But, Aren't Nazis and Fascists Really Left-Wingers?

[NYcarbineer]

There really isn't much of anything about Nazi Germany that compares favorably and particularly to the current American left.

The whole premise is an absurdity.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yet there are far more components of fascism contained within doctrines and practices of modern American liberalism than you can find components of libertarianism within the Third Reich.

And far more than either of them that compare to modern conservatism.

We've already spent almost 40 pages ***** slapping that myth... so I will just say, read thru the thread again.. Unless socialist and left wing stances and actions are "conservatism", you are completely wrong (again)

So the Nazi emphasis on militarism, building up a massive army, navy, air force, etc., is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi banning of strikes by labor unions is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi persecution of homosexuals is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi ban on abortion is liberal how exactly?

See, people, this is standard practice of the intellectually bankrupt right. Start a thread, get fully debunked,

and then just plow forward as if nothing in rebuttal has even been posted.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The OP says the Nazis were liberals. Are you that stupid?

You sure about that??

Aren't Nazism and Fascism on the far left of the political spectrum?

Evidently, you are the stupid one

Read the thread title.

 

[DiamondDave]

The OP says the Nazis were liberals. Are you that stupid?

You sure about that??

Aren't Nazism and Fascism on the far left of the political spectrum?

Evidently, you are the stupid one

Read the thread title.

But, Aren't Nazis and Fascists Really Left-Wingers?

Nope.. not there either... referring to the left wing... as in socialist/communist wing...

Yep.. you are indeed an idiot

 

[DiamondDave]

And far more than either of them that compare to modern conservatism.

We've already spent almost 40 pages ***** slapping that myth... so I will just say, read thru the thread again.. Unless socialist and left wing stances and actions are "conservatism", you are completely wrong (again)

So the Nazi emphasis on militarism, building up a massive army, navy, air force, etc., is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi banning of strikes by labor unions is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi persecution of homosexuals is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi ban on abortion is liberal how exactly?

See, people, this is standard practice of the intellectually bankrupt right. Start a thread, get fully debunked,

and then just plow forward as if nothing in rebuttal has even been posted.

Are you confusing totalitarianism (which can be left, right, or middle) with conservatism again?? Are you seriously thinking totalitarian leftist regimes don't build huge militaries?? Leftist regimes do not control business and production?? Leftists do not chose out chosen enemies of every sort (sex, nationality, race, etc)
Go back and learn something, idiot

 

[Foxfyre]

Yet there are far more components of fascism contained within doctrines and practices of modern American liberalism than you can find components of libertarianism within the Third Reich.

And far more than either of them that compare to modern conservatism.

We've already spent almost 40 pages ***** slapping that myth... so I will just say, read thru the thread again.. Unless socialist and left wing stances and actions are "conservatism", you are completely wrong (again)

Very true. You can find elements of fascism within a few right wing factions, but I defy anybody to find anybody to find elements of fascism within modern American conservatism as it is accurately defined. American conservatism is 180 opposite to fascist concepts.

Facism:
Philosophy of government that stresses the primacy and glory of the state, unquestioning obedience to its leader, subordination of the individual will to the state's authority, and harsh suppression of dissent.. . . .

. . . .The leaders of the fascist governments of Italy (1922–43), Germany (1933–45), and Spain (1939–75)—Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, and Francisco Franco—were portrayed to their publics as embodiments of the strength and resolve necessary to rescue their nations from political and economic chaos. Japanese fascists (1936–45) fostered belief in the uniqueness of the Japanese spirit and taught subordination to the state and personal sacrifice.
Fascism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

 

[DiamondDave]

The definition of socialism has as many variances and sub plots as does liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, Marxism, or Nazism.

Technically:

1. A political theory advocating state ownership of industry.[Wordnet]

2. An economic system based on state ownership of capital.[Wordnet]

3. A theory or system of social reform which contemplates a complete reconstruction of society, with a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor. In popular usage, the term is often employed to indicate any lawless, revolutionary social scheme.[Websters].
Dictionary - Definition of socialism

So if you go by the strict definition, Nazi Germany was not socialist in that it did allow for private ownership of property and means of production. It WAS socialist, however as the government controlled the means of production, dictated who would be allowed to own private property, and dictated what wages and benefits the people would receive.

