Obviously, such people exist. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a thing.
There are reasons for it. For example: While the term existed before the infamous party (but with a different meaning), the "Nazi"-term was an abbreviation from the German Nationalsozialismus (「National Socialism」).
Of course, the counter-argument can be used, saying that the name is not always reflective of the actual thing named. For example: 「The so-called Holy Roman Empire was neither holy nor Roman not an empire.」 And, that does that merit.
But it's also true that mentally walking East can get you circling back West. For example: 「"Equality for all!" → "All cultures are equal." → "The culture of the Brazilians is equal to that of the Italians, whose culture is equal to the Arabs, whose culture is equal to the Koreans, whose culture is equal to Papua New Guinea's Sambia tribe, who ritually feed their underage-boys… eh, MALE-ESSENCE direct from the tap regularly, so they can be masculine and eventually reach puberty in due time." → "All cultures are not equal."」 https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/an-ode-to-the-many-evolved-virtues-of-human-semen/ Walk further without counter-balances and absolute cultural-supremacy becomes an easy conclusion.
While I have not yet done any detailed study on the specifics of Socialism & National Socialism, the the seemingly-obvious similarities between the Socialism of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U. S. S. R.) & the National Socialism of the 3rd Reich seems similar enough for an identical preliminary-conclusion for either, that living in there would not be desirable. Similar enough for them, apparently.
But personally (while I'm more familiar with the "for"-argument and lacking in the "against"), I'm withholding a conclusion until I actually research this topic myself.
The right relies entirely on performative misinformation. You can drive yourself nuts trying to disprove or fact check everything they say - indeed that's why they say it.
The problem is lying is easier than anyone ever imagines. And if a whole political party does it constantly it is inevitable that at some point someone will assume that they can't actually be lying constantly because that would be too ridiculous - like a conspiracy or something. I don't know why people assume the only explanation is conspiracy when it is much simpler to explain it as a scam. But while people who value credibility and integrity waste hundreds of hours fact checking each lie, the liars will have told thousands more. Because lying is really easy. .
The only solution is to turn it off. This is why the right has dumped so may resources into fighting against "cancel culture" in its infancy - because they know their existence is entirely the message of their existence. Anyone who has a shred of decency is left wing by default, and so that's pretty much everyone. It takes all that misinformation to create and sustain a right wing. So simply cancelling that misinformation would be the end of the right.
People call Nazis socialists because the name of the party is the National Socialist party. Regardless of Hitler's actions and political alignment, it's still called the socialist party.
People use that do demonize socalism even though it is the antithesis of socialism.
My go to retort is, "Yes, and the Democratic People's Republic of (North) Korea is both democratic and a people's republic."
Names are propaganda, and are used/manipulated to suit the whim of whoever is talking.
(NSDSP) National Socialist German Workers Party. NAZI is the abbreviation for National Socialists "Sozi".
Hitler won popularity when the German economy was in the toilet. He blamed the "wealthy Jews" and told the Germans that if they didn't have a house it was because a Jew had two houses. He demonized the Jewish community as the "wealthy not paying their share." Sound familiar?
@TrueConfection Where did you even get that information from?
The only articles I could find that’s remotely talking about what you’re referring to is a recent article.. so not about “Soviet Russia” . It’s about Russia
And they mentioned nothing about it tainting socialism?
If you’re going to talk about history you need to be intellectually honest.
There were several conspiracy theories circulating around the time about the Jewish people being communist (which is weird if Hitler was supposedly a big commie). He blamed Jewish people for Germanies problems (not rich Jews ) after they lost world war.
The whole point was that Jews were the ones blamed not just rich Jews.
These anti Semitic beliefs about Jewish people hoarding money
Please do your research on topics before speaking on them because you’re starting to sounding like one of those Holocaust apologists?
They were socialist as hell. Hitler believed that loyalty to state trumps any economic theory and didn't cooperate with other socialists, but his party had many socialist policies, they targeted workers with their campaigns. Nazi regime then made use of massive government projects to stimulate the economy and after several problems resulting from their policies even put strict price controls in place. Though they didn't usually directly nationalize industry, they did place their people in key companies, dictated prices and enforced their decisions, effectively taking control even if original owners were allowed to keep ownership unless they misbehaved. Overall it their style of tyranny had very clear socialist aspects, and they called themselves socialist too. You could argue other parties were even more socialist than the Nazis, but they certainly were not some laissez fair free marketers. On the spectrum they were certainly more socialist than not. If the government today put in place the same economic measures as they did, I would be alarmed for many reasons.
