Mussolini and Hitler were right wing dictators

[multivita-man]

No, you simply have that wrong. Were I attempting to define the entirety of the right as being small government conservatives you would have a point, but I’m not, so you don’t. “The right” does include small government conservatism, but the right is not defined exclusively by small government conservatism. I made this point earlier.

You want to be right on this, don't you. lol

You’re clinging to labels without thinking about how degrees of government authority create similarities and differences. But thanks for brining up for-profit capitalism being “aligned with the regime’s political agenda,” i.e. government exercising its authority and dictating what businesses should and should not do as opposed to the more limited role of maintaining open and fair markets. That is a specific example of what the progressive left has in common with totalitarian regimes: politically motivated industrial policy. Small government conservatives reject that.

You want to make up your own definition of what "right" means - fine. I don't care, but I'll point out that your understanding of "right" isn't commonly accepted.

 

[NatMorton]

You want to be right on this, don't you. lol

Even if I didn’t I still would be

You want to make up your own definition of what "right" means - fine. I don't care, but I'll point out that your understanding of "right" isn't commonly accepted.

So to be clear, as someone who is a small government conservative, you don’t consider me a member of the right?

 

[Paradoxical]

Hitler and Mussolini Were Right Wing.
Lots of right wingers try to claim Hitler and Mussolini Were left wing. When in reality they said they were right wing.
I am centre-left.
I am against the far-right.
I support democracy, peace, and the best of capitalism and socialism.

I would like to point out Hitler and Mussolini admitted themselves they were right wing.
This is a taken from a speech by Adolf Hitler, April 12, 1921
'There are only two possibilities in Germany; do not imagine that the people will forever go with the middle party, the party of compromises; one day it will turn to those who have most consistently foretold the coming ruin and have sought to dissociate themselves from it. And that party is either the Left: and then God help us! for it will lead us to complete destruction - to Bolshevism, or else it is a party of the Right which at the last, when the people is in utter despair, when it has lost all its spirit and has no longer any faith in anything, is determined for its part ruthlessly to seize the reins of power - that is the beginning of resistance of which I spoke a few minutes ago. Here, too, there can be no compromise - there are only two possibilities: either victory of the Aryan or annihilation of the Aryan and the victory of the Jew.'
So that shows that Hitler saw himself and his ideology as right wing.
Mussolini wrote in The Doctrine of Fascism, ‘doctrines pass; nations remain. We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the right, a Fascist century’..
So that shows Mussolini saw himself as right wing.

What we see here in the above statement is that Hitler says that people will turn to those who have most consistently foretold the coming ruin (bolded above) and that party is the left. This is interesting because it is exactly what the left does today with the MSM piling on whoever it is that threatens their power and that was and is Trump and now using Lawfare to destroy him and anyone else who expresses support as well as raiding the homes of Catholics because they are the most vocal against abortion which the Democrats need to do in order to reduce the black population.

Now look at the next bolded sections where Hitler says a party of the right.........is determined for its part ruthlessly to seize the reins of power.

This hardly shows Hitler to be a right winger, does it? Now, take some time and research who and what Josef Goebbels, his propaganda chief. You will find that he was an avowed socialist and unless you think Hitler was stupid and hated those on the "left" (socialists) he would have most assuredly not have had Goebbels as his right-hand (pun intended) man.

There is not much more to say other than to give the Democrats, the Leftists, the Socialists, and the Progressives credit where credit is due. They are masters at shaping the narrative and rewriting history. They do it in real-time. Notice that none of them talk anymore about Trump colluding with Russia even though they impeached him for it and spent two years doing it and had hundreds of millions of people believe their lies? If you were to ask CNN, MSM, and the other propagandist Goebbels press about what they claimed just 4 years ago, they would deny it.

 

[Quag]

And with that you’ve demonstrated you’re lying.

What lie? Be specific because you seem to love accusing peopel of lying when you either fail to comprehend their posts or are unable to make a cogent reply to them

You didn’t quote anything I said because you know if you did you wouldn’t be able to prove it to be untrue.

Ahh the old attempt to reverse the burden of proof
Sucks for you I dont have to I just have to point out your statement is based on false premsises

You might want to run along now.

Words you should have heeded before you entered this thread

 

[multivita-man]

So to be clear, as someone who is a small government conservative, you don’t consider me a member of the right?

As I understand it, the debate is whether Mussolini and Hitler were right wing dictators. As most of the world understands the term right-wing, they are. Nobody cares how you identify...lol

 

[NatMorton]

What lie? Be specific because you seem to love accusing peopel of lying when you either fail to comprehend their posts or are unable to make a cogent reply to them

Ahh the old attempt to reverse the burden of proof
Sucks for you I dont have to I just have to point out your statement is based on false premsises


Words you should have heeded before you entered this thread

You’re lying because you can’t quote me and prove that quote is (as you claimed) untrue. You know it. I know it.

 

[NatMorton]

As I understand it, the debate is whether Mussolini and Hitler were right wing dictators. As most of the world understands the term right-wing, they are. Nobody cares how you identify...lol

You care. It’s been one reply after another from you.

My point stands. The left’s methods are closer to the fascists’ than are the methods of small government conservatives. You can dance around all you like, but you’ve not proven otherwise.

 

[multivita-man]

You care. It’s been one reply after another from you.

lol, this is where @NatMorton goes for the winning kick to win the internet, lol. Okay, bud...whatever.

 

[NatMorton]

lol, this is where @NatMorton goes for the winning kick to win the internet, lol. Okay, bud...whatever.

