It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What? Nazism is left-wing?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Wally Hope
 


Your post response was very insightful.

I believe I read recently that Mussolini was a liberal-fascist. In American terms, that would be similar to the Progressive movement here.

Glenn Beck has been covering this topic a lot lately...he fears we are becoming very progressive and liberal-fascist or corporate-fascist.




posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by debz325
What does Fascism,Nazism and Communism all have in commom?socialism.So yes it is all left leaning,Dems want big goverment.


Fascism is the combination of corporation and goverment. That is right. Communism is very left.

Nazi-ism is not a socialist structure. It is a combination of both. I suggest you do a little more research on the subject.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by MOFreemason
 


Here go to this site it has a FAQ and will clear a lot of things up.

Political Compass FAQ Q. 20

It explains where we are heading and why it will never work really. It's essentially stating that what the liberals here in America want won't work because Freedom, and Economic Authoritarianism doesn't go together.

But, yea it's crazy because it's a lot more complicated than just "right or left".

Edit - Sometimes I wonder if I speak as bad as I write.

[edit on 11-6-2009 by Hastobemoretolife]



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Dbl post sry

[edit on 11-6-2009 by Wally Hope]



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by MOFreemason
 


I'm not sure that there is such a thing as liberal-fascist?

Liberalism in it's true meaning is apposed to state and government.

Fascism is conservative, it supports government, the state, and capitalism.
(cons in America claim they want small government but in reality conservatism requires government, socialism doesn't)

Fascism IS 'corporate-fascism' because fascism is the joining of government and corporations in order to control the many and create wealth for the few.

Socialism is when the workers, as apposed to private entities, own the means of production. In other words we ALL own and benefit from production, as apposed to the wealth going into the hands of the few and the rest of us get what they decide to pay for our labor. Everything is controlled from the bottom not the top, no monopolizing of resources and hording of wealth.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wally Hope In other words we ALL own and benefit from production, as apposed to the wealth going into the hands of the few and the rest of us get what they decide to pay for our labor.


So a pension, paycheck and stock dividends arent benefiting from production?

I dont know how marketable you are but I've always decided how much my labor was worth. An employer offers a price, I negotiate it up, if I cant I move on to the next employer.

If ownership of a widget plant were spread among the employees who pays to fix it if it breaks? Do they all chip in? What if Steve over here spent all his money on booze and playstation games and cant afford his share? Does it not get fixed? Does some other employee pay his share? Sooner or later Steve will have to make up his debt somehow. If Steve likes to work hungover and only produces half the widgets of Paul in the cube next door should Steve really earn as much as Paul? Somebody will have to take time to retrain, discipline or fire Steve and possibly hire Steves replacement. How is that guy compensated?

If I were in a business with only 4 or 5 people I knew well I'd be all for the 5 of us acting like co-owners and sharing the profits. If I'm a plant with 300 employees I'm not willing to bet my paycheck on the fact that there arent any dumbasses at the plant dragging our profitability down.

What you speak of is a fantasy barely functional in a controlled environment destined to fail in a real world environment.

I think in this world of yours I'd like to be an engineer. That way I get a piece of all the profitability of every structure and road around. Maybe I'll even do some side blackmailing and extortion if folks dont want their roads or buildings to fail.

This all seems eerily similar to the dismal way the folks in Eastern Europe were living not so long ago.

How soon people forget. Oh, that's right, that wasn't trueSocialism. Once the human factor is involved there can be no trueSocialism as these daydreamers paint it.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by nunya13
 


Nope, you found it.

That is what I was trying to get at. It is a lot more complex than left or right it is up or down also as your graph has posted.

Now if you just take the up and down of that and turn it 90 degrees to the right, then you can see where I was going in my first post.

For simplicity sake, complete freedom is on the right and authoritarianism is on the left.

As you can see Hitler wasn't hard right he was hard left as was Stalin, Bush, etc.

