How we know Hitler was right wing.

[KnobbyWalsh]

Why can't people get their history straight on how a dictator becomes a dictator?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9k5v6bjwGA]The Three Stooges: Moe becomes hailstone dictator of moronica (he looks just like Hitler) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Saigon]

again, when you are talking about socialism, right wing and left wing simply talk about opposite ends of the same house.

That is simply gibberish.

Randomly assembling political terms into a row does not amount to an argument of any form.

ANY definition of these terms will help you to understand that left wing politics extend across a massive spectrum from Stalinism at one extreme, to Centrist Capitalism at the other.

From left to right along that line we move from Stalinism to Marxism & Socialism to Greens to Social Democrats to Centrists.

Look, it is completely fine that you don't understand these terms, but what is hugely annoying is your complete and constant refusal to actually read and research. In 10 minutes on google you could have spared the board 100 posts of nonsense.

 

[Saigon]

"The meanings of the words have shifted...."

You can call a pile of shit a peppermint stick all you want...That doesn't mean anyone would be more inclined to eat it.

Well, does the word 'liberal' mean the same thing in the US today that it meant in Europe 50 years ago, or even today?

All that we really need to know about what hitler intended is in this quote:

""The Jewish doctrine of Marxism rejects the aristocratic principle of Nature and replaces the eternal privilege of power and strength by the mass of numbers and their dead weight."

When he talks about the 'eternal privelege of power' - he means the Rich.

 

[Uncensored2008]

See: Hegelian dialectic.

You do need to spell it out to the left;

The State has the supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the State

While this could have been uttered by Obama, it was adopted by Marx, Engels, Mussolini, and Hitler - formally in all cases.

The dialectic is that right opposes left, while left seek authoritarian measures to contain right, as right seeks authoritarian measures to contain left.

In the end, the winner is always the authoritarian, both sides are merely pawns, played against each other to take liberty from the individual on behalf of the collective - or state.

 

[Oddball]

"The meanings of the words have shifted...."

You can call a pile of shit a peppermint stick all you want...That doesn't mean anyone would be more inclined to eat it.

Well, does the word 'liberal' mean the same thing in the US today that it meant in Europe 50 years ago, or even today?

All that we really need to know about what hitler intended is in this quote:

""The Jewish doctrine of Marxism rejects the aristocratic principle of Nature and replaces the eternal privilege of power and strength by the mass of numbers and their dead weight."

When he talks about the 'eternal privelege of power' - he means the Rich.

It has a different meaning in America because progressives/socialists hijacked the term in the 1930s...In most of the rest of the non-English speaking world, the word means "libertarian".

Both Orwell and Rand -hardly co-conspirators in the VRWC- spoke at great length about how authoritarians sought to control the populace by controlling the language....They had exactly the kind of chin stroking, navel gazing blabbering, in which you are engaging, in mind.

 

[Darkwind]

See: Hegelian dialectic.

You do need to spell it out to the left;

The State has the supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the State

While this could have been uttered by Obama, it was adopted by Marx, Engels, Mussolini, and Hitler - formally in all cases.

The dialectic is that right opposes left, while left seek authoritarian measures to contain right, as right seeks authoritarian measures to contain left.

In the end, the winner is always the authoritarian, both sides are merely pawns, played against each other to take liberty from the individual on behalf of the collective - or state.

All of that is anathema to conservatism or classical liberalism. Far to many people throw the terms right wing and left wing around without truly understanding what they are talking about. To them, it is a Pavlovian reaction to anyone who disagrees with their own philosophy.

Fascism, Marxism, Communism bear absolutely no resemblance to Conservatism in any form whatever. In fact, it bears no resemblance to liberalism either. It does, however, have a remarkable kinship to the progressive philosophy of extreme regulation of the private sector and absolute obedience to the State.

 

[Saigon]

]It has a different meaning in America because progressives/socialists hijacked the term in the 1930s...In most of the rest of the non-English speaking world, the word means "libertarian".

Well, liberal has never meant 'libertarian' here, but I do agree that the meaning of the word shifted around the 1930's in the US for some reason or another.

Liberal here is very often used quite apart from politics, to mean tolerant, open-minded and forward-thinking. I'm not saying that is a right or wrong usage, it is just how people talk.

