Hitler, Fascism and the right wing

[kaz]

HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST
Hitler's Socialist Deeds

Yes, now flesh out his nationalist deeds just as thoroughly, will you?

You know...that whole Jew thing. That whole hatred of multiculturalism thing. All that usual liberal stuff.

Your belief that nationalism is somehow "right-wing" is utterly absurd. Are we supposed to believe that Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt didn't practice nationalism?

Churchill et al did not preach ethnic superiority.

Hitler is obviously an extreme example of nationalism, but I would also say that nationalism is an inherent feature of right-wing autocratic regimes.

If you think Soviet Russia was any less nationalist than Nazi Germany then you know zero about history. And you may want to learn a think or two about China, North Korea, Cuba, ...

 

[Iceweasel]

Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle. Here is Orwell on the topic in 1940

Orwell in a Mein Kampf review talking about an english edition "edited from a pro-Hitler angle". "For at that date Hitler was still respectable. He had crushed the German labour movement, and for that the property-owning classes were willing to forgive him almost anything. Both Left and Right concurred in the very shallow notion that National Socialism was merely a version of Conservatism."

I can see 'conservativism' being used in the context of preserving the race but their government encompassed virtually every aspect of life. If you could work, you did work and you worked for the state, for the good of the state, doing what they said for the salary they said. That's a socialist system and it's why they named the party the way they did.

All of this has nothing to do with American conservatives here and now. Which I suspect was the true goal of the OP.

 

[kaz]

Any "historian" that claims the national socialists weren't socialist is a propagandist. Which is why the left would grovel at their feet. Just like the Nazis.

I'm apparently going to need to come up with a more remedial education plan for you since you've never read any history.

So far we have no evidence you have read any history as you have done zero to back up your argument.

Again, what POLICIES made Fascist Germany "right" while Communist Russia was "left." Grow a pair, serving wench, and back up your argument instead of just repeating your mindless assertion.

I'm slapping you in the face with my glove, calling you a dickless bitch and stating you have no manhood and challenging you to back up your argument. So are you going to do it or keep hiding like the little girl you are? Pull down your dress, your twat is showing.

So you have been challenged, what say you?

 

[kaz]

Begs the question: How stupid do you have to be to argue points of history without being able to cite any historians who concur with your view?

LOL, you used "begs the question" wrong in calling us stupid. Now that ... is stupid ... Dude, if you don't know what begs the questions means, you're on the freaking internet, google it.

 

[kaz]

Wow, you finally didn't just call us stupid, you provided a link this time. LOL. You're not just discombobulated, you're dismanhooded.

At least I'm smart enough to know better than to make up my own definitions.

No, you link to someone not smart enough to make up their own definitions but does it anyway.

So what about answering the question, Skippy. How was fascist Germany materially different from Communist Russia?

Soviet Communist were left wing and Nazi Germany was right wing......as everyone obviously already knows. Well.....almost everyone.

Repeating your assertion as truth is a logical fallacy called "begging the question."

The question is how are they materially different? If "everyone already knows" then why can't you simply answer the question instead of ducking and dodging? How were they different that makes Germany "right" and Russia "left?" They were two peas in a pod, both socialist.

Neither was socialist, which has to be democratic. One totalitarianism was communist, collective economy, the other fascist, capitalist economy. Duh.

You pulled that out of your ass. Where do you get that socialism has to be Democratic?

 

[kaz]

Repeating your assertion as truth is a logical fallacy called "begging the question."

The question is how are they materially different? If "everyone already knows" then why can't you simply answer the question instead of ducking and dodging? How were they different that makes Germany "right" and Russia "left?" They were two peas in a pod, both socialist.

It's explained in some detail in the OP, which you obviously did not read.

Read it, give it some thought - THEN come back with questions.

I already addressed this. All you referred to was the marketing of Fascism versus Communism. There are no policy differences. You obviously didn't read my response to this. Read it, give it some thought - THEN come back with questions.

