How we know Hitler was right wing.

[Avorysuds]

You have either more Government or less Government... There is no circle. A dictator on the right and a dictator on the left, it makes no fucking sense.

That is becuse you assume right wing = small government. It doesn't. (Explained above)

I don't agree with the circle model myself - a horseshoe is a much more used model.

Wrong. We are back to fighting over the definition of what pop culture has labeled a group.

Again, Bush was pro big Government, stimulus, bailouts, Education, healthcare, military and so on... Obama falls in the same description, the very same description in fact. So once again, you either have more Government or you have less. Bush was for a huge increase in Government per actual Bush era policy, so is Obama... You can label Obama left and Bush right, you can label Obama liberal/progressive and Bush conservative/neocon but these titles have no meaning when they are based on rhetoric rather than policy.

What you're really debating is under what pro government ideology did a certain country/person use to gain power (communism/socialism/fascism.) Thus no matter who is promoting Government as the answer it always ends up the same when that power grows, a dictatorship.

You simply want to attach “right wing” to Hitler/Nazi. If Right wing = conservative = libertarian = American constitution = the most limited Government the world has ever seen, then it’s not possible to get Hitler/Nazi. If “Right Wing” means Neo-con = Pro Government = Pro military = Pro bailouts = Pro stimulus… well then you are really just back to fighting over slight variations of what makes up Progressives different than Neo-cons with the same inevitable result of either a bankrupted country or a dictator invading other countries to steal their wealth so they don’t go bankrupted.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Does being limited government to an extreme lead to Fascism? No

Then fascism sure as heck isn't right wing.

If you're posting here, then you have a computer and access to the internet.

I'd suggest that you go to a dictionary site and look up the definition of "fascism", and then go to various political scholarly websites and look up what a fascist is.

If you're honest about it, you'll see how wrong your post is.

 

[Saigon]

Avory -

It is a simple fact that Hitler has been described in every history book and in every dictionary as being right wing since at least the 1940's and probably earlier. It is not disputed.

The mistake you are making here is trying to define parties and politicians from the 1930's with a perspective from 2013. We can't really compare Obama with Stalin or Bush with Hitler, because they are so extremely different. It makes much more sense to compare and contrast politicians and leaders with those of a similar type. There is no question that Obama is left of Bush, nor that Stalin is left of Hitler.

 

[Avorysuds]

Here Saigon, short... Video. The False Left Right Political Paradigm

 

[Saigon]

As I mentioned earlier - this isn't some theory of mine. It's in every dictionary.

noun
[mass noun]

an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
(in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practices: this is yet another example of health fascism in action

Definition of fascism in Oxford Dictionaries (British & World English)

 

[Avorysuds]

Avory -

It is a simple fact that Hitler has been described in every history book and in every dictionary as being right wing since at least the 1940's and probably earlier. It is not disputed.

The mistake you are making here is trying to define parties and politicians from the 1930's with a perspective from 2013. We can't really compare Obama with Stalin or Bush with Hitler, because they are so extremely different. It makes much more sense to compare and contrast politicians and leaders with those of a similar type. There is no question that Obama is left of Bush, nor that Stalin is left of Hitler.

Again, you either have more government or less.... YOU are trying to attach Hitler to modern day "right wing." if not, then who the fuck cares if HITLER was a smidgen to the right of STALIN when you ended up with the same thing, a dictator. Reality is they were both the very definition of extremisms of the left (pro Government).

If we look at Hitler today from a 2013 prospective then yes, Hitler is the definition of "left wing." If we are looking at it from a 1940's standpoint I honestly see no reason for your thread as we are past that time period.

 

[Saigon]

Avory -

you either have more government or less...

It is not this which defines left or right. I know many Americans believe that it is, and I certainly understand why, but the elements historians usually use to define left or right are capital/capitalism and class.

Hitler was considered right wing because he was a capitalist who supported a clear class system.

Stalin was considered left wing because he was anti-capitalist and wanted to smash the class system.