 

[AmyNation]

Right wing? left wing?

Meaningless blather

FASCISM
A political doctrine opposed to democracy and demanding submission to political leadership and authority. A key principle of fascism is the belief that the whole society has a shared destiny and purpose which can only be achieved by iron discipline, obedience to leadership and an all-powerful state. Fascism first developed in Italy, under the leadership of Benito Mussolini (dictator of Italy from 1922 to 1943) and later influenced the development of German fascism in the Nazi movement led by Adolf Hitler (dictator of Germany from 1933-1945) . While fascism increases the power and role of the state in society and suppresses free trade unions and political opposition, it preserves private ownership and private property.

Definition of fascism
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:

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

 

[Saigon]

A couple of posters had mentioned Franco and whether or not he was Fascist, so I think it is worth looking at the difference between Nazism and Fascism:

Nazism, or National Socialism (German: Nationalsozialismus) in full, was the ideology of the Nazi Party in Germany and related movements outside Germany. It is a variety of fascism that incorporates biological racism and antisemitism. Nazism developed in Germany from the influence of the far-right racist Völkisch German nationalist movement and the anti-communist Freikorps paramilitary culture which fought against the communists in post-World War I Germany. The German Nazi Party and its affiliates in Germanic states supported pan-Germanicism. It was designed to draw workers away from communism and into völkisch nationalism. Major elements of Nazism have been described as far-right, such as allowing domination of society by people deemed racially superior, while purging society of people declared inferior, who were said to be a threat to national survival.

Nazism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So what we see here is Hitler fusing elements such as Aryan superiority and anti-Semitism into Fascism to move into a harder, more violent and oppressive right-wing force.

While Antonescu followed this and was arguably more extreme, both Franco and Mussolini practised a form of Fascism that was less racist, and remained closer to the mixed political origins of fascism. In Mussolini's Italy we could see elements of socialist/left-wing infuences in policy that Hitler later expunged.

 

[AmyNation]

Right wing? left wing?

Meaningless blather

FASCISM
A political doctrine opposed to democracy and demanding submission to political leadership and authority. A key principle of fascism is the belief that the whole society has a shared destiny and purpose which can only be achieved by iron discipline, obedience to leadership and an all-powerful state. Fascism first developed in Italy, under the leadership of Benito Mussolini (dictator of Italy from 1922 to 1943) and later influenced the development of German fascism in the Nazi movement led by Adolf Hitler (dictator of Germany from 1933-1945) . While fascism increases the power and role of the state in society and suppresses free trade unions and political opposition, it preserves private ownership and private property.

Btw you forgot to source that. No worries though, I found it.

Fascism is  political doctrine opposed to democracy and demanding submission to political leadership and authority. A key principle of fascism is the belief that the whole society has a shared destiny and purpose.

Oh and here the next paragraph from your source

Fascism is a form of extreme right-wing ideology that celebrates the nation or the race as an organic community transcending all other loyalties. It emphasizes a myth of national or racial rebirth after a period of decline or destruction.

 

[Oddball]

]It has a different meaning in America because progressives/socialists hijacked the term in the 1930s...In most of the rest of the non-English speaking world, the word means "libertarian".

Well, liberal has never meant 'libertarian' here, but I do agree that the meaning of the word shifted around the 1930's in the US for some reason or another.

Liberal here is very often used quite apart from politics, to mean tolerant, open-minded and forward-thinking. I'm not saying that is a right or wrong usage, it is just how people talk.

Couldn't care less how or where the term has been hijacked, just that it has.

The "for some reason or another" is exactly what I said it is...Because progressives/socialists needed to obfuscate their agenda behind a term that didn't give them away...Now they've fucked up the meaning of the word so badly that they're now going back to embracing the term "progressive", which is still an authoritarian central controller mindset...Lest I forget to mention that progressives are also big into eugenics, just like the Nazis.

 

[Oddball]

Right wing? left wing?

Meaningless blather

FASCISM
A political doctrine opposed to democracy and demanding submission to political leadership and authority. A key principle of fascism is the belief that the whole society has a shared destiny and purpose which can only be achieved by iron discipline, obedience to leadership and an all-powerful state. Fascism first developed in Italy, under the leadership of Benito Mussolini (dictator of Italy from 1922 to 1943) and later influenced the development of German fascism in the Nazi movement led by Adolf Hitler (dictator of Germany from 1933-1945) . While fascism increases the power and role of the state in society and suppresses free trade unions and political opposition, it preserves private ownership and private property.