 

[kaz]

Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle. Here is Orwell on the topic in 1940

Orwell in a Mein Kampf review talking about an english edition "edited from a pro-Hitler angle". "For at that date Hitler was still respectable. He had crushed the German labour movement, and for that the property-owning classes were willing to forgive him almost anything. Both Left and Right concurred in the very shallow notion that National Socialism was merely a version of Conservatism."

He crushed the labor movement, then government controlled labor. And you see that as anti-socialist? Seriously?

 

[kaz]

Any "historian" that claims the national socialists weren't socialist is a propagandist. Which is why the left would grovel at their feet. Just like the Nazis.

Now we're back to lying.

I have already told you that German historians from the era, some of whom had close links to the Nazis, also assure us that Hitler was right wing.I listed 6 historians on this thread - not one is communist and two are Jewish.

This idea that "I won't read history because it's communist" does not make you look smart, dude. You look like someone who knows what he is posting is horseshit.

Everything with you seems to come down to "I won't read! I won't learn!"

And you wonder why no one takes you seriously?

Can you quote one of these "German historians" who says Hitler was a right-winger?

He didn't say he wouldn't read history. However, intelligent people ignore what historians have to say when it's obviously just partisan babble. Historians all claim FDR was one of the greatest presidents, and everyone with a brain, who actually believes in freedom, knows he was one of the worst.

Every single one. Don't try your bs anywhere but Tea Party rallies and on Beck.

You know you're losing when you start trotting out the tea party and Beck, that means you have nothing.

 

[kaz]

Just in summary here -

The idea that any small group of people want to change the meaning of a word that has stood for 60+ years should disturb all of us

So 60 years ago, liberal academics changed the definition of fascism, that's OK. Now people are discussing what it actually means, and that is scary. You're drooling, here's a napkin.

Nazi means German Workers Socialist Party, you're the game players. Hitler knew exactly what he was. He centrally planned the economy. That is what socialism means.

 

[Iceweasel]

Just in summary here -

The idea that any small group of people want to change the meaning of a word that has stood for 60+ years should disturb all of us

Uhm no. People knew all along what national socialism was. This is the first I knew it was even a mystery. My mother grew up in NAZI Germany and I'm pretty sure she knows more about it than you do. But I doubt she read a book on it.

The Germans had no illusions, they lived it. You can call it right wing if it makes you feel better. But one would have to question...why would it? The right wing aspect was the nationalism, but that was right wing in 1930s and 40s Germany. As I said repeatedly, it has zip to do with the American right wing. So I asked repeatedly what your goal was.

 

[Saigon]

Weasel -

Why is it that virtually every German historian - including the very right wing ones - disagree with you? Why not tell us which qualified historins agree with you?

How many historians and books do you need to have cited here before you wake up?

Ten? Twenty?

And this time don't dodge, don't spout abuse - just answer the question.

 

[Saigon]

Sounds like you put up a website and then this counts as proof and you won't listen to anything else.

All I've seen as a response is that "actual" historians don't agree, go read a book, you never read a book, I'm unintelligent, I haven't posted anything of substance and now I made the web sites.

All of the advice you have received has been fair and good.

You should read, but you won't, because you know you'll only find truth and facts if you so. You assume bluffing and lies are enough, but how is that working for you?

Can you place Stroessner on the politicl spectrum yet?

 

[Saigon]

Kaz -

Please read the thread before entering the discussion.

I think every question you have asked so far is clealy explained in the OP.

There has only ever been one definition of facism, and that has been used for 60 years. It is only now the American right wing are trying to change it. The definition of fascism as being right wing extends back into the 1930's, and was used extensively by German historians (named below) and philosophers such as Heidegger and Arendt. Heidegger was a key supporter of the Nazi movement.

Also, Nazi members Traudl Junge and Albert Speer have written books where they discuss the right-wing nature of their own party.

 

[Iceweasel]

Weasel -

Why is it that virtually every German historian - including the very right wing ones - disagree with you? Why not tell us which qualified historins agree with you?

How many historians and books do you need to have cited here before you wake up?

Ten? Twenty?

And this time don't dodge, don't spout abuse - just answer the question.

LOL. You're stuck on stupid and can't even read the words in front of your eyes. You use the liberal tactic of adding the qualifier "virtually" which means, not every. But you get to choose who's legitimate? You haven't posted shit except your assertion of what an author says, and without any context.