Nazism was socialist, but only in its 1920 program, which was 13 years before it took power. The original program of the NSDAP envisaged the nationalization of all existing companies.
However, this did not happen. The German economic boom of the early 1930s in which Germany grew at rates of 9.5% a year was financed by stealing from workers' pension funds. One of the first Hitlerian measures was to abrogate the right to strike, increase working hours, block all wage claims, dissolve trade unions, block the opening of production sites abroad, bind the production plants of German companies to Germany and hire exclusively German labor, to this they contrasted the impossibility of firing.
At the same time, protectionism tending towards autarchy was established. De facto the Nazis maintained the Rhenish control system on the management of companies where the state assisted the business management and pushed the companies themselves.
Fascism, on the other hand, was an alternative to socialism, communism and classical liberalism. It was economically corporatist. Corporatism is favored with a view to class collaboration, as opposed to the Marxist class struggle and capitalist individualism. It argued that inequalities between men are fruitful and generate economic growth (as opposed to socialists and communists). But also the need to channel the strength of individual social classes into the national interest, giving the state an intermediary role in the relations between them (as opposed to classical liberals).
12.2K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
Most people who talk about the Nazi's know nothing about them but what little agrees with their cognitive dissonance.
The Nazi party were not one entity and there were public and private supporters of the government many of whom did and didn't agree with their ideologies but their policies.
It's a far more complex picture that Hollywood has dumbed down.
A while back I became obsessed with the Holocaust so I’ve done a lot of research on it and can agree. Most schools only cover the basics and not the entirety of the tragedy that happened or even explain how the nazis/Hitler got into power in the first place.
No obviously lol, How could nazi's be socialists when they literally locked up communists and had tons of propaganda ageist ideals of socialism and wasn't following Marxism ideals at all. Hitler loved the idea of class systems. Marx did not. One is socialist, one was not.
There name just like china's commie party does not reflect the beliefs of Marx nor have anything to do with socialism or communists views.
Uh, you clearly don't know your WW1 and WW2 history. They were literally a socialist party. In the beginning, in German, the party's name was Deutsche Arbeiterpartei which means German Workers' Party. The original creator of the party was against being called Socialist but eventually they became the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (The National Socialist Worker's Party). Prior to Adolf Hitler taking control of the party, active between 1919 and 1920, they were just an average Socialist party and were barely on the map. It was after Adolf forcibly took over, during the late 1920's, that they became a powerful party. He used socialist rhetoric and propaganda to gain a following and, eventually, the party warped into something else.
They branded themselves as socialists to get the attention of the German working class. It didn’t matter what the parties name was prior at all because Hitler openly expressed his disagreement with socialism and communism.
Hitler being socialist would be against the anti semetic beliefs of the nazi party since it was already a popular anti semetic belief at the time that Jewish people were communist. That’s why a lot of anti semetic propaganda included such imagery.
While their name did include the word “socialist”, their policies and treatment of left-wing opponents show they were not socialists in any actual meaningful sense.
It boggles your mind how the Nationalist Socialist Workers Party (aka the Nazis) and movement could have socialist tendencies?
Really?
Technically speaking, that party and Hitler himself were influenced by Mussolini's fascism, but largely shifted to a socialist system shortly after taking power, for various reasons. It's not much of a leap though because functionally speaking, the biggest difference between them as far as the public is concerned is the rhetoric to justify themselves. Both are authoritarian governments clawing for excuses to justify seizing power. Fascism has popular messaging in campaigns, but historically doesn't last long in functioning government. All that crap does is get people in power, by appealing to national identity, or appealing to the welfare of all. Once power is attained, priorities shift quite a bit, and pretty much never deliver what was promised regardless.
Actually Nazi were socialist. Sorry to bust your bubble. They nationalizd all the industries, regulated their currancy and devolped social programs all for the good of state and community of people.
Now it was corrupted and you can get into the ethical discussion... but its beyond prove positive fact that they were socialists.
According to Karl Marxs doctrine, socialism is the state between Capitalism and Communism. Communism being the ultimate goal of any state. Just like there is no truly or pure capitalist state, there never was or is a truly communist state. So according to Marxs one could argue that every state is socialists... because they all fall between capitalist and communist.