Whenever the U.S. government presumes to redistribute wealth, that is a socialist concept. When the government assumes the power to take the property of one person and give it to another, that is also a socialist concept and starts moving into the realm of totalitarianism.

And yet, despite exercising some of the same concepts here and there, the U.S. government is not anything like the Third Reich. At least not yet.

Yet if you did not go along with the Nazi leadership, or you were the wrong religion or sexual orientation or a gypsy or whatever else.. they would take away your private property and put it in the hands of someone else who would most times be a puppet for the regime.. and as stated, see how the Betriebsführer would ensure these so called 'private owners' (in name only) were allowed to run their businesses

The US government is not like Naziism... it is not to that extreme.. you are correct.. but we do have an ever growing shift toward more and more socialism or socialist programs thanks to this government

Bump for the idiot carby

 

[tooAlive]

And far more than either of them that compare to modern conservatism.

We've already spent almost 40 pages ***** slapping that myth... so I will just say, read thru the thread again.. Unless socialist and left wing stances and actions are "conservatism", you are completely wrong (again)

So the Nazi emphasis on militarism, building up a massive army, navy, air force, etc., is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi banning of strikes by labor unions is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi persecution of homosexuals is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi ban on abortion is liberal how exactly?

See, people, this is standard practice of the intellectually bankrupt right. Start a thread, get fully debunked,

and then just plow forward as if nothing in rebuttal has even been posted.

Give me an example of one socialist or communist regime that didn't have one of the following qualities:

1. Strong military
2. Persecution of certain individuals
3. Government control over means of production
4. Government control over wages
5. Government control over supply of goods
6. Ability to seize private property & redistribute at will
7. No freedom for opposing political parties

 

[Foxfyre]

TA, I would add to your list:
8. Control of the media and other means of communication.

Most, not all, also pretty well disarmed most of the citizens.

 

[francoHFW]

We've already spent almost 40 pages ***** slapping that myth... so I will just say, read thru the thread again.. Unless socialist and left wing stances and actions are "conservatism", you are completely wrong (again)

So the Nazi emphasis on militarism, building up a massive army, navy, air force, etc., is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi banning of strikes by labor unions is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi persecution of homosexuals is liberal how exactly?

The Nazi ban on abortion is liberal how exactly?

See, people, this is standard practice of the intellectually bankrupt right. Start a thread, get fully debunked,

and then just plow forward as if nothing in rebuttal has even been posted.

Give me an example of one socialist or communist regime that didn't have one of the following qualities:

1. Strong military
2. Persecution of certain individuals
3. Government control over means of production
4. Government control over wages
5. Government control over supply of goods
6. Ability to seize private property & redistribute at will
7. No freedom for opposing political parties

Despite the ridiculously simplistc dictionary definitions that seem to be the limit of RW tinfoilers (and "Liberal Fascism" and Prof. Beck- PURE DRIVEL), the rest of the world defines socialist as ALWAYS DEMOCRATIC, communism NEVER.

All rich countries are socialist, including US, since we are getting an intelligent health system that covers everyone ("We're all socialists now"- Finland P.M.)- though we have a ridiculous pander to the rich Pub Party with 20-30% of the country brainwashed MORONS.

If you think Hitler was a socialist, you're one of these morons, believing the Nazi propaganda. And in 1935 Germany, obviously YOU would be a Nazi- takes a certain racist gullible idiot. LOL

 

[Cowman]

The Nazi regime was an oligarchy.

They had near complete control over the economy (socialism; government controls means of production) and mandated for all homosexuals, Jews and any other individuals deemed undesirable to be sent to concentration camps (dictatorship).

So yes, the Nazis were socialist, intolerant dictators.

Sorry my friend, but socialists were persecuted by the nazis just like the homosexuals, Jews, liberals, etc. they had their own patch. Same can't be said for conservatives.

Yes, the National Socialist German Workers' Party persecuted socialists.

