I taught this stuff so I forgot how complicated it is.
Let me know if this does not explain it.
Some BUGSERS have trouble with how Germany’s government was formed in 1932.
In the United States the president and congress are elected separately.
However, in most places there is a single election for the single ruling House, like the House of Commons in Britain.
Americans are used to an orderly, timed changes of government. Our elections are in November, but the old congressmen and the old president stay in office until January, the “transition” period. It used to be that those elected only took office in March, four months after the election.
This makes the way they change governments in Europe very confusing to us.
In Britain, there is only one election, and that election is for every Member of Parliament on the same day. If that election goes against the party in power, every office from Prime Minister down to MP (Member of Parliament) changes.
Right after Election Day, if the party in power loses, a new government must be formed.
This has happened many, many times. The moment the Labor Party got a majority in the House of Commons in 1945, the Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, suddenly had to leave Number Ten Downing Street, their White House.
In the European form of government, the old government disappears at the top and a complete new government must be formed.
Here is the part that confuses Americans: The new government must be supported by a majority of members of the one elected House selected in that one election.
Nowadays, no one party ever gets a majority in the British Parliament. So they have to form a coalition in order to form any government or elect any prime minister. I have long since lost track, but the last British Government I remember was a coalition of Conservative and Liberal Democrat Parties.
Back in the fifties, the Governments of France and Italy were standing jokes. They would form a new Government every few DAYS, as members of Parliament formed new coalitions and then fell out with each other.
To Americans, this would be a weird way to run a country store, much less a GOVERNMENT!
I repeat: in this Bizarro way of running a government, there is no government unless it is backed by a MAJORITY of the one elected house.
There is no end to the number of disasters this can lead to. One of these disasters occurred in the Weimar Republic after the election of 1932.
Between the two, the Communists and the Nazis, they had a MAJORITY of the total membership of the newly elected ruling House. 
The ONLY House Germany has forms a government!
You could not form a government without a majority.
Basic arithmetic: If two (2) parties hold a majority, one of the two must be included if you are to form ANY new government. So the 1932 election meant that ANY new government must include either Nazis or Communists.
I did NOT say the Nazis and Communists got together. What I said was that those people who voted Communist caused this situation, as Nazi voters did.
The new government HAD to include either Communists or Nazis.
Hitler owned a third of the Reichstag. A government required a majority vote. Hitler formed a coalition with other right-wing German parties.
No, the Nazis and the Communists did not come together. When Hitler took power his coalition then Hitler formed a coalition with the tiny right-wing National Party. Kicking out the Reds made the Reichstag arithmetic even better. With a sixth of its members kicked out, Hitler’s third got even closer to a majority. There were 83% of the delegates left, and Hitler owned 33% of those delegates.
A snap election was called, during which the Reichstag burned down and the Communists got blamed. The Nazis ran against politically handicapped opponents in March. This further improved their numbers.
Hitler was at last able to declare a State of Emergency and he then threw all the other parties out of the Reichstag and Germany was run by the Nazis in that State of Emergency until May of 1945.
Is this understandable?
#1 by Jason on 09/24/2014 - 9:09 am
This is why I just spread memes. All of that is confusing!
#2 by Daniel Genseric on 09/24/2014 - 9:10 am
So, you’re saying that the Communists did to the US what the National Socialists did to Germany?
I say that because there is NOBODY who publicly represents European Americans in any part of our government – local, state, or federal.
Whatever works, I guess. I’m just praying that the 2016 elections aren’t suspended because of some affirmative action executive’s lust for his favorite rendition of “State of Emergency”.
BUGS is in big trouble if they are.
sidebar: As of late he has become quite the Expert on the Islamic State, no? Gutting the military of its war-time generals and firing NCO E-7’s like it’s going out of style. Economically terrorizing their most ardent opponents through the IRS. Experts being called in to consult on the very crisis they created comes to mind…again. Is it parallel or simply the SAME damn thing?
#3 by -backbaygrouch- on 09/24/2014 - 12:33 pm
When coalition governments are formed in parliamentary systems very formal agreements are agreed as to patronage, that is, the assignment of offices up and down the line. This is important because it impacts the income of activists. Even after Mr. Hitler had assumed de facto dictatorial power he carefully saw to it that the National Party functionaries retained their agreed upon positions. To that extent he ruled a coalition, sort of a unity government.
