17.2K 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.
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
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.
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".
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.
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
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
59Opinion
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.
* Brownshirts. Brownshorts would be funnier. Like a parade of UPS drivers.
They know the Nazis were not socialists.
Racists bend over backwards to make insanity seem rational.
Hey, there are people who believe Antifa is anti-fascist. Go figure.
... I mean.. the ONE definition of Antifa is that they are Anti-fascists.. Its like saying Atheists are not atheists.
@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".
@Soteris BAHAHAHAHAHAHA God damn, do you think ANYONE buys that bullshit you just typed?
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".
@Soteris Where did I say there was central membership, shit for brains?
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.
@Soteris No, that's not required to be a group, you idiot.
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.
@Soteris Do you apply that logic to all aspects of your life? Like to the Jan 6 protests also?
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.
Antifa is anti fascist, lmaoo. Just cause you think violence against fascists is fascist doesn’t mean squat
@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.
@doopayo you really fall for it all, don't you?
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.
Radical ideas.
@Soteris So modern whites in America should never pay reparations for slavery, correct?
No, but the country of USA should. Not because its the "moral" thing to do but because its the smartest economical decision for future return.
@Soteris No, you JUST got done making the bold statement that an individual is not responsible for what others do.
And dipshit, who do you think funds the government?
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..
lets check a few things:
* 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.
That sound like authoritarianism
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.
Hitler thought that Communism and socialism were Jewish concepts. Not capitalism?
A lot of anti semantic propaganda included imagery equating Jewish people to communists.
It even happened in America at some point too. It was a racist stereotype that Jewish people were communist
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.
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
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.
The word "Nazi" stands for "National Socialist German Workers' Party."
The New Nazi Party are the leftist democrats who are fascist and support extreme mandates
Democrats in the US aren’t even left wing anymore. They’re conservative if you compare them to democrats in other countries
I wouldn’t say they’re nazis to be exact but they’re real big liars and frauds
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.
@Fuentes how did your 1/6 stunt go pal
National socialism is absolutely an outgrowth of Marxist thought. Hitler just did away with the international part of the "international workers revolution".
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.
Nazi is a shortened form of National Socialist so, yeah, Nazi's were socialists.
They were fascists despite the name.
Exactly
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.
This is true ^ they even burned books made by Karl Marx
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
The only people that believe this are right-wing dullards who cannot fathom the idea that the meaning of words can change depending on context.
Yes, the Nazi party was socialist. NAZI is the acronym of the German words for "National Socialist German Workers' Party"
They were socialists, at least in economics. Even the name is: National SOCIALIST German Workers' Party.
...
no lol. this is just a way for fascists and right wingers to try to say they are different from nazi's
don't buy it ever. Nazi's weren't socialists AT ALL.