i mean theres the shadow of oto strasser
and otto had uh interesting ideas
The issue is that the term "socialism" actually predates the term "communism," and while communist theory uses the term "socialism" in a particular way that is in conflict with the views expressed by these piece-of-shit nazis the nazis weren't bound to this usage and therefore wrong to use the existing term "socialism" in a more general way that encompassed their horrible project. Communists don't own "socialism."
goddamn I wish there was more english resources on japanese governance in manchukuo
You can trace socialist ideas back to feudal times and they will still deal with concepts like the abolition of private ownership and the distribution of goods according to need. Do you think this stuff is unique to Marx/communists or something? Socialism is incompatible with nazism, and Hitler's silly definition was only valid in his mind. It wasn't even a legit attempt, it's just a word he used to attract workers and left-leaning people.
>>1070789>capitalism good! usury bad!
He was spooked by petty bourgeois idealism
Do you know what private property is?
They privatised industries, rejected class struggle, killed communists of all persuasions, abolished democratic institutions that would serve the collective working class and they committed acts of imperialism and genocide.
Yeah, can you state your point?
>>1070105>What are the biggest divides that separate Nazis/fascist from socialist.
Nazis create class hierarchies, something that socialists want to abolish, and love sucking on their bosses. They lack sanity.
Good replies. Good info
The real question is how nazi can be considered leftist in the first place ? Unless you definition of leftism is some social security and some state intervention, there's nothing in national-socialism that is remotely leftist : the ideology is the epitome of anti-left.
leftism means democracy and egalitarianism
i think they can connect the dots with nazism
did the workers own the means of production?
and how many work hours did people work in nazi germany?
those are the two main ones i recall from the top of my head
Most conservatives/lolberts literally think the Nazis were socialist because they had word socialist in their name.
Rightoids created this meme that “left” and “right” are defined by the “size” of government. Size being defined by “how many laws does the government have” and vibes, for the most part.
Therefore, in their worldview, Nazis and Commies are both “Left Wing” aka “Socialist” because their governments supposedly were “bigger” compared to the Wild West frontier fantasy rightoids enjoy.
I like to imagine that burger conservatives believe that the president has a giant knob on his desk labeled "GOVERNMENT", which they can set from 1 to 11. Clearly when Joe Biden got into power, he cranked it all the way up which is why he's a communist.>>1074321>His tirade was about how a democratic system would have dragged down muh big personalities like them and eventually and inevitably it would also have dissolved any notion of private property and thus democracy = communism.
I knew Ayn Rand fans were already crypto-fascists, but this basically confirms that they share Hitler's exact views.
The fact that they were capitalist.
Self identification is a terrible way of judging someone's politics. Only look at their actions.
Just look at how many liberals consider themselves on the left for example.
>>1070522>WWII was leftist infighting
imagine the clowndom
Germany wasn't really centrally planned beyond pillaging for valuables and funding infrastructure though that's off top of my head to my recall. They had private businesses such as Fanta a subdivision that broke off from the Coca Cola company due to wartime for example.
who the fuck would i need to explain this to? most people intuitively understand they were far right
there were elements of central planning in the form of economic plans. basically the state wanted these things built and convinced the companies to follow through with these macroeconomic plans, by giving them subsidies in return. theres also the threat of competitors getting a gov contract which thus convinced firms to accept state contracts.
of course this wasnt microeconomic planning at all but just the gov saying oh we need more steel, we need more guns, we need more ammunition and etc so lets give the companies contracts to build them. The companies were pretty much the ones that built the factories and etc micro wise, its just the gov did ww2 dirigsme and directed them towards certain sectors by promising lots of funding
also the reason why i mentioned the central planning thing is because the guy behind the miracle of the rhine heavily criticized the nazi economy for having central planning mechanics
im not joking look it up
This is basic neoliberalism.
was that comment meant for this?>>1078167
and if it was okay i guess
As Goebbels famously said : "we have erased 1789 from history".