Definition of fascism
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:

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

Back to meanings created by the notoriously leftist academe...BFD.

 

[Wiseacre]

" Major elements of Nazism have been described as far-right, such as allowing domination of society by people deemed racially superior, while purging society of people declared inferior, who were said to be a threat to national survival. "

Didn't the communists in Russia and China do the same thing?

It is possible that the writers of history books portraying Fascism as far right did so because the Fascists in the 30s and 40s were virulently against socialism and communism and were therefore considered as extreme right?

Still waiting for somebody to explain how a person or group that espouses less gov't control and intervention can possibly become totalitarian if they move to the extreme right.

 

[Saigon]

" Major elements of Nazism have been described as far-right, such as allowing domination of society by people deemed racially superior, while purging society of people declared inferior, who were said to be a threat to national survival. "

Didn't the communists in Russia and China do the same thing?

It is possible that the writers of history books portraying Fascism as far right did so because the Fascists in the 30s and 40s were virulently against socialism and communism and were therefore considered as extreme right?

Still waiting for somebody to explain how a person or group that espouses less gov't control and intervention can possibly become totalitarian if they move to the extreme right.

Communism largely embraced multi-culturalism. Lenin was surrounded by a phalanx of Jews, Armenians and Tatars, all prepared to join any group that fought against the bitterly anti-Semitic Tsar.

Stalin was Georgian, of course, and even though he purged Jews and some other groups, he still had a number of Azeris and Armenians etc in his Politburo.

Fascism is considered right wing not because of its obvious opposition to Marxism - though that may have helped - but because it espoused capitalism and a class-based society.

Less government control probably can not ever become totalitarian, but the concept of small government is relatively recent and is a very American position - many recent right wing governments around the world (Sakorzy, Cameron, Muldoon) have not in any way touched on small government as a concept.

 

[Wiseacre]

" Major elements of Nazism have been described as far-right, such as allowing domination of society by people deemed racially superior, while purging society of people declared inferior, who were said to be a threat to national survival. "

Didn't the communists in Russia and China do the same thing?

It is possible that the writers of history books portraying Fascism as far right did so because the Fascists in the 30s and 40s were virulently against socialism and communism and were therefore considered as extreme right?

Still waiting for somebody to explain how a person or group that espouses less gov't control and intervention can possibly become totalitarian if they move to the extreme right.

Communism largely embraced multi-culturalism. Lenin was surrounded by a phalanx of Jews, Armenians and Tatars, all prepared to join any group that fought against the bitterly anti-Semitic Tsar.

Stalin was Georgian, of course, and even though he purged Jews and some other groups, he still had a number of Azeris and Armenians etc in his Politburo.


I dunno about mulitculturalism, Stalin and Mao killed an awful lot of people. Does it matter a whole lot why they did so?


Fascism is considered right wing not because of its obvious opposition to Marxism - though that may have helped - but because it espoused capitalism and a class-based society.


The brand of capitalism spoused by the Fascists was almost entirely gov't controlled, certainly not the form of capitalism that most RWers today want. The further right you go, the less intervention and regulation you want, which is the exact opposite of fascist capitalism. And a class-based society? Where's that show up on the right? Those on the right support the right of every individual to succeed, there's no inherent philosophy on the right to stratify people based on any type of class structure. If anything, I see more of that coming from the left these days. And back in the day, it was the progressive liberals who wanted eugenics programs to thin out the undesireables.


Less government control probably can not ever become totalitarian, but the concept of small government is relatively recent and is a very American position - many recent right wing governments around the world (Sakorzy, Cameron, Muldoon) have not in any way touched on small government as a concept.

True, but the notion that today's political right gravitates to a totalitarian fascist state at it's extreme makes no sense. I think the right has been for less gov't control and intervention since the days of Teddy Roosevelt, maybe before that. Lower taxes, less public spending, and less oversight and intrusion has been what they've always wanted. And that is absolutely not anywhere close to fascism.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

BigRegb -

I believe the quotes here are all from Hitler himself, but either way, there are DOZENS of quotes from Hitler attacking the left wing. He absolutely despised Marxism and everything related to it.

i'll check the quotes later.

