Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Page / 4
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 6:59:44 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
This.

And at the historical basis, National Socialism is right wing.


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By hauslp:
Bad
This.

And at the historical basis, National Socialism is right wing.



Actually, no. At it's base, National Socialism was left wing. Had Hitler been right-wing, he would have brought back the Kaiser. And the Kirchenkampf would not have happened either, since the historical church (kirch) and the historical kaiser would have been seen as the bedrocks of traditional German society. Instead, Hitler sought to replace the concept of Kaiser (a limited monarch) with the concept of Fuehrer (a single absolute dictator). As an aside, the first time Bonhoeffer ran afoul of the Nazis, it was for giving a radio address critical of the concept of Fuehrer.

Which leads us to the kirchenkampf, in which Bonhoeffer and others tried to retain the historic conservative Lutheran church of Germany against the attempts by the Nazis to turn the state church into a sort of nationalistic state religion, purged of all Jewish influences (i.e. the Old Testament, the Jewishness of Jesus, etc).

National Socialism was called National because it was distinct from international socialism, the dominate from of socialism at the time. International socialism was basically Marxism. It was revolutionary and global, believing in an eventual global revolution that would overthrow the capitalist order forever, which is one of the main tenets of Marx's philosophy. Under this framework, nationalism was a characteristic of the evil capitalist system.

After WWI, some socialist thinkers began to abandon the internationalist assumption while retaining both the revolutionary view and the socialist view. Among them was the primary thought leader Mussolini, who coined the term fascism to describe this kind of system. These nationalist socialists didn't see socialism as incompatible with nationalism. Rather, they saw nationalism as a means of bringing about revolutionary socialism. As such, the fight between nationalist and internationalist socialists was not a fight between left and right, but a fight between left and left.

After WWII, communists actually embraced the nationalist concept as a means of creating an axis of communist countries to rival the west. Thus, the Russians and the Chinese funded and backed socialist revolutions in a variety of countries that also included heavy doses of nationalism. This was particularly potent in the Third World, where the natives could claim their socialist revolution was freeing the people from foreign (i.e. Western) imperialism that was running and ruining their countries.

Having stolen a card from their allegedly sworn enemies, the communist movement had to engage in a major re-definition of terms in order to avoid the obvious charges of hypocrisy. As a result, they worked to redefine the term fascism in common use as 1) anything we don't like, and 2) anything that is right of center.

There are interesting sources on this, but Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism goes into a lot of detail about the historical development of national socialism as a leftist ideology.

Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:00:51 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Where does this come from?

Who came up with the idea that left=more government and right=less government?

For example, Anarchism has always been the most associated with radical-leftest movements, but somehow with this scale it becomes right-wing?

Political ideology isn't linear, and shouldn't be viewed as such.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By IL2windhawk:
How could it be right-wing? I never understood this claim.
Hitler wasn't very big on individual rights and small government!
Where does this come from?

Who came up with the idea that left=more government and right=less government?

For example, Anarchism has always been the most associated with radical-leftest movements, but somehow with this scale it becomes right-wing?

Political ideology isn't linear, and shouldn't be viewed as such.


If morans didn't have logical fallacies to use, they might actually have to use logic.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:01:58 PM EDT
I don't buy the notion that it fits either of the current US extreme ideologies. I deplore the ideology of those on the left, but I don't see them as genocidal jew-haters bent on burning their opponents in ovens and destroying neighboring countries militarily. It's quite a stretch to compare the evils (and they truly are evil) of progressives, with the atrocities of the Nazis... I'm sure they have no trouble equating a Tea Party rally with naziism though. I won't play that game, though they might.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:03:02 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:


If morans didn't have logical fallacies to use, they might actually have to use logic.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By IL2windhawk:
How could it be right-wing? I never understood this claim.
Hitler wasn't very big on individual rights and small government!
Where does this come from?

Who came up with the idea that left=more government and right=less government?

For example, Anarchism has always been the most associated with radical-leftest movements, but somehow with this scale it becomes right-wing?

Political ideology isn't linear, and shouldn't be viewed as such.


If morans didn't have logical fallacies to use, they might actually have to use logic.


Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:05:42 PM EDT
"National Socialism is an ideology of the..."

Obama White House?
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:08:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2014 7:09:18 PM EDT by TylerF]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HostisHumaniGeneris:


There are interesting sources on this, but Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism goes into a lot of detail about the historical development of national socialism as a leftist ideology.

View Quote
Goldberg's book is noted to have serious flaws in it's reasoning.

