SirPwn4lot
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2010
- Messages
- 523
- Reaction score
- 148
- Location
- Perth, Western Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Someone may have already, but I doubt it had any success, so I'll do it too, lets have a political maths lesson.
Communism (a political ideology advocating a stateless, classless society in which everyone is equal and the means of production are distributed equally)=/= National Socialism (a political party in which Hitler rose to prominence, which, once Hitler controlled it, advocated a patriarchal society, rigid social classes, absolute obedience to the state, and and a government controlled economy, which was directed to xenophobic and racist ends).
No matter how you try to spin it, Communism and Nazism are completely incompatible.
Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.
hey claim that culture is created by the collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus they reject individualism. Viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, they see pluralism as a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety. They advocate the creation of a single-party state.[17] Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the fascist state and the fascist movement.[18] They identify violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality
Fascism rejects the concepts of egalitarianism, materialism, and rationalism in favor of action, discipline, hierarchy, spirit, and will.[20
They oppose liberalism (as a bourgeois movement) and Marxism (as a proletarian movement) for being exclusive economic class-based movements.[21] Fascists present their ideology as that of an economically trans-class movement that promotes ending economic class conflict to secure national solidarity. They believe that economic classes are not capable of properly governing a nation, and that a merit-based elite of experienced military persons must rule through regimenting a nation's forces of production and securing the nation's independence. Fascism presents itself as a solution to the perceived benefits and disadvantages of conservatism by advocating state-controlled modernization that promotes orderly change while resisting the dangers to order in society of pluralism and independent initiative.[24]
Fascists tend to support a "third position" in economic policy, which they believe superior to both the rampant individualism of laissez-faire capitalism and the severe control of state socialism.[25][26] Italian Fascism and most other fascist movements promote a corporatist economy whereby, in theory, representatives of capital and labour interest groups work together within sectoral corporations to create both harmonious labour relations and maximization of production that would serve the national interest.[27] However, other fascist movements and ideologies, such as Nazism, did not use this form of economy.
They referred to themselves as "national socialists", and have also been called "fascist"... one term suggests the left, the other suggests the right.
Frankly, the Nazi's were statist thugs, expansionist imperialists, and mass-murderers, and that's good enough definition for me. I don't think trying to claim they were tied to modern liberalism or modern conservatism is productive or accurate.
I have never found the name argument to be adequate. For example The Democratic People's Republic of North Korea is not exactly democratic. Evil people will always attempt to use propaganda and basically lie to get what they want.
They did employ socialist policies, subordinating manufacturing and other industries to state control in order to ensure that competing elements did not lead to internal divisions in society and to create strength through national solidarity and central planning. Unlike other socialists, however, they made no illusion that such policy was intended to promote the people's interest. They made no distinction between the state's interest and the people's well-being--to the degree that individuals or even corporate entities (such as unions) were incidental and disposable if they were at odds with the state.
I think this crucial element is where the concepts diverge. One of the major points and goals of socialism is to promote society while fascists want to promote the state instead. While there is government intervention into the economy it is not socialist.
I don't believe in the left/right line of traditional politics. I think the 3D graph is closer, but still too simplistic.
The Nazi's were statists, of this there is no doubt. Statism is commonly associated with both the FAR left and the FAR right on the "traditional line".... another indicator of that left/right line's flaws.
They referred to themselves as "national socialists", and have also been called "fascist"... one term suggests the left, the other suggests the right.
Frankly, the Nazi's were statist thugs, expansionist imperialists, and mass-murderers, and that's good enough definition for me. I don't think trying to claim they were tied to modern liberalism or modern conservatism is productive or accurate.
Yeah, there's certainly a divergence. But remember that they had the people convinced that the well-ordered and powerful state would lead to the well-being of the German people. So you do point out a distinction, but it is a distinction that was not recognized by the nazis or the german people (well, not all of them, but you know what I mean)-- hence they called themselves national socialists.
A typical socialist wants the benefits of collective production to be equally available to all workers who invest labor. A national socialist filtered the benefit through the state under the pretext that the people would equally benefit by living in a powerful and strong German empire that was superior to all other nations.
crushing individual rights for the "good" of the state is quintissential collectivist philosophy--in other words left wing
crushing individual rights for the "good" of the state is quintissential collectivist philosophy--in other words left wing
Left-wing contrary to idiots.
Perhaps. I am not familiar with the specific propaganda of that time. However, in general principal and philosophy, they are VERY different and I see it as dishonest to equate the two. Whether or not the Nazis were dishonest is not really relevent.
But that is not what they did.. they crushed individual rights for the good of the party and its leaders.
And you forget that it was the right wing that crushed individual rights for centuries and only gave it up when the left came around
AKA "My identity is so wrapped up in being a right winger that I have to describe them as left".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?