Seriously, you are piss poor at this. Find another hobby.

 

[Iceweasel]

All of the advice you have received has been fair and good.

You should read, but you won't, because you know you'll only find truth and facts if you so. You assume bluffing and lies are enough, but how is that working for you?

Can you place Stroessner on the politicl spectrum yet?

I assume you are completely full of shit. I proved it and you can't handle it. The bluff is all yours.

 

[Discombobulated]

All of the advice you have received has been fair and good.

You should read, but you won't, because you know you'll only find truth and facts if you so. You assume bluffing and lies are enough, but how is that working for you?

Can you place Stroessner on the politicl spectrum yet?

I assume you are completely full of shit. I proved it and you can't handle it. The bluff is all yours.

When will you present the historic evidence that supports you half wit claims? And why do you have to lie all the time?

 

[Saigon]

Right-wing German historians on Fascism:

As mentioned earlier, a number of right-wing German historians and philosophers have spoken quite a lot about the nature of the regime, especially during the Historikerstreit or Historians Dispute, linked below.

During this disupte, a number of right-wing historians, including Ernst Nolte, Michael Sturmer and Andreas Hilgruber, claimed (in short) that right-wing capitalism had been forced to oppose communism, and that Fascism was the result.

Centrist historians attacked them for playing down Germany's reponsibility for the Holocaust. Socialist historians went further, insisting that Fascism represented the culmination of capitalist thinking, and thus all capitalism was in some way culpable, though these attacks have now largely been forgotten (and with good reason).

Essentially all of the 20 or so historians in this debate used the term 'right'wing' extensively to describe the Nazi regime. Although there is discussion concerning the similarities between various totalitarian regimes, what is clear is the importance of capitalism to all interpretations of fascist regimes.

Historikerstreit - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The debate opened on June 6, 1986 when the philosopher and historian Ernst Nolte had a speech printed in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, entitled Die Vergangenheit, die nicht vergehen will (“The past that won't go away”). Nolte argued that the “race murder” of the Nazi death camps was a “defensive reaction” to the “class murder” of the Stalinist system of gulags. In his view, the gulags were the original and greater horror. In the face of the threat of Bolshevism, it was reasonable that the German people would turn to Nazi fascism.[9] He had already articulated this argument the previous year in an essay published in English: “Auschwitz... was above all a reaction born out of the annihilating occurrences of the Russian Revolution... the so-called annihilation of the Jews during the Third Reich was a reaction or a distorted copy and not a first act or an original”

This alone should prove to any logical person that fascism was clearly, obviously unequivocably capitalist and right wing in nature.

 

[Discombobulated]

Holy shit these people are stupid. When will the dummies substantiate their alleged argument?

 

[Saigon]

Weasel -

Answer the questions.

Why is it that virtually every German historian - including the very right wing ones - disagree with you? Why not tell us which qualified historians agree with you?

Why do you think Nazi party members like Speer and Traudl Junge use the word 'right wing' in their books?

How many historians and books do you need to have cited here before you wake up?

Stop dodging. Stop spouting childish abuse.

 

[Discombobulated]

Weasel -

Have you considered that in the time you have spent posting nonsense on this thread, you could have gone and read a book and brought yourself up to speed on this topic?

Yes, you'd have found that you were wrong - but you would also have learned the topic.

What would it cost you to read a book and learn?

It's been demonstrated that the NAZIs were a socialist regime. Your stupid insults don't make you look smart. You're just another left wing asshole that relies on smears and insults. Just like the NAZIs. You and Adolf Hilter have more in common that you can apparently handle, don't blame me.


“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” Adolf Hitler - See more at: Nazi Germany quotations


“The Reichswirtschaftsministerium (‘Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs’) tells the shop managers what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. It assigns every worker to his job and fixes his wages. It decrees to whom and on what terms the capitalists must entrust their funds. Market exchange is merely a sham.” Ludwig von Mises (historian / economist) - See more at: Nazi Germany quotations

You've demonstrated nothing....jack shit.