Now there is a piont were socialist can turn nationalist. The difference being that a socialist state is focused upon the greater good of the people and community at large within a states own borders.
Nationalist are solely focused on the greater good of the nation, which can encompasses the nation of people beyond the boarder of any given state.. even at the cost of communal good inorder to achieve a greater good.
So you could argue the Nazi were a Nationalist, which they were, but Germany was a socialist state, and even Nationalist States steam from Socialist principles. Nationalism is corrupted form of socialist, just like anti-marxist will argue communism is corrupted form of socialism.
So its all academic honestly... Nazi were socialist.
Yes. Generally the same people who think their rights are being taken away by being told to wear a mask in public during a pandemic.
Before 1933, the Strasser brothers championed some measure of socialism in their policies, so they could compete with the genuine socialists and communists, but it was just marketing like Trump's disappearing affordable universal health care. The Nazis murdered one brother and the other fled the country.
It's a right wing propaganda push to make the left look bad, or the Nazis look good, pushed initially by Dinesh D'Souza.
A common issue with politics in general is how the definition of a word or view can be changed to suit the side using it or to be changed to used against the side that isn't. Due to this definitions and views can be in a state of flux and it also make it next to impossible for ether side to agree on anything. So we end up in a situation where one side is say they are socialist one moment and the other is saying they are not. Only for that to flip at the drop of a hat and it continue to change.
I've had people on here argue with me that Hitler was a communist and good friends with stalin. Won't be long before they claim hitler and Charlie Chaplin were the same person because they had the same moustache.
okay I'm curious what you call a political organization that promoted social welfare safety nets, worked close with unions, and gave tax payer money to women every time they had a child. "Conservative" and "Fascist" wouldn't be the first to come to mind. Another word misunderstood by Americans in general is "Fascist". They use this word when the proper word for what they are talking about is Authoritarian.
Capitalism is way more evil than socialism could ever be. And if the nazis were socialists whats your divinities proof cause as far as I’m concerned the nazis hated marxists beliefs and locked up communism and burned all of Karl marxs books
How can capitalism be more evil than socialism? Capitalism is morally indifferent. It can be used for evil purposes, yes, but more often than not, it does a lot of good. Socialism, on the other hand, is inherently evil.
Can proponents of two different evil ideologies not be enemies?
Capitalism promotes unlimited increased production on a planet with finite resources, capitalism inherently promotes the oppression of the working class. After all, the capitalist system and mode of production would collapse if the capitalists weren’t allowed to get away with exploiting their workers.
The future of the world isn’t capitalist or a capitalist system. Capitalism is going to collapse and a new systems bound to remain in its place, just like fatalism collapsed and was replaced. So to will capitalism be replaced with a superior system.
Under socialism production will not be valued over humanity. We can increase the standard of living for all Americans while caring for our environment.
Under capitalism issues like fixing climate change, inequality, hunger is never going to be solved despite us having the capacity to solve such things.
Developing countries will continue to be exploited for cheap labor, slave labor, and paid poverty wages by multinational corporations under a capitalist system.
During the pandemic while millions of Americans have gone homeless, and are struggling to make ends meet. The richest family in the world are making 1 billion every two weeks?
Have you ever thought to wonder how hard are they working to make 1 billion a week? How many workers are they stealing wages from to make that kind of money? And why do so many people praise billionaires like literal Gods so much?
Until capitalism collapses every single worker under the capitalist system will be a literal slave to the capitalist mode of production. If you don’t go to work, you die.
And if your Christian (guessing from your profile) I think you should know that the god of your Bible wouldn’t stand for the imperialism and inequality that the capitalist system promotes today.
They literally were socialists, or are we now saying that the name of the group doesn't necessarily coincide with the actions of said group, if so I'd like to have a word about 'antifa'. Hitler hated communism, and didn't like socialism as he thought it would lead to former, so instead of basing the worldview around globalism, he based it on nationalism. Hitler sure as hell was not a capitalist. Leftoids don't wanna admit that Nazis were socialists, but that's just a simple fact.
There is more to socialism than just unions, or so I've been told by socialists. The 'national' part of it is the reason they didn't like unions in the first place, because they didn't give the nation power over them. The entire point of that system was combining what was necessary for the nation (national) with what was necessary for the individual (socialism). Trade unions were replaced by the German Labour Front anyway. And socialism, as in an economic policy, has jack shit to do with Jews having rights.
