Fascism is Not Right Wing, it is socialist.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: DJW001

The party was left of center according to all historians. Left of center is socialism without becoming communist. They were also far-right in that they were almost totally authoritarian. Two different lines.

The NAZI PARTY was left of center? According to which historians?

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: DJW001

The party was left of center according to all historians. Left of center is socialism without becoming communist. They were also far-right in that they were almost totally authoritarian. Two different lines.

Speaking as someone who has studied Nazi Germany in University I have to massively disagree with the above. No. Not one reputable historian that I have read has ever described the Nazis as being left of centre. The entire idea is risible.

originally posted by: raymundoko
They were socialist. Jesus how ignorant is everyone here? This is a thread full of [snip] being confused about politics.

I'm aware of the compass but the OP means socialism in a way that doesn't agree with it either.

Definitions of what "right wing" and "left wing" actually mean is in order here.

Also, "socialism" is a generalized description of ECONOMIC systems not POLITICAL ones; what kind of "socialism" is being compared here?

Also, the meaning of the German word "sozialistische" as used by the Nazis does not, in any sense, equate to any real meaning of the English word "socialism."

Also, the Nazis were anti-Marxist and anti-Communist.

For that matter, the entire thread itself has become risible. Many of the posters will no sooner separate willful disregard for proper terminology on this thread than they will successfully separate from their own shadows.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

If you went to university and studied it you would know:

TWO.DIFFERENT.LINES!

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Definitions of what "right wing" and "left wing" actually mean is in order here.

What do you consider the social-democratic party? Is it left-wing or right-wing?...

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Also, "socialism" is a generalized description of ECONOMIC systems not POLITICAL ones; what kind of "socialism" is being compared here?

Talk about not knowing what a definition means... According to wikipedia itself...

Socialism is a political ideology and movement that seeks to improve society and social conditions.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

Perhaps it is you, among some others, who do not understand these definitions...

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Also, the meaning of the German word "sozialistische" as used by the Nazis does not, in any sense, equate to any real meaning of the English word "socialism."

How so?... How is nationalization, the common good etc not socialist?...

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Also, the Nazis were anti-Marxist and anti-Communist.

There are many branches of socialism... Are they all in favor of other branches of socialism?... Are you unaware, as you are about the meaning of socialism, that there have been many examples of different branches of socialists turning against other branches of socialists?...

Stalin was "anti-Marxist" and he espoused the idea of socialism in one country... He was a left-wing dictator. Yet you have at least one member in here claiming Stalin was "right-wing as well"...

Anyway, In September 1932 Ernst Thälmann, leader of the Communist Party of Germany accused Trostky of being the worst kind of fascist, and a counter-revolutionary for Trotsky's comments on how to "save the German working class from National Socialism."

...
Struggle against Hitler

Until the victory of Hitler in March 1933, Trotsky had conducted a vigorous campaign for a united front policy against fascism in Germany. However he was denounced by the Stalinist leaders who continued to lead the German working class into a bloody debacle. Ernst Thaelmann the leader of the German CP, stated in September 1932:

"In his pamphlet on the question, How will National Socialism be Defeated? Trotsky always gives but one reply: 'The German CP must make a bloc with the social democracy...' In framing this bloc, Trotsky sees the only way for completely saving the German working class against fascism. Either the CP will make a bloc with the social democracy or the German working class will be lost for 10-20 years. This is the theory of a completely ruined fascist and counter-revolutionary. This theory is the worst theory, the most dangerous theory and the most criminal that Trotsky has constructed in the last years of his counter-revolutionary propaganda". (Communist International, no 17/18, 1932, p 1329).
...

www.socialist.net...


In fact, it was in the "third international" that the word "social-fascism" was quoted by the communists.

If anything Hitler was a social-fascist with a left-wing extremist ideology.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
If anything Hitler was a social-fascist with a left-wing extremist ideology.

He really wasn't.

Perhaps you should get to know him better, from this 1932 account:

Then he turned to the study of socialistic theory as set forth in the writings of Karl Marx and his followers. He came away with the conviction that 'the Jewish teaching of Marxism turns away from the aristocratic principle of nature and puts in place of the eternal preeminence of power and strength the measure of number with its dead weight. Thus it denies in men the worth of the individual, impugns the significance of nationality and race, and thereby takes away from humanity the basic idea of its existence and its culture.' The application of such a principle, he thought, could bring only chaos.

Maybe something else is in order...