But the truth of the matter is that its also up and down, once again as the chart shows.


Okay, now I see how you were coming to your conclusion of right = freedom and left = authoritarian. Of course, as you have obviously realized, it's just not as simple as that.

You can also see from the graph that Hitler was, in fact, a mix of communism and fascism, albeit a little more fascist. Maybe that's what made him so scary, eh?

I think the reason why I'm bothered by these new assertions that Nazism is on the left is the fact that people don't seem to want to accept that there are people with wacky ideas on both sides of the spectrum. You can even take politics out of the equation and say that about all types of other groups.

You have religious wackos that turn people off from religion with their hate and intolerance and religious people who can be tolerant and respectful that not everyone believes what they do and show what the good things about religion are.

We have people in the military who are sadistic bast***s and people who are there because they believe deep in their heart that their cause is just and they are protecting all of us Americans.

Just like we have these greedy power hungry a-wads in our government that overshadow the true civil servants who earn their paycheck each and everyday fighting for the causes of the people their represent, not their own desires.

Denying ignorance is accepting that if you align yourself with the right side of the political spectrum you shouldn't expend all your energy trying to convince the rest of America that this person who is obviously on the extreme right isn't even close your affiliation. You should hold that person up and say, "This is what I don't want my party to be. I denounce this man! And we won't tolerate your kind". Don't just say, "well he's really on the left". That's ignorance



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
I dont know how marketable you are but I've always decided how much my labor was worth. An employer offers a price, I negotiate it up, if I cant I move on to the next employer.


Marketable? I take offense to terms such as that. I'm not a commodity for you to place value on. You are lucky, most of the working world doesn't have that kind of privilege. Maybe you think everyone has the same potential and opportunities you do? Sry but most of the worlds working class have no choice.

Anyway you're off topic, all I did was try to explain terms and put them in context, sry if it upsets your twisted illusion of reality. If you learned a little about what you are so against you'd realize how your questioning really makes no sense, and how you have no idea what I'm talking about at all.

Drunk Steve wouldn't need anyone to fire him, he'd just get 'sorted', real fast. It's all about taking responsibility, as apposed to paying someone else to do it for you...



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
For simplicity sake, complete freedom is on the right and authoritarianism is on the left.
As you can see Hitler wasn't hard right he was hard left as was Stalin, Bush, etc.
But the truth of the matter is that its also up and down, once again as the chart shows.


The left was traditionally working class, anarchism, socialism. communism. The right traditionally of the elite, fascism, militarism, capitalism.

You seem to have it backwards. It seems that most all of North America has it backwards. But complete left or right would be totalitarianism. Complete freedom would be centrist and left/right wouldn't exists, government wouldn't exist.

Hitler was the poster child for the right, why do you think Nazi skinheads are right wing and not socialist? Why would Nazi Germany fight the left in Spain? Italy, Spain and Germany were all fascist nations and the left (socialists, anarchists and communists) were fighting them in Spain. The Spanish Revolution/Civil War 1936). Read some history instead of internet junk.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 06:00 PM
link   
The National Socialist Party (Nazi) was left wing. It is a historical fact. Hitlers particular brand of socialism was a mixed bag of Wealth redistribution and corporatism. This is why you hear Names like "IG Farben" always associated with the Nazi war effort. The Nazi's used the Jews in the camps as slaves for R&D projects from various German corporations during the war. This is also why German military technology was far superior to allied tech. Collusion of State and Corporation, the surest sign of fascism there is.

But You must also remember, there is no "extreme" of right and left. The Extreme of the left is fascism, the extreme of the Right is fascism, it makes no difference how or where it originates. In a sense, left wing and right wing essentially mean nothing, other than an arbitrary description of a person's moral code.