11.9K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
Hon, they were socialist, just a right-wing authoritarian form of it. Socialism is an economic policy, and national socialism is as well, which they engaged in with gusto.
Except you're incorrect. National socialism is by definition in the right wing, as it engages in socialism in the context of nationalism. That makes national socialism right winged as the economic policy works in the confines of said nationalism.
Nazism is against socialism. Hitler actively suppressed trade unions and refused to give the homes of German princes to the people, as he felt this would move the party towards communism.
Socialists, along with other left-wing political activists opposed the Nazi regime and were persecuted under it. The Communist Party and Social Democratic Party (SPD) of Germany were banned in 1933, along with the limitation of the power of all those who opposed Nazi rule.
The concept of national socialism is inherently anti socialist. Doesn’t matter how you change the way you phrase it
Nazism has socialism in its name. And correct, they were persecuted as it was believed socialism on its own would lead to communism. But thays why the nationalism part was so important. That was the form of governance, nationalism, with socialist policies in place for those deemed worthy of being in that regime. If you are not worthy of it, you didn't partake. If they didn't want to do something, they didn't do so, usually at Hitler or mullers discretion.
12.2K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
They were. hey called themselves the National Socialist German Workers party for a reason and they took control of their industries during WW2. There was nothing "right wing" about the Nazi's. That term is thrown around to associate them with conservatives. Nothing conservative about them.
The national socialist party? Yes they were socialists😂. Either that or they were really capitalist who deceptively called themselves socialists in anticipation of the 2016 election😂🙄. You got to understand that both sides are BS! Both sides lie and push propaganda and both sides aren't in politics to help people but for personal gain. Once you accept that you will truly be woke. Perhaps stop reading WorldStarHipHop and watching CNN and learn something from Malcolm x. Until you do every one of these posts you make make you sound like a dink 🤡.
“we are today seeing a global rebellion of the oppressed against the oppressor, the exploited against the exploiter.”
Malcolm X saw the limitations of black nationalism and recognized black peoples racist oppression under capitalism.
You can’t have capitalism without racism”, he said once in a rally in Harlem.
You sound real dumb if you’re trying to act woke by bringing up Malcolm, when you definitely know jack shit about the words he preached !
Malcolm was assassinated for a reason, I bet the only side of him you know is the white washed liberal version of him that the US tries to push in schools to erase his actual radical beliefs?
The name was the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP). In name, in policy and by self declaration the NSDAP was a socialist organisation. Some people today are confused, because the only paradigm of socialism with which they are familiar is the failed Marxist version.
This is a desperate rear guard ploy from a dying conservative movement around the world. We were forced to run their neo liberal economic experiment at gunpoint around the world for the past forty years and it failed miserably. If Christopher Hitches was alive he'd literally rip D'nesh Desouza's lungs out in public.
It is what the they were National Socialist (Nationalsozialismus). They were totalitarian, anti capitalist (but would use it if it suited their needs), everything was secondary to the state, does that sound like any political party in America today? But the best analysis of them is here; www.econlib.org/.../
18.6K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
It’s complex to think about. Hitler used the socialist movement to draw crowds and talk the German president to appointing him chancellor. He didn’t win any election at all. He just had throngs of brownshorts that showed up wherever he wanted and caused trouble.
The Nazis have “socialist” in the title but looking at the evidence, there wasn’t a lot of socialist there. Pretty strictly fascist.
@Soteris I know, the definition of my Good-guy group is that we are good guys. Sure we go kicking nuns in the face, but the literal definition of the group is we're good guys. It must be what we are.
I know you people have difficulties with these things. ANTIFA is not a group that you can join, its a movement. Your actions decide if you are part of that movement or not. If you are doing things that are not part of the movement, such as kicking nuns in the face, then you are not part of that movement. You only qualify if you are following the objective which is in this case being "Anti-Fascist".
Its not much of bullshit when its plain fact. There is no "ANTIFA" group. There is nowhere you go to sign up or get a silly membership hat or pay membership fees. Its not a group but something that describes what you are doing and why you are doing it.
@Soteris You're correct. There are several Antifa groups. I appreciate them burning courthouses and beating people who oppose them in the name of anti-fascism.
