[OFB Cafe] Chris's Politics...

[saki]

Derek Broughton wrote:

>> Surely an organisation that holds to a philosophy of single party,
>> totalitarian rule, together with the Fuhrer principle, cannot, by
>> definition, be "a party that wants government interference kept to a
>> minimum"?
> 
> Naturally not, but they like the idea that _current_ governments not interfere 
> with their right to eventually achieve single party totalitarian rule and 
> kill everybody they don't like.

I can see how that would be an advantage, but are these people united in 
any form(s), or are they mostly individuals with totalitarian leanings?

If the former, then dissociation should be comparatively easy. If the 
latter then not.

(I have never understood how "Nazism" should have remained bad 
totalitarianism, whilst "Marxism" is good- or, at least, not bad, 
totalitarianism, so that "Nazi" is the term applied to everyone who 
favours a dictatorial one-party state, and "Communist" carries with it 
little opprobrium, even thought they want the same)

Terence