Here:
http://www.hnn.us/article/122231
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:08:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2014 7:12:23 PM EDT by Mastadon]
Right and left are relative to your time in history.

The Founding Fathers rebelled against the established government, so they could very accurately be called radicals or liberals or even leftists in that they wanted to overturn the status-quo.

The Royalists could very accurately be called conservatives, or right-leaning in that they wanted to preserve the status-quo.

The idea of "right versus left" came from the National Assembly during the French Revolution (so after my example of the Founders, actually). Those who sat on the right favored the king's authority, while those on the left were the revolutionaries who opposed the crown.

A more meaningful way to describe someone's standing in our nation today is in terms of the degree of state control he favors. Fascists favor total state control over all facets of life and society--everything for the state, nothing outside the state. Or, you could stick with left and right where the left wants the fundamental transformation of our nation and the right wants to preserve the constitutional republic and stick to the Constitution. Either way works.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:08:54 PM EDT
It depends if we are talking about economic systems or the European, world vs. country/ethnicity point of view. As an economic system it is a form of socialism, maybe a couple of steps from communism but way to the left of capitalism. By the European spectrum, as a form of nationalism, it is placed on the far right. Both communism and national socialism are highly authoritarian.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:11:10 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HostisHumaniGeneris:

Actually, no. At it's base, National Socialism was left wing. Had Hitler been right-wing, he would have brought back the Kaiser. And the Kirchenkampf would not have happened either, since the historical church (kirch) and the historical kaiser would have been seen as the bedrocks of traditional German society. Instead, Hitler sought to replace the concept of Kaiser (a limited monarch) with the concept of Fuehrer (a single absolute dictator). As an aside, the first time Bonhoeffer ran afoul of the Nazis, it was for giving a radio address critical of the concept of Fuehrer.

Which leads us to the kirchenkampf, in which Bonhoeffer and others tried to retain the historic conservative Lutheran church of Germany against the attempts by the Nazis to turn the state church into a sort of nationalistic state religion, purged of all Jewish influences (i.e. the Old Testament, the Jewishness of Jesus, etc).

National Socialism was called National because it was distinct from international socialism, the dominate from of socialism at the time. International socialism was basically Marxism. It was revolutionary and global, believing in an eventual global revolution that would overthrow the capitalist order forever, which is one of the main tenets of Marx's philosophy. Under this framework, nationalism was a characteristic of the evil capitalist system.

After WWI, some socialist thinkers began to abandon the internationalist assumption while retaining both the revolutionary view and the socialist view. Among them was the primary thought leader Mussolini, who coined the term fascism to describe this kind of system. These nationalist socialists didn't see socialism as incompatible with nationalism. Rather, they saw nationalism as a means of bringing about revolutionary socialism. As such, the fight between nationalist and internationalist socialists was not a fight between left and right, but a fight between left and left.

After WWII, communists actually embraced the nationalist concept as a means of creating an axis of communist countries to rival the west. Thus, the Russians and the Chinese funded and backed socialist revolutions in a variety of countries that also included heavy doses of nationalism. This was particularly potent in the Third World, where the natives could claim their socialist revolution was freeing the people from foreign (i.e. Western) imperialism that was running and ruining their countries.

Having stolen a card from their allegedly sworn enemies, the communist movement had to engage in a major re-definition of terms in order to avoid the obvious charges of hypocrisy. As a result, they worked to redefine the term fascism in common use as 1) anything we don't like, and 2) anything that is right of center.

There are interesting sources on this, but Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism goes into a lot of detail about the historical development of national socialism as a leftist ideology.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HostisHumaniGeneris:
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By hauslp:
Bad
This.

And at the historical basis, National Socialism is right wing.



Actually, no. At it's base, National Socialism was left wing. Had Hitler been right-wing, he would have brought back the Kaiser. And the Kirchenkampf would not have happened either, since the historical church (kirch) and the historical kaiser would have been seen as the bedrocks of traditional German society. Instead, Hitler sought to replace the concept of Kaiser (a limited monarch) with the concept of Fuehrer (a single absolute dictator). As an aside, the first time Bonhoeffer ran afoul of the Nazis, it was for giving a radio address critical of the concept of Fuehrer.

Which leads us to the kirchenkampf, in which Bonhoeffer and others tried to retain the historic conservative Lutheran church of Germany against the attempts by the Nazis to turn the state church into a sort of nationalistic state religion, purged of all Jewish influences (i.e. the Old Testament, the Jewishness of Jesus, etc).

