How many liberals here equate conservatives with Nazis/Fascists?
I am not asking this to start a fight, but rather to get some idea of the people I will be dealing with here.
How many liberals here equate conservatives with Nazis/Fascists?
I am not asking this to start a fight, but rather to get some idea of the people I will be dealing with here.
Conservatives are too reactionary and weak to be fascists. That requires initiative and willpower.
No.
Maybe some are, but generally no.
I was going to say the same thing. Nazi’s and Fascist’s are extremes and are a rarity. Most people are actually politically moderate, they just lean a little more to the left or right.
This is test will show you where your own views put you on the political scale. It also compares you to some of the historic figures. Hitler, Stalin, Ghandi, etc.
Here is a list of the U.S presidential candidates on that same scale.
politicalcompass.org/usprimaries2007
and a few of the historic figures.
politicalcompass.org/analysis2
Quite interesting actually. I scored right near the middle but leaning right and libertarian.
The problem with the political compass test is that it is made by libertarians and so it actually has a very strong libertarian bias to it. It is actually fairly difficult to score significantly outside that bracket.
Here is a comparison of a variety of different internet fora, you’ll notice the bias quite clearly.
Fascist is a term used by a kid when Dad won’t let him use the car.
This political compass is a farce designed to make most people appear to be a libertarian.
How do you come to that conclusion?
Experience. The stupid thing even said that I am a libertarian, which is absolutely untrue. I hate libertarians as much as I hate liberals.
Fascist?
No they’re just intellectually lazy.
Please defend that claim.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush
What kind of populace critical of their conceptual prowess would vote in such a simple minded one trick pony? This is intellectual laziness – being content to march ahead into ever-increasing-in-complexity world while ignoring other trains of thought just to appease colonialistic imperialism – an ancient concept indicative of my very point.
Arguing this is like arguing the sky is blue – conservatives are traditionalists. Liberals are cynical athiests so intent on being right and floating around in a existential ‘anything is possible – I’m just one man’ bullshit that they’re equally as devoid of any truly relevant thought-process.
Both of of these – the 0 and 1 which represent the binary prison of ignorance that was erected long ago. Which is what the OP is talking about — anything outside of these two views which argue amongst themselves and go nowhere — anything relevant – is viewed as irrelevant.
Actually quite the opposite. Nazis believe in strong government, the nation state and collectivism. Sounds like socialism to me.
left wing socialist totalitarians can’t abide with the thought that the german national socialist party was one of their own
-Imp
Hitler denied Capitalism and Socialism because they both had the “evil Jew hiding in there mist”. The equality of the German people, and the subsequent meritocracy that Hitler advocated, was a matter of race. It was not a socialist argument for power lying in the hands of the proletariat, but a racial argument for all Germans being equally superior to Jews and Gypsies. A single united Aryan class presenting a strong stance against the Jew.
Because it wasn’t, which you’d know if you didn’t buy into your own rhetoric. It quite clearly based itself upon Mussolini’s corporatism, which was a syndicalist heresy promoting class cooperation, not class warfare. I understand that it’s convenient for rightist reactionary imbeciles to take the ‘Socialism’ for granted while forgetting that many ‘socialist’ parties (e.g. the Fabians) are quite emphatically not. Do me a favor next time and don’t.
Impenitent:
democritus:
Actually quite the opposite. Nazis believe in strong government, the nation state and collectivism. Sounds like socialism to me.
left wing socialist totalitarians can’t abide with the thought that the german national socialist party was one of their own
-Imp
Because it wasn’t, which you’d know if you didn’t buy into your own rhetoric. It quite clearly based itself upon Mussolini’s corporatism, which was a syndicalist heresy promoting class cooperation, not class warfare. I understand that it’s convenient for rightist reactionary imbeciles to take the ‘Socialism’ for granted while forgetting that many ‘socialist’ parties (e.g. the Fabians) are quite emphatically not. Do me a favor next time and don’t.
thank you for the insults.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program
pay attention to the 25 points…
-Imp
Dionysus:
Impenitent:
democritus:
Actually quite the opposite. Nazis believe in strong government, the nation state and collectivism. Sounds like socialism to me.
left wing socialist totalitarians can’t abide with the thought that the german national socialist party was one of their own
-Imp
Because it wasn’t, which you’d know if you didn’t buy into your own rhetoric. It quite clearly based itself upon Mussolini’s corporatism, which was a syndicalist heresy promoting class cooperation, not class warfare. I understand that it’s convenient for rightist reactionary imbeciles to take the ‘Socialism’ for granted while forgetting that many ‘socialist’ parties (e.g. the Fabians) are quite emphatically not. Do me a favor next time and don’t.
thank you for the insults.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program
pay attention to the 25 points…
-Imp
Pay attention to the fact that Hitler usurped the movement from Drexler, had one of the Strasser brothers eliminated, had another flee into hiding, and undermined Goebbel’s socialistic tendencies by offering him a high appointment if he were to swing to the ‘Hitlerite’ side.
