HOME | DD

ShadowofWOPR [2017-02-15 22:28:57 +0000 UTC]

Nationalist Socialist party.
Left/Right is your economic stance, not your governmental stance.
The further left, the more socialist/communist.
the further right, the more capitalist/hierarchical.

But why does it matter if economically the Nazi's were left-winged or not?  The issue was that they were completely authoritarian.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ryubaks [2017-02-13 08:24:33 +0000 UTC]

It is now.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

AdmiralMichalis [2017-02-08 14:52:03 +0000 UTC]

I've said this before, and I'll say it again:

It's fairly difficult to pin movements like Nazism down to one side or the other, for several reasons.  One was that it just borrowed so many radicalist concepts from either side of the political spectrum it was surprisingly closer to the center when you add them all up into one single ideology.  On top of that, Nazism as a system constantly followed the political views of one man; Adolf Hitler, whose views changed quite a few times.  Now overall, Nazism can be technically classified as center-right authoritarian.  Again, however, it's just very difficult to get a proper fix on for aforementioned reasons.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rodegas [2017-02-07 14:15:47 +0000 UTC]

Actualy you are wrong...

1. "The thing is that most of the persons who claim that Nazism is Left-wing are from the USA."

No, this statement was made by German Ludwig von Mises an Austrian-born economist who emigrated to the United States to escape Nazi persecution. He was an advocate of free market and laissez-faire policies, and was an outspoken critic of socialism.

He explained that: Supporters of Communism , or of socialism  in general, like to pretend that Nazism was not socialist but "right wing ".

"The German and Russian systems of socialism have in common the fact that the big government has full control of the means of production. It decides what shall be produced and how. It allots to each individual a share of consumer's goods for his consumption."

National Socialism is related to socialism in which the basic core is a control of people, property, and income by a centralized government. The core concepts of socialism were kept, transferred, and implemented in the 25 points of the Nazi Party Platform of 1925, which included:

The abolition of unearned income;
Nationalization of trusts;
Inclusion into profit-sharing;
Increase in old-age pensions;
Creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class;
Aguarian reform, which included the seizing of land without compensation;
State control of education;
Creation of a "folk" army to supplant or replace the regular army;
State control of the press 

and so on.

On other hand, Hitler, when asked whether he supported the "bourgeois right-wing", claimed that Nazism was not exclusively for any class, and indicated that it favoured neither the left nor the right, but preserved "pure" elements from both "camps", stating: "From the camp of bourgeois tradition, it takes national resolve, and from the materialism of the Marxist dogma, living, creative Socialism".

👍: 2 ⏩: 1

Guilliman-Heretic [2017-02-06 15:27:32 +0000 UTC]

I'm sick of Nazis and Hitler being thrown around as general terms of abuse, especially by left-wingers towards other left-wingers that happen to disagree with them. If fascism really took hold in society today, would it really be so obvious? Especially when it's the anti-fascists causing chaos and burning things to the ground right now.

👍: 1 ⏩: 1

Clawfiren [2017-02-06 12:37:13 +0000 UTC]

NaCl
Chloride Sodium

👍: 1 ⏩: 0

AnarchistSyndicate [2017-02-06 08:50:01 +0000 UTC]

Hitler wasn't a socialist gregor strasser was, who was later killed along with his entire crew on the order of Hitler.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Greatkingrat88 [2017-02-06 08:15:22 +0000 UTC]

Just the other day I argued with an idiot who claimed that socialism is a defining part of fascism. The ignorance...

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Mintaka-TK [2017-02-06 08:00:34 +0000 UTC]

Can't believe this has already attracted the loonies who can't read history books already.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Limnoria [2017-02-06 03:25:25 +0000 UTC]

*reads comments* 

Looks like my salt needs are taken care of for the next couple years.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MyonNyanMukyuu [2017-02-06 03:10:21 +0000 UTC]

*looks in the comments* Wow, such salt from the crazies!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Centurion030 [2017-02-06 01:25:54 +0000 UTC]

"And there are moments when I curse myself for not having understood it earlier; for having let myself be fooled by the two ‘soccer-teams’ for so long.  Dammit.”—Oriana Fallacci (1929-2006) “The Force of Reason”

Traditionally the political spectrum in the United States runs from Big Government on the left side of the spectrum to no government at all (anarchy) on the extreme right of the spectrum.  This is not rocket-science folks:  Big Government on the left; limited or no government on the right> – capiche?