National Socialism was called National because it was distinct from international socialism, the dominate from of socialism at the time. International socialism was basically Marxism. It was revolutionary and global, believing in an eventual global revolution that would overthrow the capitalist order forever, which is one of the main tenets of Marx's philosophy. Under this framework, nationalism was a characteristic of the evil capitalist system.

After WWI, some socialist thinkers began to abandon the internationalist assumption while retaining both the revolutionary view and the socialist view. Among them was the primary thought leader Mussolini, who coined the term fascism to describe this kind of system. These nationalist socialists didn't see socialism as incompatible with nationalism. Rather, they saw nationalism as a means of bringing about revolutionary socialism. As such, the fight between nationalist and internationalist socialists was not a fight between left and right, but a fight between left and left.

After WWII, communists actually embraced the nationalist concept as a means of creating an axis of communist countries to rival the west. Thus, the Russians and the Chinese funded and backed socialist revolutions in a variety of countries that also included heavy doses of nationalism. This was particularly potent in the Third World, where the natives could claim their socialist revolution was freeing the people from foreign (i.e. Western) imperialism that was running and ruining their countries.

Having stolen a card from their allegedly sworn enemies, the communist movement had to engage in a major re-definition of terms in order to avoid the obvious charges of hypocrisy. As a result, they worked to redefine the term fascism in common use as 1) anything we don't like, and 2) anything that is right of center.

There are interesting sources on this, but Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism goes into a lot of detail about the historical development of national socialism as a leftist ideology.




Nailed it
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:11:23 PM EDT
What makes the Nazis left wing?

They wanted to go back to the good old days, which is a right-wing thing. They were nationalists, which is also right. They viewed their ethnicity as superior, which was right-wing way back then (today it's herp-derp way in the loony right-field right-wing).

Was it their treatment of animals? IIRC, you could get sent to a concentration camp for animal abuse. Was it their nearly non-existent economic policy, which often flip-flopped? I don't think so. Was it their nearly totalitarian power? That isn't exclusive to the left.

So, anyone care to fill me in?
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:11:57 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.
View Quote


Bingo!


If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" than Anarchy is far right while socialism is far left.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:13:08 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
This.

And at the historical basis, National Socialism is right wing.


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By hauslp:
Bad
This.

And at the historical basis, National Socialism is right wing.



That's really just a side note. It ends in totalitarianism.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:13:45 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.
View Quote


This.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:13:50 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By onceNeagle:

-clusterfuck of a url removed-
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By onceNeagle:
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By IL2windhawk:
How could it be right-wing? I never understood this claim.
Hitler wasn't very big on individual rights and small government!
Where does this come from?

Who came up with the idea that left=more government and right=less government?

For example, Anarchism has always been the most associated with radical-leftest movements, but somehow with this scale it becomes right-wing?

Political ideology isn't linear, and shouldn't be viewed as such.


If morans didn't have logical fallacies to use, they might actually have to use logic.

-clusterfuck of a url removed-


Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:14:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2014 7:16:45 PM EDT by Mastadon]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sturmgeist:
What makes the Nazis left wing?

They wanted to go back to the good old days, which is a right-wing thing. They were nationalists, which is also right. They viewed their ethnicity as superior, which was right-wing way back then (today it's herp-derp way in the loony right-field right-wing).

Was it their treatment of animals? IIRC, you could get sent to a concentration camp for animal abuse. Was it their nearly non-existent economic policy, which often flip-flopped? I don't think so. Was it their nearly totalitarian power? That isn't exclusive to the left.

So, anyone care to fill me in?
View Quote

You are extremely wrong. One of the key talking points of the Fascists in general was their "New Way" or their "Third Way" in which they would transform society to speed the development of more advanced, "New Men". Everything they talked about wanting to do involved changing the status quo. Yes, their propaganda made use of former glories, but their goals were always, you know, Forward. Hope and change. Yes we can. Etc.

Fascists were just another brand of socialists. The difference between them and the "pure" socialists of the Internationale was the idea of nationalism--i.e. national unity across all classes instead of class warfare.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:14:56 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ruger556boy:


Bingo!


If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" than Anarchy is far right while socialism is far left.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ruger556boy:
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.


Bingo!


If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" than Anarchy is far right while socialism is far left.



If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" then we ignore the reality of every political structure and movement in the history of the world, and instead deliberately choose intellectual masturbation.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:16:18 PM EDT
Poll fail.