Clearly words having no meaning to rightoids is a long held tradition.
Nah. Nazis murdered socialists and commies because Hitler and Stalin had monthly chess games and Hitler kept losing.
Or maybe their was a lass that Hitler crushed on, but she was smitten by socialism, so Hitler took that too personally.
Stalin purged all rival communist movements such as the Trotskyists in "The Great Purge".
This is a secondary indicator at best since eliminating rivals is a trait of all authoritarian systems regardless of their position on the economic axis.
A primary indicator of what separates communism from national socialism, private ownership of capital would be my pick for this trait. Since no true communist government allows it because capitalism and communism are polar opposites and can not exist side by side without one being a parody of its true self.
Probably already said five times, but the only true answer is:
- Leftism doesn't exist.
- Nazis aren't socialists, and didn't even pretend to be after they assassinated the Strassers.
Anything really diverging from this is just coping mechanisms to rationalize a fundamentally broken framework, something any anti-capitalist should be embarrassed of.
>I'm talking about to a person who is not going to sit there and read long ass books you show them or studies how would you explain it.
This person isn't looking to be convinced, so first of all don't dance to their tune and try to "convince" them while they smirk and handwave every argument you throw at them. Turn the game around on them. When they quip that Nazis are leftists, demand they prove it. When they try explaining themselves, tell them they're wrong. Don't elaborate. Make them waste their time trying to justify themselves to you.
>>1091032>no UV bulb up the ass
I'll arbitrate this dispute quickly.
right for pointing out Nazi prevalence of private ownership was proof that they were not socialist, even though you then proceeded to post liberal cringe I could have taken straight from DailyKos.
Naxalite Flag anon >>1090961
was right for pointing out that thinking in terms of "libertarian vs authoritarian" and other political compass memes is retarded.
You are both correct on different counts. Now kiss and make up.
If you talk about authoritarianism, your mom’s a ho
It's not unique to Marx, yet neither is it universal to all pre-Marx socialists. Fourierists, for example, were creating companies where voting power was ascribed based on both capital contributed and hours worked, and they had private property and inheritance. That's obviously not compatible with a Marxist conception of socialism, and yet Fourierists are widely regarded as early utopian socialists. This term is bigger than your limited conception of it. I'm not defending Hitler or Nazi Germany at all, but they did a thing that was socialism in a general sense. It wasn't Marxism, nor did it claim to be. It let people extract wealth from corporations, but it was willing and able to replace those people if they didn't comply with the demands of the state, which they felt were for the welfare of the people.
There's also another YouTuber named TIKhistory who made a long-ass video explaining why the Nazis were socialists.
I usually just point out the fact that communist and fascist have been killing each other for the past couple of hundred of years. Though, it only does so much. As former lib the indoctrination and brainwashing is formidable
>>1102444>I usually just point out the fact that communist and fascist have been killing each other for the past couple of hundred of years.
To man, man is wolf. Do we say, therefore man is not man? Monotheists and Muslims have been killing each other for over a thousand years, but we understand that Muslims are also a type of monotheist.
i you want to survive you need at least a little collaboration, that said you can keep the "bourgeois" even if for me a leader of any side can be called "bourgeois" .
You can't build a stable country without good leader (nazi or commie i don't care)
that's why the only real poilitical views that seems highly irrealistic for are the full anarchist they just want global and constant chaos and that will never work .
We don't have to turn every descriptive claim into a hill to die on. Saying that the National Socialist German Workers' Party was socialist should be obvious and non-controversial. That doesn't mean it was a desirable party, nor that the Nazis were left-wing, nor that their movement reflects badly on those who use the term differently. Not all socialists are against class collaboration; to claim otherwise is to pull some No True Scotsman bullshit because you're too triggered to accept consensus definitions of words that include movements like Fourierism under the general banner of socialism.
because they werent
youre a fucking faggot
Unique IPs: 36