What Hitler’s reasoning was is unclear. My guess is that he felt at some time it may have been necessary to recall the Reichstag and he wanted the National Party in his pocket. It shows a longsighted, cautious nature.
It is a simple, obvious truth that the most absolute of dictators are reliant upon those they surround themselves with. They can terrorize their colleagues, but they cannot function without them.
#4 by Bob on 09/24/2014 - 2:34 pm
BBG:
All governments are oligarchies.
#5 by WmWhite on 09/26/2014 - 7:24 am
“Testing Theories of American Politics:
Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens”
http://tinyurl.com/ns7yxo9
Basically the April 2014 study finds that America is an oligarchy, not a democracy or republic.
America is no longer a democracy — never mind the democratic republic envisioned by the Founding Fathers.
“Rather, it has taken a turn down elitist lane and become a country led by a small dominant class comprised of powerful members who exert total control over the general population — an oligarchy, said a new study jointly conducted by Princeton and Northwestern universities.”
… … …
So who makes up this oligarchy …or are we forbidden to ask?
#6 by WmWhite on 09/26/2014 - 7:29 am
Of course from what I’ve studied –the Founding Fathers and wealthy during the time ‘before and after’ the Revolution for Financial Independence, pretty much formed an early American oligarchy. I could be wrong.
#7 by Secret Squirrel on 09/26/2014 - 9:03 am
I’m not American, but I understand 90% of the Senate are not Jewish? Perhaps it is higher now?
What makes those White politicians, who are the overwhelming majority, betray White interests year after year? What makes those millions of White voters, vote for the same anti-White political parties, year after year?
Christians are huge supporters of open borders and Israel because of “End Times Prophecy” or something and there are far more of them than Jews. So why not shout Christian! Christian! Christian! ?
It is the same for big corporations, the left and conservatives. All are profiting from White Genocide.
Also your core argument is unconvincing to Pro Whites who’s family members, friends and colleagues are White, yet remain stubbornly anti-White. These Whites don’t give a damn what happens to their children and grandchildren. Shouting Jew at these people does not work, because they agree with everything that is happening. So you are just preaching to the choir.
If you don’t know any Whites that are anti-White, I suggest leave your Mom’s basement and speak to people in the real world. You will get quite an education.
#8 by WmWhite on 09/26/2014 - 10:18 am
I agree with some of your rant, until you suddenly turn into an insulting jackass and start talking about joooos this and jooooos that.
My comment was about “Oligarchies,” (which Bob brought up).
You have now lowered the discussion into a: the-jews-did-it-BS …so get off the jew subject.
Also, if you want to improve your understanding of Oligarchies, read the report I sited instead of the funny papers.
/////
@Secret Squirrel, you may not be an American but you certainly suffer from the white terminal disease of being a “Self-Righteousness, Nobody-can-tell-me-anything,” dolt. This movement needs people that can THINK and Discuss intelligently –not short fused fanatics.
#9 by Secret Squirrel on 09/26/2014 - 10:40 am
You mad?
#10 by Secret Squirrel on 09/26/2014 - 5:06 pm
If I misunderstood where you were going with that “or are we forbidden to ask?” I’m sorry. Hard to turn it off, after jousting with anti-Whites.
#11 by WmWhite on 09/26/2014 - 6:09 pm
Don’t worry about it SSquirrel, even I blasted-off because of my misinterpretation of your misinterpretation …and on and on we went.
The important thing is we are fellow Bugsters fighting the good fight, who will knock heads from time to time; since we all have to be somewhat bull-headed to keep opposing the witless anti-whites.
My apologies to you for any unwarranted insults.
#12 by Secret Squirrel on 09/26/2014 - 10:45 am
“So who makes up this oligarchy …or are we forbidden to ask?”
Like we haven’t heard that before.
#13 by Secret Squirrel on 09/26/2014 - 9:12 am
When I first saw that article pointing out America is an oligarchy, I assumed oligarchy meant Chamber of Commerce. Thanks to your comment, I see it is much wider. It is everyone that is rewarded financially, when a certain political party is in power.
Conservatives, leftists, corporations, activists, government workers, churches, etc. All are rewarded.