No option for both.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:17:11 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:

I'm mocking stupidity.
View Quote

That's a task that could take up all of your waking hours.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:18:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2014 7:19:40 PM EDT by Bohr_Adam]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mastadon:

You are extremely wrong. One of the key talking points of the Fascists was their "New Way" or their "Third Way" in which they would transform society to speed the development of more advanced, "New Men". Everything they talked about wanting to do involved changing the status quo. Yes, their propaganda made use of former glories, but their goals were always, you know, Forward. Hope and change. Yes we can. Etc.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mastadon:
Originally Posted By Sturmgeist:
What makes the Nazis left wing?

They wanted to go back to the good old days, which is a right-wing thing. They were nationalists, which is also right. They viewed their ethnicity as superior, which was right-wing way back then (today it's herp-derp way in the loony right-field right-wing).

Was it their treatment of animals? IIRC, you could get sent to a concentration camp for animal abuse. Was it their nearly non-existent economic policy, which often flip-flopped? I don't think so. Was it their nearly totalitarian power? That isn't exclusive to the left.

So, anyone care to fill me in?

You are extremely wrong. One of the key talking points of the Fascists was their "New Way" or their "Third Way" in which they would transform society to speed the development of more advanced, "New Men". Everything they talked about wanting to do involved changing the status quo. Yes, their propaganda made use of former glories, but their goals were always, you know, Forward. Hope and change. Yes we can. Etc.



The political genius of Nazism was its ability to appeal to a broad spectrum of German society. The political bias of many here causes them to fixate only on one aspect and ignore what even a month in GD will tell you about the general passions and political biases of right wing people - and it isn't a fixation on individual rights.

Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:19:00 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ruger556boy:


Bingo!


If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" than Anarchy is far right while socialism is far left.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ruger556boy:
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.


Bingo!


If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" than Anarchy is far right while socialism is far left.




Where's your God now?
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:19:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2014 7:20:08 PM EDT by TylerF]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By magisterforlife:



Nailed it
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By magisterforlife:
Originally Posted By HostisHumaniGeneris:





After WWI, some socialist thinkers began to abandon the internationalist assumption while retaining both the revolutionary view and the socialist view. Among them was the primary thought leader Mussolini, who coined the term fascism to describe this kind of system. These nationalist socialists didn't see socialism as incompatible with nationalism. Rather, they saw nationalism as a means of bringing about revolutionary socialism. As such, the fight between nationalist and internationalist socialists was not a fight between left and right, but a fight between left and left.

.

Having stolen a card from their allegedly sworn enemies, the communist movement had to engage in a major re-definition of terms in order to avoid the obvious charges of hypocrisy. As a result, they worked to redefine the term fascism in common use as 1) anything we don't like, and 2) anything that is right of center.

There are interesting sources on this, but Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism goes into a lot of detail about the historical development of national socialism as a leftist ideology.




Nailed it
No, no it didn't.

For one exaple, like right there in red. Hitler wasn't fighting to spread socialism, nor was Mussolini. They were both waging war in order to bring more power to their own peoples, assert their people superiority and to stop what they saw as the impending threat of Bolshevism. All of those are hallmarks of the right.

In blue: Irony.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:20:30 PM EDT
is..............socialism with a political twist
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:20:43 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Goldberg's book is noted to have serious flaws in it's reasoning.

Here:
http://www.hnn.us/article/122231
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By HostisHumaniGeneris:


There are interesting sources on this, but Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism goes into a lot of detail about the historical development of national socialism as a leftist ideology.

Goldberg's book is noted to have serious flaws in it's reasoning.

Here:
http://www.hnn.us/article/122231

If, by Western European standards of the 1930s-40s, the Nazis were right of center, what would that make Conservative Party Prime Minister Winston Churchill?

At the time, rightist in Europe essentially meant 1) pro-limited monarchy coupled with parliamentary democracy, 2) a concern for individual rather than collective rights, 3) a concern for the rule of law and legal procedure over against dictatorship, and 4) support of (mostly) laissez-faire economics.

None of these describes Nazism.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:22:14 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
No, no it didn't.

For one exaple, like right there in red. Hitler wasn't fighting to spread socialism, nor was Mussolini. They were both waging war in order to bring more power to their own peoples, assert their people superiority and to stop what they saw as the impending threat of Bolshevism. All of those are hallmarks of the right.

In blue: Irony.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By magisterforlife:
Originally Posted By HostisHumaniGeneris:





After WWI, some socialist thinkers began to abandon the internationalist assumption while retaining both the revolutionary view and the socialist view. Among them was the primary thought leader Mussolini, who coined the term fascism to describe this kind of system. These nationalist socialists didn't see socialism as incompatible with nationalism. Rather, they saw nationalism as a means of bringing about revolutionary socialism. As such, the fight between nationalist and internationalist socialists was not a fight between left and right, but a fight between left and left.