As I explained earlier, many right wing governments around the world have not been about small goverment - while some left wing governments (e.g. Lange/Prebble/Douglas) have been about small government.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

Is that so? Can you explain why you ignored my post tearing apart your case that Hitler is right wing using your own words to prove you don't actually think he is right wing?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is why the political spectrum is usually shown as a horseshoe, as the RW Nazism/ Fascism (where corporations are kept, and are hugely powerful DUHHH!!) extreme and the LW communism (gov't owns industry) extremes are both totalitarian and almost meet. In the void between is anarchy (no government)...

This horseshoe? Strange how it doesn't look anything like what you described.

Pure BS from some RW charlatan, that's why.

Should go:
Center
Dems---------- Repubs
Socialists------ Fascists Naz(Totalitarians)
Communist Totalitarians

When you put fascists and socialists together, you're a MORON....
Fascists (Nazis) are totalitarians and love capitalists.
Socialists TEND toward nationalizing a few industries, are always democratic.
Commies nationalize everything, always totalitarian.

That is the facts, dupes, of modern PoliSci.

A bogus theory is still bogus if you change the order of points in the line.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Does being limited government to an extreme lead to Fascism? No

Then fascism sure as heck isn't right wing.

If you're posting here, then you have a computer and access to the internet.

I'd suggest that you go to a dictionary site and look up the definition of "fascism", and then go to various political scholarly websites and look up what a fascist is.

If you're honest about it, you'll see how wrong your post is.

Like this definition?

Fascism is "a genuinely revolutionary, trans-class form of anti-liberal, and in the last analysis, anti-conservative nationalism" built on a complex range of theoretical and cultural influences.

Fascism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Saigon]

QW -

Actually I have you on Ignore Mode, so don't see all of your posts, but having gone back and read your comments now, I think one thing to keep in mind is that almost every dictionary, encyclopedia and history book for the last 60 years has described Hitler as being right wing. Certainly every solid, reliable source does - Arendt does, Kershaw does, Overy does, Marris does.

There are VERY good reasons why they do so. Perhaps focus less on trying to 'tear things apart' and a little more on trying to understand why recorded history is at it is and you might find it all a bit more logical.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Avory -

It is a simple fact that Hitler has been described in every history book and in every dictionary as being right wing since at least the 1940's and probably earlier. It is not disputed.

The mistake you are making here is trying to define parties and politicians from the 1930's with a perspective from 2013. We can't really compare Obama with Stalin or Bush with Hitler, because they are so extremely different. It makes much more sense to compare and contrast politicians and leaders with those of a similar type. There is no question that Obama is left of Bush, nor that Stalin is left of Hitler.

Every history book ever written? Can we bet on that?

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0767917189]Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Change: Jonah Goldberg: 9780767917186: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

 

[Avatar4321]

Does being limited government to an extreme lead to Fascism? No

Then fascism sure as heck isn't right wing.

If you're posting here, then you have a computer and access to the internet.

I'd suggest that you go to a dictionary site and look up the definition of "fascism", and then go to various political scholarly websites and look up what a fascist is.

If you're honest about it, you'll see how wrong your post is.

So you are saying the dictionary and websites are going to show how being radical for limited government leads to fascism? Somehow i doubt that.

 

[Avatar4321]

Avory -

you either have more government or less...

It is not this which defines left or right. I know many Americans believe that it is, and I certainly understand why, but the elements historians usually use to define left or right are capital/capitalism and class.

Hitler was considered right wing because he was a capitalist who supported a clear class system.

Stalin was considered left wing because he was anti-capitalist and wanted to smash the class system.

As I explained earlier, many right wing governments around the world have not been about small goverment - while some left wing governments (e.g. Lange/Prebble/Douglas) have been about small government.

If that's not what your right/left spectrum defines, then it seems pretty useless as a measuring tool.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

As I mentioned earlier - this isn't some theory of mine. It's in every dictionary.

noun
[mass noun]

an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
(in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practices: this is yet another example of health fascism in action

Definition of fascism in Oxford Dictionaries (British & World English)

Every dictionary?

1. ( sometimes initial capital letter ) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
2. ( sometimes initial capital letter ) the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
3. ( initial capital letter ) a political movement that employs the principles and methods of fascism, especially the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.

Quick rule of thumb, anyone who speaks in absolutes is wrong 100% of the time.