Now you tell me, how do the Nazis, an offshoot of Big Government fascism, end up on the right side of the political spectrum (let alone the far right)?  Go ahead, I’ll wait.

I’ll save us any further delay—there is no legitimate reason for the Nazis to be labeled right wing, let alone “extreme” right wing.  The fact that most people blithely accept the “common wisdom” that Nazis were/are a right wing ideology is due to the Left’s hugely successful ploy to foist one of their own worst failures onto the shoulders of the political right.  This “Big Lie” is perhaps more responsible for muddying the waters of political discourse than any other single factor.  Big Government ideologies belong on the LEFT side of the political spectrum—period. 

That is not to say that similar ideologies get along like peas in a pod – they, of course, quite often do not.  It is not uncommon for them to detest each other with a visceral passion.  One need only look at the ongoing bloodshed between Shiite and Sunni Muslims to see the sort of internecine conflict I’m referring to.

When the fascists fell out of favor with the much more numerous and influential communists in the 1920s, what better way for the communists to defame their fellow leftists than to hang the noxious appellation of (gasp) “right wing” on them?

After Hitler attacked Stalin the communist defamation of fascists went into overdrive, and following WW II the Left had even more reason to distance themselves from the fascists, due to the atrocities committed by the Nazi version of Big Government.  The right wing has been stuck with the Nazis and fascism ever since – despite the fact that it makes no sense whatsoever.

This wrongheaded labeling has led to some perplexing head-scratchers that would have stumped Solomon on a good day.  Ezra Pound was a right wing extremist?  Really?  Mussolini and Hitler, who blatantly, obviously, and undeniably practiced a form of Big Government tyranny—the very anti-thesis of limited government conservatism—were right wing extremists?  Really? 

No, not really.  It’s all smoke ‘n’ mirrors, razzle-dazzle verbal gymnastics.  The way the Left successfully slipped their disreputable Nazi cousin into the right wing’s “family tree” is one for the books.  Credit or blame goes mainly to academia and the media, especially the media.  (It is worth mentioning in passing that a proper understanding of where fascists belong on the political spectrum throws such things as the CIA’s “Operation Paperclip” into a more revealing and edifying light).   

Speaking of the media, it was yet another article in the print media mentioning “extreme right wing Nazis” that got my dander up and resulted in this article.  It appears that German neo-Nazis are opposed to “Mutti” Merkel’s smugly pompous and insanely irresponsible immigration policies – as well they should be.  But their stance on immigration is beside the point.  Today’s neo-Nazis are no more to be conflated with the right wing than Hitler’s Brown Shirts.

Conservatives, i.e. the right wing, are generally aficionados of small but effective government, as opposed to a (left wing) bloated and unresponsive government.  To call Nazis – whose policies personified tyrannical big government—“right wing” is beyond ludicrous.

I am so sick and tired of the slanderous leftist shibboleth of “right wing Nazi” I could scream.  Wake up, people – please!  The Nazis were, are, and forever will be LEFT wing.  The left are recognized masters of a chameleon-like ability to switch from one innocuous sounding political label to another.  “We the people” need to nail them down on this one at least.

Whether you hate and despise the Nazis or consider them the best thing since sliced bread is irrelevant to my point here – which is, in case you missed it, that the Nazis were and are a Left wing phenomenon, as are all variants of fascism.  It is vitally important that “we the people” get straight about this.  Leave the Left to their delusions and verbal gymnastics; their tyrannies and bloodshed – “we the people” must deal in truth and, hopefully, a brighter future.

In order to make that brighter future a reality it is essential that we stop believing the lies so slyly and incessantly fed to us for so many years by a thoroughly corrupt media – a media that is demonstrably in the pocket of Big Government, Big Business, and Big Banking.  Our “news” outlets have become mainly partisan propaganda/entertainment venues pushing a liberal agenda of “sex and soma,” “bread and circuses” – or “cage fights and fantasy football” as Sen. Ted Cruz recently put it.