.

Having stolen a card from their allegedly sworn enemies, the communist movement had to engage in a major re-definition of terms in order to avoid the obvious charges of hypocrisy. As a result, they worked to redefine the term fascism in common use as 1) anything we don't like, and 2) anything that is right of center.

There are interesting sources on this, but Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism goes into a lot of detail about the historical development of national socialism as a leftist ideology.




Nailed it
No, no it didn't.

For one exaple, like right there in red. Hitler wasn't fighting to spread socialism, nor was Mussolini. They were both waging war in order to bring more power to their own peoples, assert their people superiority and to stop what they saw as the impending threat of Bolshevism. All of those are hallmarks of the right.

In blue: Irony.


They wanted to go back to the good old days of the German Reichs and the Roman Empire respectively.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:24:23 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HostisHumaniGeneris:

If, by Western European standards of the 1930s-40s, the Nazis were right of center, what would that make Conservative Party Prime Minister Winston Churchill?

At the time, rightist in Europe essentially meant 1) pro-limited monarchy coupled with parliamentary democracy, 2) a concern for individual rather than collective rights, 3) a concern for the rule of law and legal procedure over against dictatorship, and 4) support of (mostly) laissez-faire economics.

None of these describes Nazism.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HostisHumaniGeneris:
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By HostisHumaniGeneris:


There are interesting sources on this, but Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism goes into a lot of detail about the historical development of national socialism as a leftist ideology.

Goldberg's book is noted to have serious flaws in it's reasoning.

Here:
http://www.hnn.us/article/122231

If, by Western European standards of the 1930s-40s, the Nazis were right of center, what would that make Conservative Party Prime Minister Winston Churchill?

At the time, rightist in Europe essentially meant 1) pro-limited monarchy coupled with parliamentary democracy, 2) a concern for individual rather than collective rights, 3) a concern for the rule of law and legal procedure over against dictatorship, and 4) support of (mostly) laissez-faire economics.

None of these describes Nazism.



No shit Sherlock.

A common derpy meme in all of these threads seems to be the idea that if one acknowledges the pitfalls of the far right, that they somehow impugn all right wing politics. Another logical fallacy.

Being right of center no more makes you a fascist or a Nazi than being left of center makes you a Communist, and there is not just one extreme in either direction, but all sorts of derpy branches.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:25:46 PM EDT
It is so far right it is left. Hitler was the far right, Stalin was the far left. In the end there really isn't much difference.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:27:48 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By hauslp:
Bad
View Quote
FPNI
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:28:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2014 7:29:29 PM EDT by TylerF]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mastadon:

You are extremely wrong. One of the key talking points of the Fascists in general was their "New Way" or their "Third Way" in which they would transform society to speed the development of more advanced, "New Men". Everything they talked about wanting to do involved changing the status quo. Yes, their propaganda made use of former glories, but their goals were always, you know, Forward. Hope and change. Yes we can. Etc.

Fascists were just another brand of socialists. The difference between them and the "pure" socialists of the Internationale was the idea of nationalism--i.e. national unity across all classes instead of class warfare.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mastadon:
Originally Posted By Sturmgeist:
What makes the Nazis left wing?

They wanted to go back to the good old days, which is a right-wing thing. They were nationalists, which is also right. They viewed their ethnicity as superior, which was right-wing way back then (today it's herp-derp way in the loony right-field right-wing).

Was it their treatment of animals? IIRC, you could get sent to a concentration camp for animal abuse. Was it their nearly non-existent economic policy, which often flip-flopped? I don't think so. Was it their nearly totalitarian power? That isn't exclusive to the left.

So, anyone care to fill me in?

You are extremely wrong. One of the key talking points of the Fascists in general was their "New Way" or their "Third Way" in which they would transform society to speed the development of more advanced, "New Men". Everything they talked about wanting to do involved changing the status quo. Yes, their propaganda made use of former glories, but their goals were always, you know, Forward. Hope and change. Yes we can. Etc.

Fascists were just another brand of socialists. The difference between them and the "pure" socialists of the Internationale was the idea of nationalism--i.e. national unity across all classes instead of class warfare.
But, that "New Way" was still based on ethnic superiority and promotion of the ruling people, in Hitler's case, that would be the Germans. This would come at the expense of other groups and those viewed as inferior to those in power. Again, this is traditionally viewed as a product of right-wing ideology.