Why are those groups "antifa groups"? Because their actions qualify them. Otherwise you still have to point out where I can submit my form for my newly made group to sign up as a "ANTIFA" group.
@Soteris There are antifa groups on Facebook. I don't join scumbag commie groups, so I don't know personally where to go find them. I'm sure you can, though.
Again, you are just proving you are wrong. There is no central organization, no arbiter of "Who is ANTIFA or not", no "Membership". You can only qualify for being Antifa by your actions hence why its defined as "Anti-Facist".
That is what is required for being a "group". Something needs to decide who is part and who is not as opposed to a movement such as Antifa or Anonymous.
Well then, if you are going to break philosophical rules I am going to have you explain why you can justify labeling ANTIFA. On what logical basis does it make sense to hold someone burning down a court house against someone else who does not have any relations between them.
@Soteris when they're dressed like Antifa and marching with a group waving antifa flags and slogans... that's what they are. If they're commies like you and are beating up grandmas, that's what they are.
So do tell me how I would share the blame of someone I dont know beating up grandmas if I was to dress a certain way and wave some flag because you are not making any sense so far.
Why yes, I do apply logic to all aspects of my life. Like for example how a group shares responsibility because it is selective in its membership or how movements only shares responsibilities through shared definition.
As such I dont hold the MAGA movement as a whole responsible for what happened on Jan 6, only those who actually had independent connection to the event such as those who actually went there or otherwise involved themselves.
@Soteris So we're clear. Antifa is anti-fascist because it's in the name, but nazis were not socialist despite socialist being in their name, right? Because you apply that logic everywhere.
Easy, Antifa is Anti-facist since that is literally the only definition/description that has been provided. It is what decides if you are antifa or not. There are two types of Nazi, one is the literal members of the Nazi party which would fall into a "group" since its a literal membership and the other would be an ideology which does not really have anything to do with socialism. If you are confused why people who are trying to control people use deceptive marketing and names for things then I dont think we should talk about the political philosophy behind Nazism but rather how marketing works.
@Soteris so now we're back to the good guy group analogy again. You can't say a group that acts like fascists are anti-fascist just because that's the name. Dope.
Yes we are back to reality where you are not responsible for what other people does outside your control and where you are held accountable for things within your own influence.
A world where I can do such magical things as trace your responsibility through what you did rather than what you have no part in. Where active membership in something means you are part of a group and where your actions identifies you as part of a movement.
The default state is that you are not responsible for something. For you to be responsible for something you need to establish a connection between your actions and the thing in question. This has already been done for various things such as groups and movements which is why I can use them as a shortcut instead of having to explain the very complex philosophical argument for why they are true. You on the other hand pull shit straight from your ass and can't prove the connection.
As for who funds the government? The government of course. They are the ones who collect the revenue from various sources and two of the most common ones are production and consumption. To consume something you need to first obtain it from a supplier, this usually means you need money. The more money you have the more you can consume and the more the government can earn in revenue.
As such making a group of people who are currently not that successful more wealthy will increase their consumption and therefore increase the national revenue. This is not to talk about how they can increase production if you help them succeed.
Because of this its a rather cheap investment into a group of people that will be repaid by future revenue. The further they are behind the bigger their potential is for increasing the national wealth because its easier to get them to catch up compared to pushing another group further ahead. After the initial investment they will also become self sufficient, meaning this investment is temporary and has virtually infinite returns as it grows year after year.
@Soteris who funds the government? The government? Are you mentally retarded? If that’s the case, then there’s fuckall reason for me to pay taxes since they just fund themselves autonomously.
I thought liberals were retarded, but this takes the cake.
*sigh* You really dont understand how this works right? You as the tax payer are not funding anything, you are not an investor. They are taking money from you. They are the ones who raises money FROM you. Governments are the source of their own funding, its not like they are fucking employed at a job or something. Please, for the love of all that is unholy, learn something... anything..
* did the nazi run all companies with the government? yes * did they use state programs to control the public which were all funded by the government? yes * you will say that they hated marx... but he is only one type of socialist.
its best to think of naziism vs communism as a civil war between socialists. both different methods of achievemnt a socialist society
State usurpation of the means of production is a common thread in both fascism and socialism, while the NAZIs maintained the illusion of private enterprise there was heavy state control of industry. Socialism is generally concerned with powerful govt and limited individual freedom.