Example would be: Goerge W. Bush was considered to be the new definition of "right wing", yet his every decision countermanded what the "old right" believed in. IE : Pre-emptive war, war in general is not a right wing Ideal, neither is expanding the size and scope of government, which he most certainly did. Encroachment of civil liberties is not a right wing Ideal either. In fact nothing Bush did was right wing or conservative. If you were to research where Neo-conservatives originated from you would find that they actually came from the "far left", but what does that mean? "Far left" of what?

Then you take Barack Obama, Neo-Liberal, not doing things the classic liberals used to espouse. In fact he is polar opposite. Liberals, like conservatives, do not agree with destroying civil liberties, which he has done. Liberals, like conservatives, do not support the collusion of The State and Corporations, and yet we have a supposed "liberal" handing out money to bankers and buying out companies. Liberals, like conservatives do not support forcing our ideals on other nations at the point of a gun, and yet, the apparent "liberal" in the white house is doing just that.

If conservatives and liberals agree on so many things what are the inherent differences? Social Spending mostly. The right believes people are strong enough to care for themselves, The left believes people are strong enough to care for others. The right would say caring for yourself is caring for others. The left would say the Strong have a responsibility to care for the weak. That right there, is the core of the argument between a classic liberal, and a classic conservative.

But that argument is why things like Socialism, Communism, Fascism, and dictatorships Origionate from either side of the spectrum.

If we are talking recent history(the past 200 years or so) It typically goes like this......

The classic liberal will make his case for a social program, or the classic conservative will make his case for a trade regulation, pick one, doesn't matter. The government adopts it, after 200 years goes by the social program isn't just about food anymore, and the trade regulation isn't about tariffs. Now it's about Schools, Medicine, Money, Roads, Railways, houses, cars, jobs, globalism, "free trade agreements", licensing, registration, and control of the flow of goods and capital. Once the state controls all of that, you will wind up with Communism eventually. But, Communism cannot stand on it's own, it will eventually collapse under it's own weight. Which is why Governments need Corporations to stay Large and overbearing. Private companies drive societies forward, all governments know this, which is why governments collude with them. This is why George Bush and Barack Obama have so many striking similarities. Because they are both Fascists.

All of that happened with the best intentions in mind. The Classic Liberal was a good person, as was the conservative, Their arguments were well thought out, but like any idea, it got perverted by extreme members of their respective political parties.

The real trick of it all, is understanding the inherent evil that lies in the houses of power. Politicians will always cater to the lowest common denominator, IE the very poor. Always, I don't care how good a speaker he or she is, they do not care about you or your country. All it does is make them seem compassionate, it earns them votes, and it increases the size of the government because of the social programs implemented to take care of that sector of the population.

Ask any politician, left or right, doesn't matter, tell them that we are 54 trillion dollars in debt(which we are), then tell them the only way to balance that out is to cut all social spending, to include Medicare and Social security(which is true). How many so called "Liberals" would cut it? How many conservatives? The answer is none, no one, Republican or Democrat would do that, even though that is the only way to stave off national bankruptcy. Why? Because they would never get re-elected.

Right, Left, Republican, Democrat..... doesn't matter. They all eventually become fascist. The only thing that they give a rats ass about it serving as many terms as the possibly can. Which is why there is no such thing as change in DC.

[edit on 11-6-2009 by aravoth]



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   
I see disinfo and deflection abounds on the grounds of ATS.

Put it this way... How many neo nazi KKK members do you have marching in liberal gay rights parades?

Neo Nazis and the Klan are fundamentalist conservatives. Sorry guys but Fascist ideologies are as right wing as it's going to get. Hannity, Limbaugh Coulter, Bush and co. It's all leaning to the right. And the right includes the KKK and neo nazis like yalls good buddy Von Brunn.

I certainly doubt that Von Brunn voted for Obama.

I think we are seeing the final death throws of the GOP.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by aravoth
The National Socialist Party (Nazi) was left wing. It is a historical fact.


Well, you're wrong.

