Why the Left-Right schism on Israel? (Pat Buchannan not withstanding)

[Ignatius]

It appears our experiences with evangelical churches and the belief some of them have that the establishment of the state of Israel is necessary for the Second Coming are different. The book Late, Great Planet Earth, which espouses that premise, was taken as a true interpretation of Biblical prophecies in the church I was brought up in. Wikipedia says that book has sold over 28 million copies and spawned a movie and sequels, so I find it hard to believe that book is not influential.

Re my use of "mentality" as condescending. I don't read it that way or intended it to be such. (I know when I condescend). My point was that I have never heard an argument making it the law of the land that a victim of rape must bear the child that is it's product that as its base came down to a religious reason. I don't have another word to describe the thought process. I think free market capitalism, while prickly with edges that must be smoothed, has done more to alleviate human suffering than any other single system in human history. The reason I have that belief is my interpretation of the history of the United States in comparison to other systems. When confronted with an opinion opposed to that, my initial response is the argue with it. To say that is my mentality is not condescending (to me at least).

Now onto your contention that it is "debatable" that Fascism and Nazism are leftist movements. I find this contention outright bizarre, particularly if offered on the strength of nothing more than "internet debates". If that statement means my contributions are not welcome here, then that is fine. However, if you make statements like that, particularly without any kind of sourcing (other than "internet debates"), then that strikes me as trolling, which defeats the stated purpose of the forum.

The Soviet Union nationalized all industry, putting the economy directly under the control of the government. That's right out of The Communist Manifesto, the "Bible", if you will, of modern extremist leftist movements. Hitler and il Duce did not make large scale nationalization of industry and in fact each made allies of their country's respective industrial leaders to shore up their respective regimes. See Alan Bullock, A Study in Tyranny and Rise and William Shirer, Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. Hostility of the European Right in early to mid 20th Century Europe is a fact (the two above sources are a few of legion), it is not my "belief".

I will take the work of thousands serious scholars and journalists for the contention of Nazis and Fascists as Right wing movements over any number of "internet discussions". Again, this statement strike me as a trollish response. I can right now find zillions of "internet discussions" that 9/11 was an inside job, Obama and Elizabeth II are lizard people and we never landed on the moon, among even more bizarre topics. So what? Because anonymous people on the internet discuss it, it doesn't make a topic "debatable", except in the most tortured use of the term. For example:

"Also, labeling Osama bin Laden as anything but a CIA plant is also a debatable topic. There is no shortage of internet discussions on the topic."

"Also, labeling Obama as a Christian American is also a debatable topic. There is no shortage of internet discussions on the topic."

"Also, labeling Denver International Airport as anything other than a secret FEMA base/concentration camp to be activated when the New World Order takes over is also a debatable topic. There is no shortage of internet discussions on the topic."

You get what I mean. To my thinking, elevating the discourse means discussing theory based on facts. It is not fitting facts to theory.