Explains why Hitler committed suicide.

I think you mean communists. In which case yes, he hated them. As well as capitalists. He hated everyone actually.

You people are some of the dumbest around. And I've ******* monitored the Hannity forums for a while.

You really think National Socialism is socialism because it's called National Socialism?

THEY AREN'T THE SAME ******* THING.

But if you I dunno... knew how to read and research and formulate your own opinions and actually read works on the matter, you'd know that.

So because you're so dumb... I found a nice short and sweet video that will show you why they aren't the same.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOcB31Q0bvI]Learn the Difference: Socialism vs National Socialism - YouTube[/ame]

Nazi Germany persecution of socialism had NOTHING to do with eradicating pesky same ideology rivals. Socialism and National Socialism were diametrically opposed.

History is on my side, and a little bit of reading into the persecutions committed by Nazi Germany would reveal that to you.

But you're too ******* ignorant, and you want to KEEP being ignorant.

 

[Cowman]

The Nazi regime was an oligarchy.

They had near complete control over the economy (socialism; government controls means of production) and mandated for all homosexuals, Jews and any other individuals deemed undesirable to be sent to concentration camps (dictatorship).

So yes, the Nazis were socialist, intolerant dictators.

Sorry my friend, but socialists were persecuted by the nazis just like the homosexuals, Jews, liberals, etc. they had their own patch. Same can't be said for conservatives.

I bet you actually thought you were making a valid point.

The Bolsheviks imprisoned and killed rival socialists. So did the Maoists. The Vietnamese communists were allied with the Khmer Rouge before they betrayed and attacked them, and fought a fratricidal, genocidal war for two decades before assimilating the Khmer Rouge communists into their party.

The National Socialists were imprisoning rivals from another socialist faction, mainly Bolshevik Russian loyalists.

Learn something. THEN post.

National Socialism != Socialism

Here's an article for your dumb ass brain.

National Socialism | Cracked.com

There's a paragraph in here just for you.

Socialism: Despite the presence of the word "socialism" in the name, National Socialism is not socialist. National Socialists actually opposed democratic socialism, along with capitalism, communism, liberalism, and The JewsTM. It's kind of like how a square is a rectangle but a rectangle is not necessarily a square, or whatever. That doesn't stop anyone from making the association anyway, though, so feel free to fire off accusations with impunity. It's fun for the whole family!

 

[Cowman]

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 instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary".[14] Upon taking over the leadership, Hitler kept the term but defined socialism as meaning a commitment of an individual to a community.[14] Hitler did not want the ideology's socialism to be conflated with Marxian socialism, and claimed that true socialism does not repudiate private property unlike the claims of Marxism, and claimed that the "Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning" and said that "Communism is not socialism. Marxism is not socialism."[15] Nazism favoured private property, freedom of contract, and promoted the creation of national solidarity that would transcend class differences.[16][17] The Nazis outlawed strikes by employees and lockouts by employers, because these were regarded a threat to national unity.[18] Instead, the state controlled and approved wage and salary levels.[18]


All that comparing of National Socialists to Marxist Socialists sounds kind of silly, doesn't it?

Hell, you might even begin to find yourself falling in love with Hitler's love of Private Property and Freedom of Contract. Those are some of the biggest ******* ideals of the conservative party today.

But I'm not naive enough to even begin to call conservatives Nazi's. I'm not retarded like you guys. You just share some ideals... that's it.

 

[Cowman]

A little more reading for your addled brains.

Hitler Explains to GOP Why They Are Wrong about National Socialism

On 16 November 1928, in his first speech at the Berlin Sportpalast, Hitler told a crowd of ten thousand plus that, “We have to strip the terms ‘Nationalism’ and ‘Socialism’ of their previous meaning. Only that man is a nationalist who stands by his people, and only that man is a socialist who stands up for the rights of his people both internally and externally.”

But he became more specific yet in response to internal divisions within the NSDAP. It turns out Hitler himself pointed out the flaw in Republican thinking in a May 1930 meeting of the party leadership in Munich. As author Thomas Friedrich wrote, “Hitler…left his listeners in no doubt about what he did not mean by ‘National Socialism.’”