 

[Saigon]

Avory -

you either have more government or less...

It is not this which defines left or right. I know many Americans believe that it is, and I certainly understand why, but the elements historians usually use to define left or right are capital/capitalism and class.

Hitler was considered right wing because he was a capitalist who supported a clear class system.

Stalin was considered left wing because he was anti-capitalist and wanted to smash the class system.

As I explained earlier, many right wing governments around the world have not been about small goverment - while some left wing governments (e.g. Lange/Prebble/Douglas) have been about small government.

If that's not what your right/left spectrum defines, then it seems pretty useless as a measuring tool.

No, on the contrary, I think it is essential.

I do agree that attitudes towards small and large government are very important in US politics, but less so in other countries around the world. Unfortunately for us here in Europe, Stalin and Hitler happened here, and in an era when small government probably was not of enormous significance even in US politics.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

QW -

Actually I have you on Ignore Mode, so don't see all of your posts, but having gone back and read your comments now, I think one thing to keep in mind is that almost every dictionary, encyclopedia and history book for the last 60 years has described Hitler as being right wing. Arendt does, Kershaw does, Overy does, Marris does.

There are VERY good reasons why they do so. Perhaps focus less on trying to 'tear things apart' and a little more on trying to understand why recorded history is at it is and you might find it all a bit more logical.

Dictionaries can be wrong, despite your ignorant reliance on them. For instance, every dictionary ever written makes the same mistake about pomegranates. Feel free to keep me on ignore, I know you have a problem with reality.

The botanical name of the pomegranate tree should be Punica granata, not what it is in every botanical text on earth, namely Punica granatum. But the mistake is sanctioned by long use, and botanists will not change it. Granted, granatum is a small mistake, but it is not alone in botanical nomenclature where hundreds of clumsy fumblings in bad Latin word-making clutter otherwise pristine texts. I know I'm a fussbudget to say so, but scientists ought to correct their most easily seen errors.

pomegranate origin of the mistake in its botanical name from Bill Casselman's Canadian Word of the Day at billcasselman.com

 

[Locke11_21]

Both a communist and a socialist can be for absolute control of the people. Rather than a simple line (Everyone who believe this has it all wrong). Politics is a CIRCLE. As policies proceeds to the right or left, they will eventually come together at the bottom of the dung heap. Lefties are no worse than righties when it comes to throwing curve balls. The average citizens suffer just as much when the bottom is reached by either means.

Not a cricle, but a horseshoe. A horseshoe in which the extremes are closer to each other than they are to the centre.

Remember that the defining aspects of politics are capital and class, and in these senses left and right will always be direct opposites ideoogically.

This is a basic horseshoe

The idea that Hitler was right-wing is the most successful big lie of the left. Hitler was to the right of communism, but he was still a leftist. I noticed you used a graph, well time to use that graph against you. As the horseshoe shows, socialism is leftist. Here you go:

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with it's unfair salaries, with it's unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions". --- Adolf Hitler, May 1, 1927


Nuff said

 

[Avatar4321]

Avory -



It is not this which defines left or right. I know many Americans believe that it is, and I certainly understand why, but the elements historians usually use to define left or right are capital/capitalism and class.

Hitler was considered right wing because he was a capitalist who supported a clear class system.

Stalin was considered left wing because he was anti-capitalist and wanted to smash the class system.

As I explained earlier, many right wing governments around the world have not been about small goverment - while some left wing governments (e.g. Lange/Prebble/Douglas) have been about small government.

If that's not what your right/left spectrum defines, then it seems pretty useless as a measuring tool.

No, on the contrary, I think it is essential.

I do agree that attitudes towards small and large government are very important in US politics, but less so in other countries around the world. Unfortunately for us here in Europe, Stalin and Hitler happened here, and in an era when small government probably was not of enormous significance even in US politics.

Alright, so how does a spectrum of totalitarian regimes measure anything useful?

 

[Saigon]

Locke -

Socialism is definitely a disease of the left. There is no question at all about that.

However, as has been explained earlier on this thread, at the time the Nazis were formed in the 1920's, the term was being used right across the political spectrum, and had not become the synonym for Marxism it is used as today.