As far as politics go, yes they were. The political parts Hitler represented was the NSDAP, nationalist socialist german (deutche) workers (arbeiter) party. But politics are politics, you can spin any action to any reasoning. Now looking back at these times, we can clearly identify politics being used as a tool, let's try and keep looking at current events with the same eyes.
I do. It's called National Socialism for a reason.
-Socialism means that the state (it doesn't matter if it's race lead or class lead, it requires some sort of collective) will own the means of production which means that capitalism is the absence that control. Leaving the control of production to the individual and their own desire to provide for the community.
- Hitler thought that capitalism was a Jewish concept (as well as Marxism) which was the driving force of his hatred towards the Jews.
- Marx wanted to socialize the proletariat removing the bourgeois from society. Hitler wanted to socialize the German people by removing all other races (especially the Jews) from society. Both have the desire to create their own collective.
I said that Hitler saw capitalism and Marxism (communism found in the USSR) were Jewish concepts used to spread their corruption. This was why Hitler tried to invade the USSR but failed because he was unprepared for the brutal winter there.
There was also a lot of stereotypes of Jewish people being capitalists or being rich. It didn’t start with Hitler but he made that stereotype part of his political goal to paint them as evil.
Yes but they didn’t find capitalism in and of itself Jewish, the point was that they thought the capitalist system was being controlled by Jewish people.
Yes but thats not my point here. I'm saying that Hitler believed that the Jews are bad and use both capitalistic and communistic ideals to spread their influence.
LOL Yeah, that's kind of funny, in a pathetic sort of way. Then again, it boggles MY mind when R's call D's "socialists" or even Communists, without having any idea what the term means.
Nazi Party The Nazi Party, officially the National Socialist German Workers' Party, was a far-right political party in Germany active between 1920 and 1945, that created and supported the ideology of Nazism. Its precursor, the German Workers' Party, existed from 1919 to 1920. The Nazi Party emerged from the German nationalist, racist and populist Freikorps paramilitary culture, which fought against the communist uprisings in post-World War I Germany. Wikipedia
Yes because the beliefs of socialists are almost a perfect 1:1 carbon copy of Adolf Hitler, the only difference is that he was out with it while leftists these days try to hide their true beliefs but we see right through it.
1
0 Reply
Anonymous
(18-24)
+1 y
The word "Nazi" stands for "National Socialist German Workers' Party."
Exactly but today Biden is a Tyrant trying to impose mandates by force and blocking peoples source of income. That man is crazy and he can't be impeached because he has the support of the crazy democrats making a fascist party.
National socialism is absolutely an outgrowth of Marxist thought. Hitler just did away with the international part of the "international workers revolution".
They were definitely socialist. The state/Nazi party controlled much of the society and business. They controlled people's freedoms and the state was put above all others.
She is an ignorant asshole who blocked me from responding to her reply. Yes, the Nazis hated communists but it wasn't because they were capitalists. They controlled the country, the means of production and the freedom of their people like communists. They weren't communists but they were socialists in the regards that I mentioned
They were socialists. In fact Hitlers propaganda minister Joseph Goebells wife poisoned their six children in Hitlers bunker as the Red Army was outside claiming she did not want her children growing up in a non socialist society
0
0 Reply
Anonymous
(36-45)
+1 y
You’re not educated enough to understand. Nazi is shorthand. The actual name of the party included the word socialist right in it. National Socialism is what it was.
its a name only thats it. that alone doesn't make them socialist. i suggest you learn what socialism is more before you condescendingly try to "educate" people
@Still-alive okay genius explain to me how the nazi party was not a national socialist party. Which policy of there’s did not fall in line? Facism, socialism, communism, all of them are the same kind of fucked to a libertarian. There was an extraordinary level of government intervention under hitler
@Still-alive you don’t understand how similar the systems are. You just read words and memorize them. No contact with reality. Typical amongst gamer nerds
@Still-alive the gist is all you ever get I think, the most general possible understanding, so unfocused that you can hardly make out what’s what. Keep on with that. Ignorance is bliss. Keep telling yourself the national socialist german workers party had nothing to do with socialism because some fucking article told you so. “Oh its only right wing loonies who say that, they were actually not socialist, it’s just a name” yeah that’s good research you do there buddy. Ask you about policies and look at you. You don’t even bother to mention a single policy. “DURR THE NAZIS FOUGHT COMMUNISTS, AND I THINK INTERNATIONAL COMMUNISTS ARE THE SAME AS NATIONAL SOCIALISTS CAUSE IM A DUMB FUCK AND SURELY SOCIALISTS won't FIGHT COMMUNISTS”
@Still-alive Why don’t you share your knowledge with me? I asked you to explain why the nazi party wasn’t socialist and you’re explanation sucked ass. Re read it. That is not an argument, not even close. Go on and assert something again tho, just keep talkin that shit with nothing to back it up
@Still-alive interesting take on that expression. Doesn’t actually make sense when you think about it though, might make sense to a dipshit idiot who thinks he knows everything but feels no need to prove it tho
Nazis indeed were socialists, but, ***hot take***, we can't say that everything they did was bad. Our stupid society is just too immature to talk about it.