Getting back to Nazis:  I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are a politically informed reader who is aware that the label Nazi is a greatly abbreviated version of Hitler’s political party, Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, and furthermore that you know that the English translation of Hitler’s political party is “National-socialist German Workers’ Party.” 

If we take out the redundant “National” and “German” from the name we are left with “Socialist Workers’ Party.”  Hmmm.  (By the by, it is pretty close to the mark to say that fascism is/was a national variant of Marxism, while (Stalinist) communism is/was a global version – closely related cousins elbowing for room at the same table.  You can see the potential for conflict…and ad hominem attacks). 

Okay, so let’s say you know all that—question:  does “Socialist Workers’ Party” sound “extreme right wing” to you? 

Not to me either.  So…Hitler’s “Socialist Workers’ Party” practiced a left wing variant of Big Government tyranny called “Fascism,” which somehow or another wound up being labeled a limited-government right wing ideology.  How the heck does that work?

That works because leftist scribes made sure it worked – no mean feat, to give credit where it’s due.  The Left managed to not only distance themselves from the Nazis, but more importantly perhaps, they also managed to saddle the Right with the Left’s mess.  As I say, no mean feat.

Please do not take my word for any of this – do your own research and connect the dots yourself.  If you have an open mind and are astute enough to steer clear of the more obvious propaganda outlets (left and right), then it is likely that the truth shall set you free.

Once you are aware of the truth behind the “Big Lie” you will notice it popping up over, and over, and over again.  Its appearance should become a universal sign of untrustworthiness among “we the people.” 

When I hear or read a news venue of any sort using the slanderous, illogical lie “right wing Nazi” then the veracity of their entire output becomes immediately suspect.  As long as “we the people” keep unquestioningly swallowing the poisonous pap prepared for us by the elites, they will be more than happy to keep dishing it out.

canadafreepress.com/article/ri…

👍: 1 ⏩: 0

Centurion030 [2017-02-06 01:19:19 +0000 UTC]

A Little Secret About the Nazis

They were left-wing socialists. Yes, the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, otherwise known as the Nazi Party, was indeed socialist, and it had a lot in common with the modern left. Hitler preached class warfare, agitating the working class to resist ``exploitation'' by capitalists -- particularly Jewish capitalists, of course. Their program called for the nationalization of education, health care, transportation, and other major industries. They instituted and vigorously enforced a strict gun control regimen. They encouraged pornography, illegitimacy, and abortion, and they denounced Christians as right-wing fanatics. Yet a popular myth persists that the Nazis themselves were right-wing extremists. This insidious lie biases the entire political landscape, and the time has come to expose it.

Richard Poe, editor of Frontpage Magazine, sets the record straight:

Nazism was inspired by Italian Fascism, an invention of hardline Communist Benito Mussolini. During World War I, Mussolini recognized that conventional socialism wasn't working. He saw that nationalism exerted a stronger pull on the working class than proletarian brotherhood. He also saw that the ferocious opposition of large corporations made socialist revolution difficult. So in 1919, Mussolini came up with an alternative strategy. He called it Fascism. Mussolini described his new movement as a ``Third Way'' between capitalism and communism. As under communism, the state would exercise dictatorial control over the economy. But as under capitalism, the corporations would be left in private hands.

Hitler followed the same game plan. He openly acknowledged that the Nazi party was ``socialist'' and that its enemies were the ``bourgeoisie'' and the ``plutocrats'' (the rich). Like Lenin and Stalin, Hitler eliminated trade unions, and replaced them with his own state-run labor organizations. Like Lenin and Stalin, Hitler hunted down and exterminated rival leftist factions (such as the Communists). Like Lenin and Stalin, Hitler waged unrelenting war against small business.

Hitler regarded capitalism as an evil scheme of the Jews and said so in speech after speech. Karl Marx believed likewise. In his essay, ``On the Jewish Question,'' Marx theorized that eliminating Judaism would strike a crippling blow to capitalist exploitation. Hitler put Marx's theory to work in the death camps.