From Wiki:



Nazism is often considered by scholars to be a form of fascism. While it incorporated elements from both left and right-wing politics, the Nazis formed most of their alliances on the right.[9] The Nazis were one of several historical groups that used the term National Socialism to describe themselves, and in the 1920s they became the largest such group. The Nazi Party presented its program in the 25 point National Socialist Program in 1920. Among the key elements of Nazism were anti-parliamentarism, Pan-Germanism, racism, collectivism,[10][11] eugenics, antisemitism, anti-communism, totalitarianism and opposition to economic liberalism and political liberalism.

Emphasis mine.


Nazism was, on the correct political compass, slightly right and mostly top. In other words, it was mostly authoritarian and slightly conservative.

It's also a well-propagated myth that the Nazis were socialist, because of the name. The fact is national socialism has nothing to do with true socialism, which is closer to communism and was despised by Hitler. As another poster said earlier, National Fascist party would have been a much more appropriate name.

Also, if you look at the political compass you will see that Hitler leaned to the right, although only slightly.


Left vs. Right has nothing to do with fascism. I repeat, Left vs. Right has nothing to do with fascism. Authoritarianism = fascism, and we have to remember that most of the leaders we elect in this country, whether they are left-leaning or right-leaning, are authoritarian in nature. The reason leftism and rightism are stressed so much in modern politics, is to distract the populace from that fact.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by nunya13
 


I agree with you, people like to just throw out labels to help further their agenda.

It doesn't really matter where you fall politically or economically in your views if you are an evil person then you are an evil person.

It just so happens to be evil people like control and so they fall into the authoritarian category along with either fascism or communism economically because it is those systems have the level of control that they desire.

Plus I feel that the right feels they are being unfairly labeled with the abortionist that got killed, and now this wacko at the holocaust museum.

So I also think there is a little bit of damage control going on. Me personally I'm a constitutionally moderate. Somethings I'm conservative on and something I'm liberal on, I'm not right or left.

Although people would label me right leaning.

Edit to add -

I think people just need to realize that Fascism, Communism, etc. all lead to the same place. Which is we all end up as slaves to the government and have to watch what we say because we could be killed at anytime for any reason.

I think that is the real point people need to get.

[edit on 11-6-2009 by Hastobemoretolife]



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by aravoth
 


What you say makes sense but only because your focusing on the up/down portion of the spectrum. You're thinking one dimensionally. If you take both the left/right, up/down into consideration what you're saying will still makes sense but Obama and Bush are still on opposite ends of the spectrum but in the same top area. The liberals and conservatives will still occupy the same portion (bottom), as you say, but they will still be on opposite ends of the spectrum. Example:

[Obama/Bush] opposite [Liberal/Conservative] (as you say)

BUT

[Obama opposite Bush] opposite [liberal opposite conservative]

Got that?


It seems that many people in this thread are only considering one part of the spectrum they chose to focus on. So when you chose to focus on the Up/down portion, then yes, Fascism and communism will be on the left and freedom will be on the right (because you've flipped the orientation). But when it's oriented correctly, suddenly you see that Fascism and Communism are on opposite ends and freedom can still be on the left or the right.

I really thing when people stop thinking of one arrow heading in opposite directions, and therefore, labeling ideologies only in those confines, it makes discussions like these become less hostile and offensive.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by nunya13
 


I agree with you, people like to just throw out labels to help further their agenda.

It doesn't really matter where you fall politically or economically in your views if you are an evil person then you are an evil person.

It just so happens to be evil people like control and so they fall into the authoritarian category along with either fascism or communism economically because it is those systems have the level of control that they desire.

Plus I feel that the right feels they are being unfairly labeled with the abortionist that got killed, and now this wacko at the holocaust museum.

So I also think there is a little bit of damage control going on. Me personally I'm a constitutionally moderate. Somethings I'm conservative on and something I'm liberal on, I'm not right or left.

Although people would label me right leaning.

Edit to add -

I think people just need to realize that Fascism, Communism, etc. all lead to the same place. Which is we all end up as slaves to the government and have to watch what we say because we could be killed at anytime for any reason.

