Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
The German Nazi Führer Adolf Hitler had objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name, as Hitler at the time preferred to use "Social Revolutionary". Upon taking over the leadership, Hitler kept the term but defined socialism as being based upon a commitment of an individual to a community. Hitler did not want the ideology's socialism to be conflated with Marxian socialism.
Marxism is not left wing, it just look left wing if you refuse to accept that the political spectrum is not two dimensional.
Two wings of the same house. Both wings are socialist, one is more left one is more right and the rest of socialism fits somewhere in between. Conservativism isn't part of that house and all socialism is to the right of even the most right wing of socialism because the cornerstone of conservativism is the idea of the soveriegn individual
The more extreme you get the bigger government gets, on both sides.
Not getting it Amy, those on the right are for smaller and less intrusive govt with less regulation, while those on the left are for the opposite. So how does a person on the right get to a totalitarian state if he/she wants less and less gov't intervention and regulation?
Finaly, what seperates right wing tyranny from left wing tyranny are the facts of Capital and Class.
Socialism and Marxism are based around the worker and the working classes. Although Hitler appealed to the masses as well, his key support came from the upper classes. Socialism sought to destroy class. Fascism sought to entrench the classes even more deeply into society.
Socialism sought to remove capital from society. Fascism worked through capital, enriching the upper classes and using wealth to garner support. Hitler imagined a society in which capitalism and investment thrived - Stali imagined a society in which capitalism and investment did not exist.
There are other areas of difference as well. Hitler favoured:
Individualism over collectivism.
Merit over equality.
Competition over cooperation.
Capitalism over Marxism.
Nationalism over internationalism.
Exclusiveness over inclusiveness.
Common sense over theory or science.
Stalin's views were essentially the opposite in each instance.
Hitler did not ascribe to American capitalism or Russian communism/socialism. He thought U.S. and Russia both got it wrong and Fascism is it's own separate animal. Fascism is not geared towards capitalism or socialism, it's geared to the state, but without the 'sharing' or collectivism. Facism doesn't want corporations or workers to have much power, it wants corporations and workers to succeed only as it benefits the government. Fascism dictates that government controls BOTH businesses and workers to benefit the state, not that the government supports either businesses or workers.
I agree with most political scientists that it is more rightwing than leftwing, but it's a strange rightwing that borrows some of the authortarian tactics/elements from communism, which is one reason why I find it ironic that Hitler hated communism so much.
If we go back to the origins of the term 'Nazi' and its usage in Italy, then there were genuinely socialist influences mixed in with extreme right wing concepts, but few of these ever found their way into Nazism. Nazism jumped some distance to the right as it moved from Italy to Germany.
You mean fascism. The Nazis didn't exist in Italy.
I understand them fine. It is you who is trying to defend the claim that the National Socialist German Workers' party of Germany were not socialists.
And I have done the research which is why I don't need google and whatever revisionist history I might find there. All one need do is look at the social programs hitler instituted in germany to see that he was, in fact, a socialist.
When you use the word wing, either right or left, you are talking about the same house and the house is liberalism
And you throw around the term right wing and left wing thinking that one means liberal and socialist and the other encompasses the conservative philosophy.
It’s important to note, of course, that modern American conservatives aren’t ‘Nazis’ or ‘fascists.’ But they all do share the roots of the same political family tree, particularly with regard to the blending of government and militarism, the hostility toward political and social dissent and diversity, and opposition to immigration and the fear of the loss of a racial/ethnic ‘national identity’ as a consequence of immigration and an increase in minority populations.
Exactly that - I think some conservatives react to threads like this as some kind of insult, whereas to my mind Fascism has little to do with modern Conservatism. There is a huge gulf between the centre and the extreme.
Stalin did succeed in complete genocide of the Ukraine, moving Russians into the land after butchering virtually the entire population
If Hitler was a socialist, how come he didn't socialize any industry? And you don't count seizing jewish assets...DER!
His 25 points AND socialist in the name of the party were Hitler's PROPAGANDA!! Which you swallow as easily as all the Pubcrappe that makes the GOP the laughingstock of the world. Beck is a HS grad cokehead dj charlatan A-hole...your hero...ay caramba. Change the channel and read a history book.
hitler said:"Our socialism reaches much deeper. It does not change the external order of things, it orders solely the relationship of man to the state... Then what does property and income count for? Why should we need to socialize the banks and the factories? We are socializing the people."
Thanks to editec, we now know what Hitler was talking about when he opposed liberalism.
LIBERALISMAn ideology that upholds private property, individual rights, legal equality, freedom of choice and democratic government. Liberalism suggests that the essence of freedom is to be free from constraint. Liberalism is an ideology that supports capitalism and advocates the principle of free markets, left largely undirected by governments. While liberalism upholds free markets, it also places great value on equal of opportunity and is strongly opposed to ascriptive processes in society, since they restrict individual choice and deny equal access to satisfaction. In the twentieth century, a more active view of the state's role in creating improved equality of opportunity in society became important within liberalism. (This trend in liberalism was also a reaction to the development of trade unions and of socialist and populist movements.) There was a massive expansion in state -provided education, social programs etc. from the end of the 19th century until the 1960's and 1970's. In the 1980's and 1990's a more classical view of liberalism has returned to prominence, one that advocates a much smaller role for the state and increased reliance on the workings of the free market. In making this argument, classical liberals claim that intervention in the market rarely, if ever, promotes choice, but frustrates the market adjustments that ultimately improve efficiency, the wealth of society and the ability of individuals to make choices. See: CLASSICAL LIBERALISM / NEO-LIBERALISM / .
Keep telling me about how Hitler was right wing.
Hitler was no "socialist". The term was in the party's name before he came to power and he disapproved of it (the name as well as the ideology). He considered socialists to be enemies of the state and locked them up.
Saigon, I have seen several posters, here and elsewhere on the Net, try to float this revisionism. I'll repost some old stuff if I get the time. As I keep telling them, to conclude "Hitler's a leftist" based on the presence of the word "socialist" in the party's name is going to make it hard to explain the Democratic Republic of Congo, the DPRK, and of course the GDR. A name is a name, and a political name is propaganda. And propagana of course never lies
Historical revisionism is unfortunately a popular pastime of late. They seem to think if a lie is repeated often enough, some people will eventually believe it. Hard to see where they get that idea.
Masters in History, dupe...?