"If the nazis were socialist than why did the burn Karl Marxist"
Non sequitur. Karl Marx didn't own socialism... The German National Socialists created a new branch of socialism.
The bad thing about Nazis was a huge one, which was their extremely aggressive German Imperialism and resentment against non-Germans. Excluding those two points, I see no reason to say that their political project was bad.
I never said Karl Marx owned socialism? Karl Marx is the father of socialism and every socialist and communist till this day studies his readings and theory.
It’s counterintuitive to burn the very thing you seek to become.
The nazis were never National socialist or socialists, they were just Nazis.
Plan and simple, the only reason it was referred to as national socialist to begin with was to attract support from the working class.
Other than that Hitler explicitly said he was anti socialist and anti communist.
Which showed in the actions of the nazis as they actively suppressed unionization amongst workers.
Lastly, I have no idea what you’re referring to by their “political project” and I hope you realize that they wouldn’t be nazis if they weren’t nationalists and imperialist? That’s kind of the point and it seems weird how you’re trying to justify any of their actions as it’s up their with some of the most horrible shit that’s been committed in human history
"the only reason it was referred to as national socialist to begin with was to attract support from the working class."
The Nazis actually did a good lot for the German working class. They enacted generous welfare programs and quite a few projects to lower the cost of living and grow people's purchase power. They also had generous workers rights, arguably the most advanced pro-worker laws at the time.
"Other than that Hitler explicitly said he was anti socialist and anti communist"
Hitler and the Nazis were never against socialism. They were against Karl Marx's Jewishness, even though Marx was a known critic of the Jewish identity.
"Which showed in the actions of the nazis as they actively suppressed unionization amongst workers."
That's up to debate.
"wouldn’t be nazis if they weren’t nationalists and imperialist?"
As I said, they had a bad side, and it was a huge one.
"That’s kind of the point and it seems weird how you’re trying to justify any of their actions"
I'm making a cold analysis of history, something you're unable to do because you put your feelings above your will to understand how history operates.
"most horrible shit that’s been committed in human history"
Every regime is different. The Nazis may have practiced elements of Socialism. At the end of the day one militarist totalitarian regime is much like another. Remember the Horseshoe Theory.
0
0 Reply
Anonymous
(30-35)
+1 y
This is a case of ypu thinking emotionally about the words you're using. Socialist = positive. Nazi = negative. Therefore nazis being socialist is mind blowing to you.
It's because the old divide for "left" and "right" is not accurate anymore. The two-axed spectrum (division to world-view and economical features) makes it actually possible to place them anywhere.
Eh... I think the only way you could peg the Nazis as right wing is their hypernationalism. I don't even think you could call them "traditionalist" considering how much Hitler harped on "transforming the country". That's not the talk of someone who wants to return to tradition.
@BrosephBrostar I think you're correct, but removing the socialist label just because they're not on the left side of the lane is pretty strange, surely they would balance out to somewhere centre left/centre right but incredibly authoritarian?
Yeah, that's exactly where I peg them. They're center-authoritarian, not by nature of them being moderate, but by nature of them having a mixture of "far-left" and "far-right" policies, but then you're starting to get to why left and right are outdated for this political era.
THere's no such thing as friend in socialism. Socialists are fraudulent people, you can't believe a word they say. They act nice to your face and then stab you in the back. Hitler stabbed Stalin in the back when he invaded Poland.
this is quite controversial... but they had several typical characteristics of socialism... by the way... what has the president of brazil to do with nazism?
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
u +1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
Anonymous(18-24)+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
Anonymous(36-45)+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