ETA: Hell, why do I bother?
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:29:20 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ztug:
It is so far right it is left. Hitler was the far right, Stalin was the far left. In the end there really isn't much difference.
View Quote



Once you start to be so sure you have all the answers that you view those who disagree with you not only as political enemies, but as enemies of the people and whose very existence threatens your own, these things happen.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:34:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2014 7:38:37 PM EDT by mnvwguy02]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:



Naturally, that's why it's usually only the left wing people who advocate strong national militaries or wrap themselves in rhetoric about the "good old days" when the country was better - like when kids respected the flag and stood to say the pledge every morning, and people shut up and stood at attention for the national anthem at ballgames. Right wingers, on the other hand, are infamous for championing individual rights even when the expression of them runs contrary to social tradition - to include championing greater participation in society of ethnic minorities and homosexuals.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.



Naturally, that's why it's usually only the left wing people who advocate strong national militaries or wrap themselves in rhetoric about the "good old days" when the country was better - like when kids respected the flag and stood to say the pledge every morning, and people shut up and stood at attention for the national anthem at ballgames. Right wingers, on the other hand, are infamous for championing individual rights even when the expression of them runs contrary to social tradition - to include championing greater participation in society of ethnic minorities and homosexuals.


Bohr_Adam you are one of the smarter, yet sardonic fellows here, so I post this in respect: you've done an admirable job of describing left right differences in the US, you've also simply described factions within the left side of the political spectrum.

Consider the following:

Things are muddled in the US, the two major political parties, while different in the margins, play on the left side of the 50-yard line.

As evidence, I submit Bellamy's Pledge of allegiance has its roots in Christian Socialism, which is a left-wing philosophy that also brought forth the temperance movement and prohibition. It is this progressive philosophy that pervades the so-called "religious right" which switched horses in the 1980's to the progressive Republican party since the post 1968 Democratic party had progressed even further left, past socialism to communism, which left no room for Christian Socialists.

Bellamy Pledge Salute:
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:38:39 PM EDT
Neither.

It's "down-wing"

Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:40:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2014 7:43:11 PM EDT by Not_so_Clever]
It is rather self evident.

ETA,That being said, politics has a Z axis and more.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:43:13 PM EDT
That word "Socialism" in "National Socialism" is leading you astray. In Europe, "Socialism" is not a dirty word. It actually appears in the titles of many parties that we would not even consider Socialist.

"Radicals" in Europe are often conservatives. The "National Radical Union" was the Greek right-wing conservative party in the 1950's and 60's. Today, the official Europe-wide conservative party is called the "European People's Party." I'm serious.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:49:08 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By mnvwguy02:


Bohr_Adam you are one of the smarter, yet sardonic fellows here, so I post this in respect: you've done an admirable job of describing left right differences in the US, you've also simply described factions within the left side of the political spectrum.

Consider the following:

Things are muddled in the US, the two major political parties, while different in the margins, play on the left side of the 50-yard line.

As evidence, I submit Bellamy's Pledge of allegiance has its roots in Christian Socialism, which is a left-wing philosophy that also brought forth the temperance movement and prohibition. It is this progressive philosophy that pervades the so-called "religious right" which switched horses in the 1980's to the progressive Republican party since the post 1968 Democratic party had progressed even further left, past socialism to communism, which left no room for Christian Socialists.

Bellamy Pledge Salute:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Students_pledging_allegiance_to_the_American_flag_with_the_Bellamy_salute.jpg
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By mnvwguy02:
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.



Naturally, that's why it's usually only the left wing people who advocate strong national militaries or wrap themselves in rhetoric about the "good old days" when the country was better - like when kids respected the flag and stood to say the pledge every morning, and people shut up and stood at attention for the national anthem at ballgames. Right wingers, on the other hand, are infamous for championing individual rights even when the expression of them runs contrary to social tradition - to include championing greater participation in society of ethnic minorities and homosexuals.


Bohr_Adam you are one of the smarter, yet sardonic fellows here, so I post this in respect: you've done an admirable job of describing left right differences in the US, you've also simply described factions within the left side of the political spectrum.

Consider the following:

Things are muddled in the US, the two major political parties, while different in the margins, play on the left side of the 50-yard line.

As evidence, I submit Bellamy's Pledge of allegiance has its roots in Christian Socialism, which is a left-wing philosophy that also brought forth the temperance movement and prohibition. It is this progressive philosophy that pervades the so-called "religious right" which switched horses in the 1980's to the progressive Republican party since the post 1968 Democratic party had progressed even further left, past socialism to communism, which left no room for Christian Socialists.