This is what Hitler said National Socialism was not:

It was not, “a universal morality of pity but a master race” – in other words, Hitler did not see his socialism as Republicans today see socialism, but rather as a form of German Exceptionalism (the Nazis called it a “National Community&#8221 which can be equated with the GOP’s version of American Exceptionalism.

National socialism, Hitler said, “did not lie in socialism as a universal panacea nor was it a nationalist variant of that idea.” Republicans, of course, are fond of accusing socialism (and liberalism) as advocating a universal panacea. Indeed, it is all we are hearing leading up to Election Day 2012.

In fact, on 26 January 1932, Hitler would even address the Industry Club, Friedrich writes, “and tried to assure them that they had nothing to fear from his party’s economic policies.” In his two-and-a-half-hour speech he gave a very Social Darwinist, Republican justification for capitalism and private wealth, that those who have wealth have it because they deserve it and because they deserve it they’re better than everybody else:

I am bound to say that private property can be morally and ethically justified only if I admit that men’s achievements are different. Only on that basis can I assert since men’s achievements are different, the results of those achievements are also different. But if the results of those achievements are different, then it is reasonable to leave to men the administration of those results to a corresponding degree. It would not be logical to entrust the administration of the result of an achievement which was bound up with a personality either to the next best but less capable person or to a community which, through the mere fact that it had not performed the achievement, has proved that it is not capable of administering the result of that achievement. Thus it must be admitted that in the economic sphere, from the start, in all branches men are not of equal value or of equal importance. And once this is admitted it is madness to say: in the economic sphere there are undoubtedly differences in value, but that is not true in the political sphere.
In another speech to German industrialists a year later, on 20 February 1933, Hitler again sounds a great deal like a Republican of 2012, espousing false dilemmas and delegitimizing all but his own party:

No two ideologies can continuously live alongside one another. in such struggles the strength of a people eats itself completely up internally and therefore cannot act externally. It does not rest. This condition of attrition lasts until one party emerges victorious or the state itself dissolves, whereby a people loses its place in history.

 

[L.K.Eder]

"The basic feature of our economic theory is that we have no theory at all." ~ A. Hitler

 

[tooAlive]

Nazi Germany persecution of socialism had NOTHING to do with eradicating pesky same ideology rivals. Socialism and National Socialism were diametrically opposed.

History is on my side, and a little bit of reading into the persecutions committed by Nazi Germany would reveal that to you.

But you're too ******* ignorant, and you want to KEEP being ignorant.

*Sigh*

We already went over this.

It didn't matter what Hitler said about his "National Socialism" and how it was different from real socialism.

Because everything about the Nazi Regime follows socialist/communist regimes to a tee.

Once again, give me an example of one socialist or communist regime that didn't have one of the following qualities:

1. Strong military
2. Persecution of certain individuals
3. Government control over means of production
4. Government control over wages
5. Government control over supply of goods
6. Ability to seize private property & redistribute at will
7. No freedom for opposing political parties

And as Foxfyre added,

8. Control of the media and other means of communication.
9. Most, not all, also pretty well disarmed most of the citizens.

 

[Doc91678]

Nope.

Actually, Nazis were fanatical right wing Christians.

You miss the whole holocaust thing?

Hmm.., who is attempting to destroy capitalism, nationalize all businesses, become dictators of America, enslave the people, and take guns away from Americans, while destroying the tenets of the U.S. Constitution? Is it the right wing Christians or the Progressive Socialist Marxists of the Democratic Party?

 

[AmyNation]

I'm always suprised by how long these hitler threads get....

I would urge anyone who honestly believes hitler was a socialist, or that facism is the extreme left, to please take a history class at your local community college.

 

[del]

I'm always suprised by how long these hitler threads get....

I would urge anyone who honestly believes hitler was a socialist, or that facism is the extreme left, to please take a history class at your local community college.

i would urge them to consider donating their reproductive organs to science

unused

 

[L.K.Eder]

i always think, hey, that's right.

this hitler guy and his economic policies, that was totally out of line.