A challenge for you, then - define LEFT WING and define RIGHT WING for us so that we're all on the same page. Be at least generally complete, though it can be as brief as you desire.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

LOL ... well, if Wikipedia says it, you must be right. (Socialism, in any dictionary, is "any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods." Sounds a lot like economics doesn't it?

You are confusing "nationalization" with "nationalism" once again. Well, they both include "national" so they must be the same thing.

... and so forth. We've discussed this.

a reply to: Greven

That still only shows he was "anti-Marxist"...


Again, what does nationalization means to you?...

What does communalization of all large stores mean?

What does common good before individual good mean to you?

Hitler banned all unions, but made a new one (The German Labour Front) that him, and his party could control.

I am not saying all leftists are dictators, because not all leftists have the same ideals. But you tell me how Hitler wasn't a socialist dictator. Again, being anti-Marxist didn't make him any less socialist. Just like Stalin being anti-Marxist didn't make him any less socialist.

I could tell you by name, and how many "socialists" were either executed by the castro brothers, or imprisoned for noticing and questioning that more and more communists were being infiltrated by the castro brothers into "the socialist revolution"... That did not make the castro brothers any less socialists/communists.

a reply to: Greven

Trotsky himself was branded as a fascist by the leader of the "German Communist party" for his comments on how to save the German workers from national socialism. You do know who Trotsky was right?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Don't confuse hitler with germany. Hitler was right of center and also far right authoritarian. He used slightly left policies to control the populace. He basically borrowed from wherever he needed to make his war machine.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Greven

But you tell me how Hitler wasn't a socialist dictator.

sigh

By nationalizing business and taking pains to exclude certain groups from exercising corporate or political power of any sort, Hitler did the exact opposite of exercising socialism in political practice. By eventually gaining control over almost every aspect of German life (see Gleichschaltung) at the expense of the working public, the Nazis in fact did the exact opposite of exercising socialism in political practice.

Now, someone already went to some tremendous pains to try and point out to you (and similarly-minded individuals contributing to this thread) that, although the Nazis adopted what they referred to as a socialistic platform, their ideals were grossly inconsistent with socialism's basest tenets.

This definition of socialism, of course, being consistent with how roughly 99.99% of dedicated scholars have used the term for, oh, the past century-and-a-half.

originally posted by: Greven
He really wasn't.

He really was.

Perhaps.

‘I am a Socialist,’ Hitler told Otto Strasser in 1930
February 16, 2013

Daniel Hannan has a useful column in London’s Telegraph on the socialist origins of fascism. I merely describe it as “useful” because it will be read and understood only by people who understand these things already but worth repeating just to remind ourselves who are enemies are and what they stand for.

‘I am a Socialist,’ Hitler told Otto Strasser in 1930, ‘and a very different kind of Socialist from your rich friend, Count Reventlow’.

No one at the time would have regarded it as a controversial statement. The Nazis could hardly have been more open in their socialism, describing themselves with the same terminology as our own SWP: National Socialist German Workers’ Party.

Almost everyone in those days accepted that fascism had emerged from the revolutionary Left. Its militants marched on May Day under red flags. Its leaders stood for collectivism, state control of industry, high tariffs, workers’ councils. Around Europe, fascists were convinced that, as Hitler told an enthusiastic Mussolini in 1934, ‘capitalism has run its course’

If you, too, are of the view that capitalism has run its course you should be aware of the company you keep.

lawofmarkets.com...

Hitler was a different kind of socialist, a new kind, just like Mussolini. Both Hitler and Mussolini rose from the ranks of socialism, and became dictators with their extreme left-wing ideologies.

originally posted by: Greven
Maybe something else is in order...

A challenge for you, then - define LEFT WING and define RIGHT WING for us so that we're all on the same page. Be at least generally complete, though it can be as brief as you desire.

Collectivism, the common good before individual good, nationalization of resources and markets, state control over all sectors of society. Are those not socialist elements?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Different dictionaries use different definitions, but none say it is just an economic ideology.

Full Definition of socialism

1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private propertyb : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

www.merriam-webster.com...

BTW, I was not using the word "nationalization" because of national socialism... But because of the 25 points of the NAZI manifesto...

The 25 Points of Hitler's Nazi Party
...

7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich.
...
10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.

Therefore we demand:

11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.

14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

16. 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.

17. We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.

19. We demand that Roman law, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by German common law.

20. 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.

21. 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.
...
24. 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.

The party as such represents the point of view of a positive Christianity without binding itself to any one particular confession. It fights against the Jewish materialist spirit within and without, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our folk can only come about from within on the principle:

COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD

25. 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.