Bellamy Pledge Salute:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Students_pledging_allegiance_to_the_American_flag_with_the_Bellamy_salute.jpg


"Socialism" was thrown about pre-war much the way "democracy" was thrown about post war.

If you want to believe that a movement rooted in conservative religious views and devoted to preserving a moral society from insidious foreign influences is left wing, than I'd have to seriously ask you if you think most of GD is left wing.

The biggest problem with the claim that only movements championing individual rights are right wing, is it ceases to be a model of two wings, and starts to look like a pretty lopsided bird. That, and it ignores actual mentalities expressed in the real world.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 7:51:50 PM EDT
lol

love these threads


Link Posted: 4/24/2014 8:15:27 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ruger556boy:


Bingo!


If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" than Anarchy is far right while socialism is far left.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ruger556boy:
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.


Bingo!


If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" than Anarchy is far right while socialism is far left.


Totalitarianism isn't a left-right political ideology. You can have right wing totalitarianism or left wing totalitarianism.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 8:22:55 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheWind:
It is a name, Hitler blew smoke up up everyone's ass
View Quote

best response in the thread.

it was a path to power for some guys, who needed to call it something other than "we rule".
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 8:24:39 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ContrarianIndicator:
Left

http://www.corson.org/archives/images/ideology_chart_2.png
View Quote

lol--these graphics always crack me up. hint: republics are not necessarily representative, and constitutions can say anything that the writers want the to say.

so a fascist constitutional republic is quite possible, which would tie your spectrum into knots.


Link Posted: 4/24/2014 8:26:55 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:



If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" then we ignore the reality of every political structure and movement in the history of the world, and instead deliberately choose intellectual masturbation.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:
Originally Posted By ruger556boy:
Originally Posted By Ruun:
...



If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" then we ignore the reality of every political structure and movement in the history of the world, and instead deliberately choose intellectual masturbation.

you're saying that like it's a bad thing.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 8:28:00 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MotorMouth:


Totalitarianism isn't a left-right political ideology. You can have right wing totalitarianism or left wing totalitarianism.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MotorMouth:
Originally Posted By ruger556boy:
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.


Bingo!


If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" than Anarchy is far right while socialism is far left.


Totalitarianism isn't a left-right political ideology. You can have right wing totalitarianism or left wing totalitarianism.
Horseshoe theory.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 8:28:03 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sturmgeist:
What makes the Nazis left wing?

They wanted to go back to the good old days, which is a right-wing thing.

SNIP

View Quote


There are people in Russia today that want to go back to the 'good old days' of communism. Are they 'right wingers'? Obviously not.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 8:29:08 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Michael:


It doesn't matter how right you might be...GD will insist that only liberals, communists, and Muslims can do bad things...
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Michael:
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By hauslp:
Bad
This.

And at the historical basis, National Socialism is right wing.




It doesn't matter how right you might be...GD will insist that only liberals, communists, and Muslims can do bad things...


Well.... Let's face facts here: Liberals/Communists/Socialists have murdered more people by a factor of ten than the hardline Right.

And typically I like to poke holes in the hardline right silliness of GD.
Link Posted: 4/24/2014 8:33:25 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:


"Socialism" was thrown about pre-war much the way "democracy" was thrown about post war.

If you want to believe that a movement rooted in conservative religious views and devoted to preserving a moral society from insidious foreign influences is left wing, than I'd have to seriously ask you if you think most of GD is left wing.

The biggest problem with the claim that only movements championing individual rights are right wing, is it ceases to be a model of two wings, and starts to look like a pretty lopsided bird. That, and it ignores actual mentalities expressed in the real world.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:
Originally Posted By mnvwguy02:


Bohr_Adam you are one of the smarter, yet sardonic fellows here, so I post this in respect: you've done an admirable job of describing left right differences in the US, you've also simply described factions within the left side of the political spectrum.

Consider the following:

Things are muddled in the US, the two major political parties, while different in the margins, play on the left side of the 50-yard line.

As evidence, I submit Bellamy's Pledge of allegiance has its roots in Christian Socialism, which is a left-wing philosophy that also brought forth the temperance movement and prohibition. It is this progressive philosophy that pervades the so-called "religious right" which switched horses in the 1980's to the progressive Republican party since the post 1968 Democratic party had progressed even further left, past socialism to communism, which left no room for Christian Socialists.

Bellamy Pledge Salute:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Students_pledging_allegiance_to_the_American_flag_with_the_Bellamy_salute.jpg


"Socialism" was thrown about pre-war much the way "democracy" was thrown about post war.

