Welcome to AZNLover.com - AMXF Social Networking Community. A site dedicated to celebrating "AM/XF" relationships, romances, appreciation for Asian culture between Asian men and women of any background. Online since 2004, we provide a community between people with similar issues, questions and curiosities, and to foster interaction between females of all races and Asian males.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact Contact us. Didn't get the Registration Confirmation - Resend Activation Email
AznLover EuropeDiscussions about living, working, studying, visiting, or playing in Europe.
[quote=Wotan;139779]Curious sense of humor. Leo Strauss, the father figure of the Chicago School (or the neo-cons if you will), was raised an orthodox Jew. Notable members of the neoconservatives like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Pearle, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser, Elliot Abrams, Saul Bellows, Irvin and William Kristol, David Horowitz, Michael Rubin and so forth all happen to be Jewish. Neonazi is the last term one would associate with the neocons given that a overwhelming canon of writings exist from this camp that condemn Lord Chamberlain's so called "appeasement" of Hitler as one of the worst and most disasterous decisions ever recorded in history. Safe bet to assume they'd feel even stronger in their condemnation of Hitler and the Nazis.[/QUOTE]
That was precisely my point. The only thing worse than a neo-Nazi is its exact opposite, since it is not really known among the collective consciousness and so, is not obviously evil.
Where I am living, there are no conservative politics, only neo-con politics whose motives go far beyond any "conservative".
That was precisely my point. The only thing worse than a neo-Nazi is its exact opposite, since it is not really known among the collective consciousness and so, is not obviously evil.
I still think you're missing the point. It's fair to criticize the neocons and the Bush administration for eroding civil liberties and in effect turning a democratic republic into a corporate-ocracy. However, the major difference between neonazi and the neocon is that the former believes in racial supremacy whereas the latter holds no such views. In fairness, the neocons do obviously believe in cultural supremacy, but this quite different from racial supremacy and this distinction needs to be made. Lastly, the exact opposit of a neonazi would be a flower child, touchy feely hippie who believes in anarchy. The neocons are far too anal to fit into this category.
WHAT?!!* - Ludwig van Beethoven [*translated from German by Günter Grass]
I still think you're missing the point. It's fair to criticize the neocons and the Bush administration for eroding civil liberties and in effect turning a democratic republic into a corporate-ocracy. However, the major difference between neonazi and the neocon is that the former believes in racial supremacy whereas the latter holds no such views. In fairness, the neocons do obviously believe in cultural supremacy, but this quite different from racial supremacy and this distinction needs to be made. Lastly, the exact opposit of a neonazi would be a flower child, touchy feely hippie who believes in anarchy. The neocons are far too anal to fit into this category.
..as in they believe in cultural supremacy for their own core members, but for their periphery followers, the ideal is a culture of no culture, just empty suit and materialist culture.
...they hold no such views in theory, but they love to see a materialistically successful non-white person who acts as "white" as they do.
..as in they believe in cultural supremacy for their own core members, but for their periphery followers, the ideal is a culture of no culture, just empty suit and materialist culture.
...they hold no such views in theory, but they love to see a materialistically successful non-white person who acts as "white" as they do.
Interesting take. However, might I suggest you actually try reading some Leo Strauss and then Francis Fukuyama's End to History. In the latter book, which by the way was seminal reading for the neoconservatives, when Sun Tzu, Lao Tzu, Brahmins via Hegel and so forth are referenced and given much credit for their influence, I hardly think qualfies as acting white, whatever this means. Regardless, you've not made a case that neocons and neonazis or neofascists should be used in the same breath. As such, you're as guilty as Picard in obfusicating these terms, and further, you're as guilty as the neocons you mock when they toss about words like Islamofascists.
there are sporadic news reports of German youths attacking non-white people.
So you're referring to racial attacks then. If so, then why not just say so from the beginning? Words or phrases have a given meaning for a reason. Also, though I don't recall the numbers off the top of my head, in early-October, the number of racially motivated attacks was somewhere in 1,000 incidents for 2006 as stated by the IM. While this represents an "high" increase, if you think about it, it's really not a high number and these attacks can be further isolated into specific areas of Germany. Given the polarized world environment, you're likely to see such rates in most countries that house a immigrant or "minority" population.