Marxism is not left wing, it just look left wing if you refuse to accept that the political spectrum is not two dimensional.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh, ferchrissakes...The socialists identified themselves socialists, but that doesn't count because you say so?

Really?

No, it's because facts say so. Facts and history text books and the vast majority of historians on our planet say hitler was a fascist and that fascism is the extreme right.

The vast amount of history texts do not say any such thing, despite the fact that most public high school texts say that. Any good histoian that manages to overcome his own plitical bias will openly tell you that fascism is more centrist than either right or left wing. It combines extreme nationalism with supranationalism, social conservative values with anti conservative positions on economics. Anyone that ever tries to argue that it is right wing is going to end up tripped up in their own words when they are forced to redefine left wing positions as right wing.

 

[SSDD]

Just as words like 'liberal' have shifted in meaning over time, so the meaning of the word 'socialist' in Germany in 1924 is not what it is today.

Really? Here are some of the planks of the National Socialist German Workers' party of * Germany's platform. Are they so different from the stated goals of socialism today?

• We demand profit-sharing in large industries.
  
• We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.
  
• We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.
  
• In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.
  
• The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.
  
• We demand freedom for all religious faiths in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of the Germanic race.
  
• In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.

So tell me how the word socialist in 1930's Germany meant something different than it means today. We have established how the term liberal has a different meaning now, than it had then...in what ways does socialist mean something now that it didn't mean then. The planks of the nazi party sound very much like modern socialism to me...what's the difference?

 

[SSDD]

I am really trying to be patient with you on this, SSDD, really I am.

Not reallly. You are trying to get me to buy the same line you have bought but it simply doesn't fly.

The Nazis used the word 'socialist' in an entirely different way from what you and I use and understand the term.

No they didn't. Strong central government....collective society.....welfare state.....free goodies for all....limit capitalization...free healthcare....free education...and on and on. The planks of his party could fit very well into any liberal platform today. In fact, you will find many of them still in use today.

Socialism is inherently left wing - Nazism is inherently right wing.

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 and the protection of the individual's rights while the cornerstone of even the most right wing of socialism is the necessity of making the individual subservient to the state.

How they go about achieving that particular goal determines whether they fall on the left, right or center of the socialist scale.

Thus, 'Nazism' used the term 'socialist', but not the philosophy you are thinking of.

Of course they did. They had the same philosphy as stalin, lenin, pol pot, mao and the rest of the socialist tyrants...subjection of the individual to the state. The tyrants did it with an iron fist...modern socialists for the most part keep thier iron fist in a velvet glove. Rather than lining up malcontents and shooting them, modern socialism seeks to gain control over essential services and thus leave the malcontents out in the cold unless they relent.

Education and healthcare are the primary tools by which modern socialist make the individual subservient to the state.

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.

Again right and left wings of the same house. All nazis were socialists but not all socialists were nazis...all communists are socialists but not all socialists are communists...all marxists are socialists but not all socialists are marxists...all fascists were socialists but not all socialists were fascists. They are all tinctures of the same basic philosophy. The only real difference being how the goals are achieved.

I would be delighted to recommend three or four books which would explain why and how and when and give you as much info as might like.

I am sure that you would, but it is clear that they didn't teach you much so why would I wan't to read them? They have left you trying to argue that the National Socialist German Workers' party of Germany was not, in fact socialist and you are making some indefensible arguments at that. I have read extensively on the topic and am able to apply the principles to the various political philosophies to a government and determine what it's true philosphy is.

 

[bripat9643]

]It has a different meaning in America because progressives/socialists hijacked the term in the 1930s...In most of the rest of the non-English speaking world, the word means "libertarian".

Well, liberal has never meant 'libertarian' here, but I do agree that the meaning of the word shifted around the 1930's in the US for some reason or another.

In Europe, to this day, a liberal is someone who believes in laizzes faire capitalism.

Liberal here is very often used quite apart from politics, to mean tolerant, open-minded and forward-thinking. I'm not saying that is a right or wrong usage, it is just how people talk.

That's true, but irrelevant. However, I've seen many liberals in this forum use that fact to confuse the debate on the subject.