I would literally drive one up your ass to if you called me a kike in person, but cowards like you only do it over the intranets.
I am offended by you making shit up to smear my civilisation and Id slap you on the face in person too. How is that? Kike.
Mussolini was a communist, and that is the way he framed fascism. That is what fascism is.
You highlighted where he says framing something in terms of class warfare is vain as proof that he is not a communist.
All that would happen is that you would unfortunately get raped.
Just kidding, you are free to have your idiot opinions bro. I am a democrat.
Sounds fair.
Put on some mass, maybe you will get a chance but I dont mess around nowadays. Kicks to the groin, eye pokes and eye gouging, headbutts and something at hand on your head if its there.
Hahahahahahahaha
Ain’t that the way it always is.
Seriously though, I would rape you if you call me a kike in person.
'ere ya go, ladies. This is a copy and paste thing so there are hot links in there that aren’t showing. I’d link u to the page on quora but i can’t get it opened in a new window with its own link. Nevermind.
Anyway I’m binge watching the WW2 high definition in color series so I ain’t bout to type a long ass post plus homegirl says it all better and’s got dates and places and shit.
The question: Were The Nazis and the Fascists Left-Wingers and Socialists?
First, not everyone who calls him/herself a ‘socialist’ is a socialist, just as King Crabs aren’t Kings, the East River in New York isn’t a river, and the State of Rhode Island isn’t an island. Indeed, just as not everyone who calls him/herself a Republican is a Republican. Ever heard of the phrase “Republican in name only” [RINO]? The “Nationalist” part of “Nazism” [Nazi = National Socialist] negates the “Socialist” part — rather like “Atheism, big government, pro-choice, open borders, greatly reduced military expenditure, and high taxation” would negate Republicanism.
[Although, having said that, it now appears that RINOs are those Republicans who fail to give Trump 100% support.]
Of course, there are critics who ignore the above and who retort “It’s in their name, for goodness sake — ‘National Socialist’!” In that case I am sure they also believe that the regime in N Korea is democratic since that’s in their name, too: the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”.
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
The growth of universal suffrage since the turn of the 20th century has meant that if any party (whether of the right, the centre or even the ‘acceptable’ left) wants to win electoral support they have to offer the electorate popular-sounding policies. After WW1, Germany was dominated by the largest socialist party on the planet, the SPD, and a very large communist party, the KPD, as well as other leftist groups. If the Nazis ever hoped to win power, they had to offer popular, socialist-looking policies in order to draw support from those left-wing parties, and they had to choose a name that suggested they were serious about implementing them.
Since then, we have witnessed something similar in ‘the west’ — for example, both Republican and Democratic parties in the USA pretend to be the party of working people, even though, when in power, they do sod all for ordinary people. Same here in the UK, and the rest of Europe. Despite this, we can see how sincere the Nazis were when in office; they sided with big capital from the get-go, and destroyed all the institutions of working class power (unions and parties) almost as quickly.
For these reasons, the Nazis incorporated the word “socialist” in their title — they wouldn’t choose “communist” because of the involvement of the KPD in the failed German Revolution of 1918–23, and because the Nazis were an anti-Bolshevik party. Unlike the KPD, the SPD had been at the forefront of the fight against that revolution, so the word “socialist” wasn’t ‘tainted’ in the eyes of ordinary Germans.
Far more important than what a party says, however, is what it does when in power. As noted above, the Nazis in office fully supported the capitalist system, as did the fascists in Italy, Spain, Chile and Portugal. Hence, they were pretend anti-capitalists. In that case, the Nazis were ‘socialist’ in name only, and had nothing whatsoever to do with socialism as such —
aniceguy:what are you even talking about? you make zero sense bro. just because somebody accepts the fact of class warfare and wants to do something about it, knowing its dangers, means he is a communist? go get treatment.
Mussolini was a communist, and that is the way he framed fascism. That is what fascism is.
You highlighted where he says framing something in terms of class warfare is vain as proof that he is not a communist.
'ere ya go, ladies. This is a copy and paste thing so there are hot links in there that aren’t showing. I’d link u to the page on quora but i can’t get it opened in a new window with its own link. Nevermind.
Anyway I’m binge watching the WW2 high definition in color series so I ain’t bout to type a long ass post plus homegirl says it all better and’s got dates and places and shit.
Comrade Rosa Lichtenstein:The question: Were The Nazis and the Fascists Left-Wingers and Socialists?
First, not everyone who calls him/herself a ‘socialist’ is a socialist, just as King Crabs aren’t Kings, the East River in New York isn’t a river, and the State of Rhode Island isn’t an island. Indeed, just as not everyone who calls him/herself a Republican is a Republican. Ever heard of the phrase “Republican in name only” [RINO]? The “Nationalist” part of “Nazism” [Nazi = National Socialist] negates the “Socialist” part — rather like “Atheism, big government, pro-choice, open borders, greatly reduced military expenditure, and high taxation” would negate Republicanism.
[Although, having said that, it now appears that RINOs are those Republicans who fail to give Trump 100% support.]
Of course, there are critics who ignore the above and who retort “It’s in their name, for goodness sake — ‘National Socialist’!” In that case I am sure they also believe that the regime in N Korea is democratic since that’s in their name, too: the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”.
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
The growth of universal suffrage since the turn of the 20th century has meant that if any party (whether of the right, the centre or even the ‘acceptable’ left) wants to win electoral support they have to offer the electorate popular-sounding policies. After WW1, Germany was dominated by the largest socialist party on the planet, the SPD, and a very large communist party, the KPD, as well as other leftist groups. If the Nazis ever hoped to win power, they had to offer popular, socialist-looking policies in order to draw support from those left-wing parties, and they had to choose a name that suggested they were serious about implementing them.
Since then, we have witnessed something similar in ‘the west’ — for example, both Republican and Democratic parties in the USA pretend to be the party of working people, even though, when in power, they do sod all for ordinary people. Same here in the UK, and the rest of Europe. Despite this, we can see how sincere the Nazis were when in office; they sided with big capital from the get-go, and destroyed all the institutions of working class power (unions and parties) almost as quickly.
For these reasons, the Nazis incorporated the word “socialist” in their title — they wouldn’t choose “communist” because of the involvement of the KPD in the failed German Revolution of 1918–23, and because the Nazis were an anti-Bolshevik party. Unlike the KPD, the SPD had been at the forefront of the fight against that revolution, so the word “socialist” wasn’t ‘tainted’ in the eyes of ordinary Germans.
Far more important than what a party says, however, is what it does when in power. As noted above, the Nazis in office fully supported the capitalist system, as did the fascists in Italy, Spain, Chile and Portugal. Hence, they were pretend anti-capitalists. In that case, the Nazis were ‘socialist’ in name only, and had nothing whatsoever to do with socialism as such —
You seriously believe we are going to waste a second of our time reading that stupid shit?
Yes, I do believe you are going to waste a second of your time.
But not by reading that stupid shit.
What happened to all that “Il Duce” shit? You’re past that now?
Yes, I do believe you are going to waste a second of your time.
But not by reading that stupid shit.
That is absolutely correct.
I’m gonna go play chess.