I think that is the real point people need to get.

[edit on 11-6-2009 by Hastobemoretolife]


I fully agree with everything you just said. It makes perfect sense. I do think that what is going is, in fact, damage control.

Maybe we should just be smarter about it and not just take these wackos and throw them to the other side (here you go lefties. We righties don't want em anymore). We should just start throwing them into a completely different area all together, the "nutjob/wacko/extremist a-hole" side of the spectrum. You know, kind of a little off the graph entirely.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by drwizardphd

Authoritarianism = fascism, and we have to remember that most of the leaders we elect in this country, whether they are left-leaning or right-leaning, are authoritarian in nature. The reason leftism and rightism are stressed so much in modern politics, is to distract the populace from that fact.


Perfect. When we realize this and stop labeling them as just right and just left, we'll realize that neither of us want AUTHORITARIAN.

Once we realize they are all "out to get us" (aka authoritarian) and not on "your side" or "my side", then maybe we can finally unite and stand up against those pieces of doggy doo-doo.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


I would challenge the WIKI entry on the grounds that the Nazi government heavily intervened in the economy and the private affairs of it's citizenry. One could make a strong case either way I suppose.

I do recall that the Nazi party was formally termed "The German Workers Party", and among it's 25 planks was listed a persons "right to employment", the Nationalization of Industry, expansion of welfare programs, it voiced for wealth redistribution, and a middle class created and protected by the central government.

This argument has been had many times before us by scholars of merit. And to this day you can have two textbooks say two different things about it.

To me the argument is not as important as the similarities between Nazi Germany, and the Current state of the United States. Frog in the pot of boiling water I suppose.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by nunya13
 


Yes that is true, alas, my post was long winded enough.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by nunya13
 





We should just start throwing them into a completely different area all together, the "nutjob/wacko/extremist a-hole" side of the spectrum. You know, kind of a little off the graph entirely.


I say since they want to feel special we can give them their very own special graph. Compete with X, Y, Z coordinates too. On the right we can say Stupid on the left we can say completely deranged on the top bottom we can measure their mental stability. Or something.

But yes, this country is becoming too polarized and it is not a good thing. The people that say so and so are just filled with hate, don't realize how hypocritical they are being.



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by nunya13
reply to post by Fromabove
 


Wow, this is something new to me. Fascism = Left-wing.

So socialism, fascism, communism are all left wing? There no extremism on the right?



Fascism works like this. It is based on an ideal that separates one class of people from another with the intention that one class has the right and privilage of being worthy while the other is worthless. It takes on a cult like appearance to futher the ideal. This is liberal left wing theology. On the right, government is based on a strong central authority that reflects the will and desire of the people with a hands off to involvement at the local level. On the right, the possibility of dictatorship is always a danger but in so far as the people support it. Ronald Reagan and G.W. Bush are two such dictators as the people allowed them to be.

Nazism fits the liberal left and Barack Obama because they are at war with the Christian, the Jew, and the conservative right. They separate classes of people and even gender, those of color from those of white skin. They persecute the wealthy and cause burdens to be born on their shoulders out of class envy and even hatred. They divide and conquer for gain and selfish greed. They build their political empires, not on any values of their own but by laying blame and slander on their adversaries. We see this with Sarah Palin whom they fear with dread because she will be the voice of a new conservative movement across the nation. So they insult and slander her and her family using class, religion, and status, and gender to attempt to bring her down. So lefties are true Nasi bootstrappers one and all.

On a wave of conservative pricaples and a renewed national American pride, Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich will ride to power not see since Reagan. The people will give them renewed power and so will rise a state of dictatorial governance in the nation. All of Obama's attempts to cast down the Constitution will be overturned. This is because a new breath of fresh air will be felt in the new House and Senate that will give their consent to the President who will do the will of the people.

Sorry to rant a little, but it could not be helped.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join