The formation of professional committees and of committees representing the several estates of the realm, to ensure that the laws promulgated by the central authority shall be carried out by the federal states.

The leaders of the party undertake to promote the execution of the foregoing points at all costs, if necessary at the sacrifice of their own lives.

www.historyplace.com...

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Greven

Trotsky himself was branded as a fascist by the leader of the "German Communist party" for his comments on how to save the German workers from national socialism. You do know who Trotsky was right?

Someone doesn't know his/her Trotsky, that's for sure...

Our Man in Turkey, in the aptly-titled "What is National Socialism," points out that, apart from incorporating the term socialism into the Nazi movement to roust popular post-war sentiments regarding the need for the German people to band together, there existed (and continues to exist) no articulable relationship between the base tenets of socialism (again, common ownership of means of production) and the Nazis.

But don't take my word for it:

The banner of National Socialism was raised by upstarts from the lower and middle commanding ranks of the old army. Decorated with medals for distinguished service...officers could not believe that their heroism and sufferings for the Fatherland had not only come to naught, but also gave them no special claims to gratitude...[a]t the same time, they did not want to reconcile themselves to being sent by the bankers, industrialists, and ministers back to the modest posts of bookkeepers, engineers, postal clerks, and schoolteachers. Hence their “socialism”

...the middle classes have lost the last shadow of independence. They live on the periphery of large-scale industry and the banking system, and they live off the crumbs from the table of the monopolies and cartels, and off the spiritual alms of their theorists and professional politicians

For your (in)convenience:

www.marxists.org...

a reply to: TramperoJuan

So, as a response you give the claims from Marxists that Hitler wasn't a different type of socialist?... Of course they would try to distance socialism from Hitler... But "collectivism, common good before individual good" etc, they all were found in Germany under National Socialism. These are all marks of socialism... Sorry to burst your bubble.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
That still only shows he was "anti-Marxist"...

Again with the '25 points' that Hitler mocked. I told you pages ago about this, but you refuse to engage with the very idea. You ignore it and continue to act as if Hitler believed in those statements.

You also need to read that passage a little better; you focused on the Marxism part, but there's more to it than that. Here is a relevant portion:

teaching of Marxism turns away from the aristocratic principle of nature and puts in place of the eternal preeminence of power and strength the measure of number with its dead weight

He's saying here that aristocracies - supreme leaders - are natural; that strength and power are supreme; that the masses are dead weight. Socialism my butt.

Perhaps you should read that account more than just the brief snippet I included; you would find things like this:

This new party Nazi, or Fascist, it is commonly called is 'National' because Hitler's fundamental ideal is nationalism. It is 'Socialist' (in Hitler's own meaning of the word) because he saw that the people would have to be made comfortable before they would listen to his gospel. It is 'German' because his national aspirations are for Germans only. It is a 'Laborers' party because Hitler intended to appeal particularly to the laboring masses.

People can say what they want. It doesn't make it true.

Quoting the retelling by a politician (Daniel Hannan) of Hitler telling the brother (Strasser) of a man he later had murdered that he was a 'different kind of Socialist' kind of... doesn't help your point any at all?

You did not define RIGHT WING or LEFT WING. Please try again.

Oh, and please stop reposting the same 25 points over and over again unless you can provide examples after 1926 where he talked about them. We've seen them enough.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: TramperoJuan

But "collectivism, common good before individual good" etc, they all were found in Germany under National Socialism.

Collectivism and common good are virtually synonymous concepts (depending upon the community in question). In spite of your persistence to the contrary, repeating the same point does not mean you've made a new one.

These are all marks of socialism

Collectivism is an ingredient in many ideologies and/or movements, and may be found in systems both past and present. Your example is neither useful, nor exceptional.

I'd talk about Hitler's version of Socialism, but Gryphon66 covered that in this thread months ago about this same rehashed topic.

It was more lively... 85 pages in a mere 10 days! Why did you even create this thread again?

Although, there is this:

’Socialists’ I define from the word ‘social’ meaning in the main ‘social equity’. A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency.

Our adopted term ‘Socialist’ has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true socialism is not. Marxism places no value on the individual, or individual effort, of efficiency; true Socialism values the individual and encourages him in individual efficiency, at the same time holding that his interests as an individual must be in consonance with those of the community. All great inventions, discoveries, achievements were first the product of an individual brain. It is charged against me that I am against property, that I am an atheist. Both charges are false.

This was written by Adolf Hitler in the Sunday Express Dec. 28, 1938.

Gasp! Property rights, religion, and individuality!