View attachment 67482082

No, it’s where I point out your argument has run dry.

 

[multivita-man]

No, it’s where I point out your argument has run dry.

 

[Quag]

You’re lying because you can’t quote me and prove that quote is (as you claimed) untrue. You know it. I know it.

I did quote you
I already showed the quote to be untrue but you are oblivious to reality
All you can do is try and fail to reverse the burden of proof

 

[NatMorton]

I did quote you
I already showed the quote to be untrue but you are oblivious to reality
All you can do is try and fail to reverse the burden of proof

And I think you're lying. Feel free to try and prove me wrong by citing the post #, but we both know you cannot do it.

 

[NatMorton]

No, I'm just proving you have no credible argument to make.

 

[Quag]

And I think you're lying. Feel free to try and prove me wrong by citing the post #, but we both know you cannot do it.

What am I lying about?
Try proving your claims
Pretty much everyone on here including yourself knows you cannot do so

 

[Quag]

No, I'm just proving you have no credible argument to make.

Irony meters explode

 

[NatMorton]

What am I lying about?
Try proving your claims
Pretty much everyone on here including yourself knows you cannot do so

You lied here, in post 491:



You lied when you claimed what I said was "untrue." You've merely made that claim knowing full well you're unable to quote anything I've said in this thread that can be proven false.

See how easy it is to quote something that is untrue when one is not lying?

Now, one more time, quote what I said that you believe is "untrue."

 

[Quag]

You lied here, in post 491:

View attachment 67482089

You lied when you claimed what I said was "untrue." You've merely made that claim knowing full well you're unable to quote anything I've said in this thread that can be proven false.

See how easy it is to quote something that is untrue when one is not lying?

Now, one more time, quote what I said that you believe is "untrue."

How is that a lie?

I've clarified my use of the term "right" in this thread to mean small government conservatism. I accept there are people on the right who are not for small government, just big government with different policy objectives.

 

[TypicalRussian]

Not for the last century or so, no.

What you define as "right wing" has always been classified as liberalism. Still is. Your own definition quite literally does not matter

 

[Tigerace117]

Thanks, but if you say "it can happen on the left and the right" then calling it right or left wing doesn't really make any sense.

I stand by my earlier statement. Modern-day liberalism is closer to fascism than is small government conservatism. If you don't want to call small government conservatism "right wing," I'm okay with that.

Except for the fact that in the heyday of “small government conservatism” America was a tyranny for much of its populace.

 

[NatMorton]

What you define as "right wing" has always been classified as liberalism. Still is. Your own definition quite literally does not matter

I did not “define” it that way. Try reading post 478, again.

 

[Tigerace117]

“In my eyes,” Erhard confided in January 1962, “power is always dull, it is dangerous, it is brutal and ultimately even dumb.”

By every measure, Germany was a disaster in 1945—defeated, devastated, divided, and demoralized—and not only because of the war. The Nazis, of course, were socialist (the name derives from National Socialist German Workers Party), so for more than a decade the German economy had been “planned” from the top. It was tormented with price controls, rationing, bureaucracy, inflation, cronyism, cartels, misdirection of resources, and government command of important industries. Producers made what the planners ordered them to. Service to the state was the highest value.

Ludwig Erhard reversed those practices, and in doing so he gave birth to a miraculous economic recovery.

Ludwig Erhard: Architect of a Miracle | The Daily Economy

"Erhard's legacy was forged in the decade and a half after the war’s end. He forever answered the question 'What do you do with an economy in ...

www.aier.org

Of course the Nazis were not, in fact, socialist, and murdered every socialist they could catch. Conservatives from across Europe flocked to join their “Crusade Against Bolshevism”.

 

[neo publius]

Of course the Nazis were not, in fact, socialist, and murdered every socialist they could catch. Conservatives from across Europe flocked to join their “Crusade Against Bolshevism”.

Citations ? So the National Socialist Workers party - aka Nazi party didn’t like the bourgeois Bolshevik’s ? It doesn’t change the fact they called themselves socialists, acted like socialists, governed like socialists and went around condemning capitalism .

I’m a King. lol by your logic that should work.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

No, they were much closer to the left than the right: expansive government, centralized political authority, national industrial policy, anti-competition, anti-markets, and largely intolerant of differing political views.

Nope.

 

[Quag]

Citations ? So the National Socialist Workers party - aka Nazi party didn’t like the bourgeois Bolshevik’s ? It doesn’t change the fact they called themselves socialists, acted like socialists, governed like socialists and went around condemning capitalism .

I’m a King. lol by your logic that should work.

They were pro capitalist which is why the large capitalists were backing them

 

[Jredbaron96]

Not in my book.

Or course, but that's because your diary is not an accurate reflection of reality.

The Nazis had no qualms with the idea of privately owned enterprises competing in a market environment, nor did they object on any principle to private ownership of land or capital.

The Nazis objected to the capitalism and international commerce under the auspices that they thought they were controlled by Jews for the benefit of international Jewery, and the detriment of the German people.

Commercial competition among privately owned firms was the norm in Nazi Germany. Thats how the majority of Nazi infrastructure projects and military development went. Your inevitable counter "No, the Nazis could force companies to do what they told or forces them to comply with government decree", the same is true of many other states; you run afoul of US commercial law you will find yourself fined and potentially arrested.

Your argument about political similarities only works because you are insisting on a definition that fits your own worldview, not the objective reality. It's as intellectually dishonest as if I we're to say "the right wing is defines by intolerance to different ideas, ergo all bigots are right wing"