I also want to point out, former colonial powers look down on non-White countries they used to rule, because their leaders take suitcases full of money out to the back blocks, to bribe entire villages to vote for them. Its no different to the oligarchy in White countries.
#14 by WmWhite on 09/26/2014 - 10:21 am
Your understanding of what an Oligarchy is is incorrect. Read the sited article for enlightenment.
#15 by Secret Squirrel on 09/26/2014 - 10:43 am
What is to understand?
Oligarchy:
A form of government in which all power is vested in a few persons or in a dominant class or clique; government by the few.
#16 by Secret Squirrel on 09/26/2014 - 10:39 am
Your article was discussed here months ago.
#17 by Secret Squirrel on 09/26/2014 - 11:41 am
When I said they bribe entire villages, they give the money to the tribal leader and he tells everyone how to vote, again bribing the influential ones under him, I assume.
So rule by oligarchy comes down to who has the suitcases of money and its power comes from those that take the bribes.
#18 by Benjamin Newells on 09/24/2014 - 7:17 pm
Thanks Bob. This makes sense to me.
#19 by Sys Op on 09/25/2014 - 5:07 pm
ALL: NOTE:
I made changes to overall system last night. Email me or put in TECH forum if you have any NEW issues here. Sys Op
#20 by Jason on 09/26/2014 - 11:18 pm
Can’s we say that when BUGS cooperates with groups and individuals who still hold to Old School White Nationalism or to Jew-Hatred First-and-Foremost, we are likely to get burned?
We’ve seen several hijacking nows.
People who are obviously from old brand of “white nationalism” say they are ready to get on message.
And then they get off message and wreak havoc. Has it all been worth it?
A lot of time and energy is invested in big events that involve cooperating with these other groups, in which inevitably end up slapping a big swastika on it and then go off taking about Zionist Supermacism. Always.
So whose fault is this? Is it really the fault of the guy who in 2014 is pushing an image that was stale 70 years ago. Or is it the fault of BUGS for thinking such a person can really be worked with?
#21 by Tom Bowie on 09/27/2014 - 5:30 pm
“So whose fault is this?”
Six of one half a dozen of the other, in my opinion.
One of the counter demonstrations to a march for amnesty I attended included a what you can vs. can’t say briefing. To my question however it was agreed that me saying “In your opinion I’m Racist/Bigot/Whatever, you’re only saying that because I’m White” was perfectly fine.
That’s what I said at first but one thing lead to another and after a bit I had others saying something like it as well. (It worked out in a way I’d not planed on and that’s another story.) When I said it to one of my opponents who was White and he responded with a comment about being White himself and an anti-Racist; my response was along the lines of “In that case anti-racist is nothing more than just a code word for antiWhite and you’re just a self hating White antiWhite”. (Likely not my exact wording but close.)
Despite having agreed as to what was acceptable, I’d obtained a chance to exercise Mission Creep. Every so often I’d add “AntiRacist is just a code word for AntiWhite” after my agreed upon response and the group was fine with it.
Was I planning Mission Creep, you bet your life I was and still am. I’ve been out with them once after that and I’m welcome to attend any of their protests. I at least appear to be playing by the rules they demand, even if I’m rehearsing in my mind ways I can slip in White GeNOcide acceptably at some point. (Yeah, that’s going to be much harder to pull off in such a situation and, not discourage those folks as well as break our arrangement.)
Another of the anti-amnesty groups that attended the first event, had a fellow with them who was a diehard uniform wearing member of the Aryan Nations. You’d never know it however by the way he acted at the event; he was following the rules as well. He was not among the first of those to start responding with the In your Opinion response.
In working with anybody there’s always a risk they’ll break ranks and if they’re unskilled they’ll often think they’re doing the right thing.
The AN guy in such groups with a an agreement in advance is likely to stay in check more than I am, I’m actively looking for a way to engage in Mission Creep but, only within acceptable limits.
A few of the folks running things with the group know who I am and hat I’m about, and as long as I don’t go to far to fast, they’re fine with that as well.
Having an advance agreement is not always possible and even then misunderstandings as well as mistakes will happen. Somebody going off the farm is always a possibility as well but, that’s a separate issue.
#22 by Polar Bear on 10/02/2014 - 11:32 pm
Fully understood Mr bob.