We Europeans think it's just hilarious when some fringe political groups and/or people on the Right in America claim that Hitler was a socialist and
ruled Germany by "left-wing politics"
Talk about ignorance!
What does that actually say about these people and the political group who actually claims this utter rubbish?
Well! it tells us that they themselves, stand to the RIGHT of the nazi's and that Nazism stands to the left of themselves - well that is how extreme
these people say they really are, with their own words, to us, when they are claiming this garbage and are calling Hitler a socialist and that the
nazi-party was a leftwing party!
They are very funny people in that way those Americans!
Seriously!...to have a fair view of politics in Europe in the 1930's one need to apply the political spectrum that was valid for Europe at that time
- and on this political spectrum - Hitler & Mussolini and Franco
were FAR RIGHT! and belonged to political parties on the far-right here in
Even if they were extreme far-right groups here in Europe, both the authoritarian right-wing movements of Fascism and National-Socialism are
constructed with some nationalistic socio-economics treats in the core foundation of Fascism and they incorporated small elements of leftwing economic
policies to attract the vote of the workers. but that didn't make them less far-right on the political spectrum in the 1930's here in Europe.
They promoted themselves as “The New Third Way” in politics
They wanted to be seen as an political alternative for all German workers, military, farmers and small shop owners - instead of having all these
people voting for the Social Democrats and Socialists in the elections.
They snatched votes from the center-right and center-left parties - the highest proportion of Nazi voters were in Protestant farming communities who
earlier voted for the nationalists, DNVP.
The Nazi Party was therefore without doubt a Volkspartei, recruiting its members and its voters across a broad range of social groups, from both sexes
and from the older as well as the younger generation.
In fact! the Nazis recruited voters from a very very broad spectrum in the German society. More than any other party obviously.
Who voted for the Nazis?
Nazism (Nationalsozialismus, National Socialism), is the ideology and practice of the Nazi Party and of Nazi Germany. It is a politically
syncretic variety of fascism that incorporates policies, tactics and philosophies from right- and left-wing ideologies; in practice, Nazism is a
far right form of politics.
In post–World War I Weimar Germany, the Nazis were among right-wing political parties defining their ideology as National Socialism. In 1920, the
Nazi Party published their 25-point National Socialist Program, the key tenets being: anti-parliamentarism, pan-Germanism, racism, collectivism,
social Darwinism, eugenics, anti-Semitism, anti-communism, totalitarianism, and opposition to economic and political liberalism. Yet, by the 1930s,
despite such intellectual bases, Nazism was not a specific ideology, but a conflation of ideas, concepts, and philosophies meant to realise the mythic
ethnostate of Großdeutschland (Greater Germany).
To rescue Germany from the socio-economic chaos established by the world-wide Great Depression, Nazism promoted a politico-economic “Third
Series: Great interviews of the 20th century
This edited interview of Adolf Hitler by George Sylvester Viereck took place in 1923. It was republished in Liberty magazine in July 1932.
"When I take charge of Germany, I shall end tribute abroad and Bolshevism at home."
Adolf Hitler drained his cup as if it contained not tea, but the lifeblood of Bolshevism.
"Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to
"Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism.
Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.
Many average Americans even today, are using a simplified political spectrums & by politicians, manipulated models - and are looking especially &
soley at the ECONOMICAL AXIS/SCALE when they are doing their 'faulty' political analysis of foreign countries.
In Europe, even since before the 1930's - we are using AT LEAST! a biaxial political spectrum with two axis/scales when analysing the political
spectrum to get a fair view - AND TO US the SOCIAL & CULTURAL AXIS/SCALE was and IS still EQUALLY IMPORTANT as the economical axis/scale to get a fair
view of the politics.
You can't do a fair analysis or judge a society based soley on the economical analysis! that would be stupid and plain ignorant to any country and
society in the world.
It's not enough to get a fair view and analysis of a society.
And it's impossible to slap an American Chart directly on the political spectrum in Europe, because you would end up with a faulty analysis since
they measure different values of the society and from different perspectives.
And there are now a myriad of manipulated political spectrums to find on the Internet, some are plain out agenda-manipulated and are more easy to spot
- but there are also some more sane alternatives to find - but there is not one Universal model and spectrum yet which can be applied to ALL countries
in the world for neutral, objective and fair anylysis.
Each special political group today have constructed "THEIR" political spectrum to manipulate the analysis for their own political AGENDA.
These are some of the more "known" spectrums from wiki:
1. Nolan Chart - en.wikipedia.org...
2. The Political Compass - en.wikipedia.org...
3. UK inferred model: left-right, political pragmatism
While multiple axes on the political spectrum had been postulated for a while, statistical analysis of survey data using principal component
analysis to verify the theory and establish their existence, number and meaning was not done until recently. A 2003 study in the UK yielded two
significant eigenvectors (that is, groups of questions that tend to be answered consistently), one less well-constrained than the other. If one
examines the survey questions and tries to assign a meaning to the axes it turns out that one is like the familiar "left-right" axis that mixes
economic and social issues, and the other indicates a degree of political pragmatism. The outcome of that study is that the UK political spectrum is
most sensibly described with two axes.
4. Pournelle Chart: liberty-control, irrationalism-rationalism
(similar to the Political compass and the Nolan Chart)
5. Inglehart: tradition-secular, self expression-survivalist
In its January 4, 2003 issue, The Economist discussed a chart, proposed by Dr. Ronald Inglehart and supported by the World Values Survey
(associated with the University of Michigan), to plot cultural ideology onto two dimensions. On the y-axis it covered issues of tradition and
religion, like patriotism, abortion, euthanasia and the importance of obeying the law and authority figures. At the bottom of the chart is the
traditionalist position on issues like these (with loyalty to country and family and respect for life considered important), while at the top is the
secular position. The x-axis deals with self-expression, issues like everyday conduct and dress, acceptance of diversity (including foreigners) and
innovation, and attitudes towards people with specific controversial lifestyles such as vegetarianism, as well as willingness to partake in political
activism. At the right of the chart is the open self-expressionist position, while at the left is its opposite position, which Dr. Inglehart calls
survivalist. This chart not only has the power to map the values of individuals, but also to compare the values of people in different countries.
Placed on this chart, EU countries in continental Europe come out on the top right, Anglophone countries on the middle right, Latin American countries
on the bottom right, African, Middle Eastern and South Asian countries on the bottom left, and ex-Communist countries on the top left.
6. Mitchell: Eight Ways to Run the Country (AMERICA ONLY!)
In his book Eight Ways to Run the Country: A New and Revealing Look at Left and Right (ISBN 0275993582) Brian Patrick Mitchell identifies four
main political traditions in Anglo-American history:
republican constitutionalism, libertarian individualism, progressive democracy, plutocratic nationalism.
These four have given rise to eight distinct political perspectives:
A potential ninth perspective, in midst of the eight, is populism, which is vaguely defined and situation dependent, having no fixed character other
than opposition to the prevailing power.
These perspectives vary according to their regard for kratos (the use of force) and arche (the recognition of rank). Mitchell roots his distinction of
arche and kratos in the West's historical experience of church and state, crediting the collapse of the Christian consensus on church and state with
the appearance of the four main traditions.
[edit on 9-3-2010 by Chevalerous]