The Nazis are widely known as nationalists, but that label is often used to obscure the fact that they were also socialists. Some question whether Hitler himself actually believed in socialism, but that is no more relevant than whether Stalin was a true believer. The fact is that neither could have come to power without at least posing as a socialist. And the constant emphasis on the fact that the Nazis were nationalists, with barely an acknowledgment that they were socialists, is as absurd as labeling the Soviets ``internationalists'' and ignoring the fact that they were socialists (they called themselves the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics). Yet many who regard ``national'' socialism as the scourge of humanity consider ``international'' socialism a benign or even superior form of government.

According to a popular misconception, the Nazis must have been on the political right because they persecuted communists and fought a war with the communists in Russia. This specious logic has gone largely unchallenged because it serves as useful propaganda for the left, which needs ``right-wing'' atrocities to divert attention from the horrific communist atrocities of the past century. Hence, communist atrocities have received much less publicity than Nazi war crimes, even though they were greater in magnitude by any objective measure.

R. J. Rummel of the University of Hawaii documents in his book Death by Government that the two most murderous regimes of the past century were both communist: communists in the Soviet Union murdered 62 million of their own citizens, and Chinese communists killed 35 million Chinese citizens. The Nazi socialists come in third, having murdered 21 million Jews, Slavs, Serbs, Czechs, Poles, Ukrainians and others. Additional purges occurred in smaller communist hellholes such as Cambodia, Vietnam, North Korea, Ethiopia, and Cuba, of course. Communism does more than imprison and impoverish nations: it kills wholesale. And so did ``national socialism'' during the Nazi reign of terror.

But the history of the past century has been grossly distorted by the predominantly left-wing media and academic elite. The Nazis have been universally condemned -- as they obviously should be -- but they have also been repositioned clear across the political spectrum and propped up as false representatives of the far right -- even though Hitler railed frantically against capitalism in his infamous demagogic speeches. At the same time, heinous crimes of larger magnitude by communist regimes have been ignored or downplayed, and the general public is largely unaware of them. Hence, communism is still widely regarded as a fundamentally good idea that has just not yet been properly ``implemented.'' Santayana said, ``Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.'' God help us if we forget the horrors of communism and get the historical lessons of Nazism backwards.

The Nazis also had something else in common with the modern left: an obsessive preoccupation with race. Hitler and his Nazis considered races other than their own inferior, of course. Modern ``liberals,'' who vociferously oppose the elimination of racial quotas, seem to agree. They apparently believe that non-white minorities (excluding Asians, of course) are inferior and unable to compete in the free market without favoritism mandated by the government. Whereas Hitler was hostile to those racial minorities, however, modern white ``liberals'' condescend benevolently. Hitler's blatant and virulent form of racism was eradicated relatively quickly and very forcefully, but the more subtle and insidious racism of the modern left has yet to be universally recognized and condemned.

The media often focuses its microscope on modern neo-nazi lunatics, but the actual scope of the menace is relatively miniscule, with perhaps a few thousand neo-nazis at most in the United States (mostly ``twenty-something'' know-nothings). The number of communists and communist sympathizers in the United States dwarfs that figure, of course -- even among tenured professors! And while the threat of neo-nazi terrorism is indeed serious, the chance of neo-nazis gaining any kind of legitimate political power anywhere is virtually zero. That is why the ACLU can safely use them to advertise its supposed commitment to free speech. Neo-nazi rallies incite violence, but they do not persuade bystanders to join their cause! If they did, the ACLU would have nothing to do with them.
www.freerepublic.com/focus/new…

👍: 1 ⏩: 0

Centurion030 [2017-02-06 01:16:14 +0000 UTC]

