I prefer not to live under a system like that. ------------- I'm sorry but my English is not very good. I'm from Vila-real (Valencia, Spain) |
Posted By: malizai_
Date Posted: 21-Aug-2006 at 12:25
Thats about right.  ------------- |
Posted By: perikles
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 15:54
you must be joking yes?
In communism the only thing that exists is the state ------------- Samos national guard. 260 days left. |
Posted By: perikles
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 15:57
they are socialist only by name. This is not socialism
All the "bad" politics dictatoros, fasists etc make good things like bridgs and big projects in order to disorientise the people. ------------- Samos national guard. 260 days left. |
Posted By: Barbarroja
Date Posted: 24-Aug-2006 at 05:19
|
Well, Are Cuba Socialist, or is only by the name? Well, there were many socialist dictators as bad as fascist. Why left cannot be bad? In a system were the State is the most important, without freedom and were the methods to control are very hard and bad... I think left is nor beter than right, both can be good or bad, it depends. But always people want to excuse left wing totalitarism. ------------- I'm sorry but my English is not very good. I'm from Vila-real (Valencia, Spain) |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 24-Aug-2006 at 08:50
|
Cuba is a (partly) socialist state. In the marxist doxa you have two stages. The first one known a dictatorship of the proletaria, where supposedly the workers overtake the bourgeois at the head of the state. The ownership of all instrument of production goes to the state. This phase is called socialist. Then after a while, the perfect moment arrives when no man lives to the expend of another one's labor. This new stage when the state is not needed any longer is called communism. Of course all the so-called communist dictator completly forgot about the second stage (with the exception of Krutshov who once declared that the communist level was on sight). The point with excusing left wing totalitarism is that the dictator are seen as liars who have betrailed their word to bring every body to a better life. It goes without saying that this vision forgets that all the communist who ever hold the power turned into barbarian dictator soon after. Considering Cuba the point is slightly different in the sens that Castro's regime was at first a fair answer to the lawless exploitation of the island by the American big companies and that the Socialist regime has achieved a fiew important goals (every body can read, every body eats, hospitals are available for all, there is much less racism against the blacks, etc...). Of course on the other hand the ability of getting richer through personal enterprise is nul, the army hold 80% of the exportation and the political rights are so to speak inexistant. Yet Cuba has two excuses. The first one is that Eisenhower and Kennedy did everything they could to through the Leader Maximo into the USSR's arms by trying to overthrough his regime by force and to kill him at least 8 times. Plus one thing is for sure, when you consider the other islands of the area most of them are extremely poor (yet capitalist), or in the worst anarchy, or ruled by rightist dictator involved even more than Castro in the drug business. To conclude, the leftist dictator have an avantage on their rightist counterpart, they pretend (and sometimes manage) to trade the people's political and economic rights for the fulfilling of their social needs. And finally they're cooler on the posters (who wants a poster of Franco in his room but the Che rocks). M. ------------- I am a free donkey! |