If you want to believe that a movement rooted in conservative religious views and devoted to preserving a moral society from insidious foreign influences is left wing, than I'd have to seriously ask you if you think most of GD is left wing.

The biggest problem with the claim that only movements championing individual rights are right wing, is it ceases to be a model of two wings, and starts to look like a pretty lopsided bird. That, and it ignores actual mentalities expressed in the real world.


Good post.

For a "movement rooted in conservative religious views and devoted to preserving a moral society from insidious foreign influences is left wing": if the effort is to enact legal restrictions on individual liberty based solely on their admitted philosophy that Jesus was a Socialist (a term that has not changed pre or post-war, regardless of how often it is used) then yes, left wing in terms of the model.

Is GD left wing? I reject the premise of the question and answer, GD isn't a political movement. If I were to label GD, GD is simply human.

With regard to "the claim that only movements championing individual rights are right wing, is it ceases to be a model of two wings", we agree the model is flawed, which begets us threads like this one where we cannot manage our agreement because the terms and models themselves are inadequate.

Real world is that there is no pure philosophical play and thus societies, like the people that comprise them, are imperfect.

Link Posted: 4/24/2014 8:34:12 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Horseshoe theory.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By MotorMouth:
Originally Posted By ruger556boy:
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.


Bingo!


If we follow the "left is more gov the right is no gov" than Anarchy is far right while socialism is far left.


Totalitarianism isn't a left-right political ideology. You can have right wing totalitarianism or left wing totalitarianism.
Horseshoe theory.


I subscribe to a two axis theory similar to those proposed by Nolan and Pournelle.
Link Posted: 4/25/2014 3:04:06 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
This.

And at the historical basis, National Socialism is right wing.


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TylerF:
Originally Posted By hauslp:
Bad
This.

And at the historical basis, National Socialism is right wing.




If you examine its origins I don't understand how it could possibly be considered right wing. Nationalism has its origins in the French Revolution, and German National Socialism had as its ultimate goal (according to its founders) of spreading socialism at the international level; it was just felt by the founders that such was not practical at the time and that it was best to focus on the national level and only look towards socialism as an international movement once socialism at the national level was achieved. For this reason, they split off from the socialist party (which was part of the 2nd International) which existed In the Austro-Hungarian Empire at the time (in what would become Czechoslovakia after WWI). The platform and rhetoric are strongly Leftist, from 1896 through WWII. You'd have to ignore an awful lot to claim with a straight face that the ideology was Rightist.
Link Posted: 4/25/2014 3:04:59 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheWind:
It is a name, Hitler blew smoke up up everyone's ass
View Quote


German National Socialism was founded in the 1800s. Hitler did not have anything substantial to do with what it was called.
Link Posted: 4/25/2014 3:07:17 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:



Naturally, that's why it's usually only the left wing people who advocate strong national militaries or wrap themselves in rhetoric about the "good old days" when the country was better - like when kids respected the flag and stood to say the pledge every morning, and people shut up and stood at attention for the national anthem at ballgames. Right wingers, on the other hand, are infamous for championing individual rights even when the expression of them runs contrary to social tradition - to include championing greater participation in society of ethnic minorities and homosexuals.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.



Naturally, that's why it's usually only the left wing people who advocate strong national militaries or wrap themselves in rhetoric about the "good old days" when the country was better - like when kids respected the flag and stood to say the pledge every morning, and people shut up and stood at attention for the national anthem at ballgames. Right wingers, on the other hand, are infamous for championing individual rights even when the expression of them runs contrary to social tradition - to include championing greater participation in society of ethnic minorities and homosexuals.


You are greatly oversimplifying things (especially when it comes to traditionalism; not really comparable to something like national socialism, which was radical at its core) while missing the fact that ideologies can be admixtures of Left and Right (while still being predominantly one or the other) and that patriotism and nationalism are not synonymous.
Link Posted: 4/25/2014 3:07:39 AM EDT
Depends on perspective.

Right by many European standards. Left by the US's standards.
Link Posted: 4/25/2014 3:08:49 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Ruun:
The left to right political spectrum runs from full government control to limited government/anarchy. Nazis were statists, therefore, leftists. Misnaming nazism as right wing is a progressive lie that you guys seem to have fallen in.
View Quote

Link Posted: 4/25/2014 3:09:03 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By hauslp:
Bad
View Quote

Nationalism combined with socialism. One can lead to war, the other to loss of private property.
Page / 4
Top Top