"Here we go again. Yes, Nazis squelched independent labor unions. Yes, yes, Nazis repressed socialists and Communists. Fine, fine. You know who else treated independent labor unions roughly? You know who else repressed socialists and Communists? The Soviet Union. The Soviets surely killed and arrested more domestic socialists, starting with the Mensheviks, than the Nazis did. And how did labor unions fare in the Soviet Union? How were strikes treated? Let’s ask the survivors of the Novocherkassk massacre or the Kengir uprising. Were they not for all practical purposes folded up into paper-tiger fronts as extensions of the State?   Maybe workers were treated better in “left-wing” Russia than in “right-wing” Germany, though I doubt it. But even if that were the case, it’s ridiculous to hold up the Soviets as examples of how the “Left” treated workers well, unlike the “Right.” From 1940 to 1955, 15 million workers were sent to the Gulag simply for committing the crime of not working hard enough. Workers paradise! And then there’s the third item on his checklist: Communists have a demonstrated record of erasing traditional society root and branch — exterminating aristocrats, industrialists, landowners, priests, kulaks, etc. Fascists in actual power, despite their modernist reputation, seem almost traditional in comparison. In Mussolini’s Italy, the king, the titled nobility, the church, the industrialists, the landholders, and the mafia slept soundly at night. The chief innovation of fascism was not really in political economy, but in political community. And we’re back to using the Soviets as the only benchmark for what counts as left-wing. For the record, I agree with much of what he says about Mussolini and Mussolini’s fascism. But Hitler most certainly was an anti-traditionalist (as was Mussolini personally), who loathed the Church and had zero desire to restore the monarchy. The Horst Wessel Lied identifies both the Red Shirts and the reactionaries as the enemy. The more interesting point, I think, is that most Communist regimes eventually stop erasing traditional society root and branch and move toward a policy of invoking and co-opting useful national traditions and institutions. It turns out that the masses grow weary of doctrinaire socialism and need a little nationalism to get out of bed (and, quite often, nationalist regimes slowly realize they can’t stay in power without becoming ever stricter socialists). We’ve seen this in Stalin’s Soviet Union (he did declare WWII “the Great Patriotic War for Mother Russia” after all), Mao’s China (Communism with “Chinese characteristics”), and virtually every other Communist regime (it’s somewhat ridiculous to view Castro’s Cuba as anything other than national-socialist). The best example of course is today’s North Korea, which started conventionally Communist but eventually became insanely nationalist (and racist). The economic policies don’t change that much, but the arguments for them do.  I have many other complaints. He says that progressive support for Mussolini in Western countries was insignificant and mostly among “kooks” — I think that’s demonstrably wrong. He says that “fascists fetishised law & order, and made a cult out of the armed forces.” Ah yes, unlike the Soviets (and the Red Chinese!) who were notoriously loosey-goosey on law-and-order issues and treated the military contemptuously. Etc., etc. 

Read more at: www.nationalreview.com/corner/…

"Pseudoerasmus illuminates a great source of confusion among critics of Liberal Fascism — and among some fans as well. When I say that fascism or Nazism was of the Left, I’m using as my yardstick the Anglo-American, classical-liberal, tradition. Many people want to track the Left by a kind of lineage interpretation. So they go back and look at intellectuals (usually quite selectively) and say something like: These people called themselves the Left, the people they hated were “the Right,” they hated the Nazis therefore the Nazis were right-wing. Others look at voting blocs or interest groups and offer a very similar kind of analysis. The Nazis got X voters, X voters were on the right, therefore the Nazis were right-wing. This might seem like approaching things through “historical terms,” but it largely ignores the substance of the policies in question, uses a very limited benchmark for what is “left-wing,” and obscures the fact that the center of gravity intellectually in the 1920s and 1930s was much farther to the left than is widely understood. So, yes, sure fascism was seen as being to the “right” of Communism, because it was. Even Trotsky considered fascism to be right-wing socialism or middle-class socialism. It seems to me that the key word there is socialism, which is properly understood as a phenomenon of the Left. (The Soviets also considered not only the New Deal fascist and right-wing, but the American Socialist Party, too. Why take their judgment so seriously?)

👍: 1 ⏩: 1

MadKingFroggy [2017-02-06 01:09:06 +0000 UTC]

Anyone who honestly thinks this truly is an idiot. :/ Even someone with a really basic grasp of politics could tell you that Nazism is right wing.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2