“National and socialist! What goes first, and what comes afterwards?†Goebbels asked rhetorically in a debate with Theodore Vahlen, Gauleiter (regional party head) of Pomerania, in the Rhineland party newspaper National-sozialistische Briefe (National-Socialist Letters), of which he was editor, in mid 1925. “With us in the west, there can be no doubt. First socialist redemption, then comes national liberation like a whirlwind… Hitler stands between both opinions, but he is on his way to coming over to us completely.â€[14] Goebbels, with his journalistic skills, thus soon became a key ally of Strasser in his struggle with the Bavarians over the party programme. The conflict was not, so they thought, with Hitler, but with his lieutenants, Rudolf Hess, Julius Streicher and Hermann Esser, who, they said, were mismanaging the party in Hitler’s absence. In 1925, Goebbels published an open letter to “my friends of the left,†urging unity between socialists and Nazis against the capitalists. “You and I,†he wrote, “we are fighting one another although we are not really enemies.â€[15]
In February 1926, Hitler, having finished working on Mein Kampf, made a sudden return to party affairs and soon disabused the northerners of any illusions about where he stood. He summoned about 60 gauleiter and other activists, including Goebbels, to a meeting at Bamberg, in Streicher’s gau of Franconia, where he gave a two-hour speech repudiating the political programme of the “socialist†wing of the party. For Hitler, the real enemy of the German people was always the Jews, not the capitalists. Goebbels was bitterly disillusioned. “I feel devastated,†he wrote. “What sort of Hitler? A reactionary?†He was horrified by Hitler’s characterisation of socialism as “a Jewish creation,†his declaration that the Soviet Union must be destroyed, and his assertion that private property would not be expropriated by a Nazi government. “I no longer fully believe in Hitler. That’s the terrible thing: my inner support has been taken away.â€[16]
Hitler, however, recognised Goebbels’s talents, and he was a shrewd judge of character—he knew that Goebbels craved recognition above all else. In April, he brought Goebbels to Munich, sending his own car to meet him at the railway station, and gave him a long private audience. Hitler berated Goebbels over his support for the “socialist†line, but offered to “wipe the slate clean†if Goebbels would now accept his leadership. Goebbels capitulated completely, offering Hitler his total loyalty—a pledge which was clearly sincere, and which he adhered to until the end of his life. “I love him… He has thought through everything,†Goebbels wrote. “Such a sparkling mind can be my leader. I bow to the greater one, the political genius. Later he wrote: “Adolf Hitler, I love you because you are both great and simple at the same time. What one calls a genius.â€[17] Fest writes:
From this point on he submitted himself, his whole existence, to his attachment to the person of the Führer, consciously eliminating all inhibitions springing from intellect, free will and self-respect. Since this submission was an act less of faith than of insight, it stood firm through all vicissitudes to the end. ‘He who forsakes the Führer withers away,’ he would later write.
So, no, Hitlerism is not a socialist position. The Nazi Party began as a putschish working class movement, but was quite soon hijacked by Hitler, who promptly ousted the Strassers, Drexler, etc.
Born in Bavaria, he took part in World War I and returned to Germany in 1919 where he served in the Freikorps that put down the Bavarian Soviet Republic. At the same time, he also joined the Social Democratic Party. In 1920 he participated in the opposition to the Kapp Putsch. However, he grew increasingly alienated with that reformist-socialist party’s stand, particularly when it put down a workers’ uprising in the Ruhr, and he left the party later that year. In 1925 he joined the Nazi (National Socialist) Party, which his brother had been a member of for several years, and worked for its newspaper as a journalist, ultimately taking it over with his brother. He took the socialist element in the party’s programme seriously enough to lead a very socialist-inclined faction of the party in northern Germany together with his brother Gregor and Joseph Goebbels. His faction advocated support for strikes, nationalisation of banks and industry, and - despite acknowledged differences - closer ties with the Soviet Union. Some of these policies were opposed to by Hitler, who thought they were too radical and too alienating from parts to the German people (middle class and some Nazi-supporting nationalist industrialists in particular), and the Strasser faction was defeated at the Bamberg Conference (1926), with Joseph Goebbels joining Hitler. Humiliated, he nonetheless, along with his brother Gregor, continued as a leading Left Nazi within the Party, until expelled from the NSDAP by Hitler in 1930.
Following his expulsion, he set up his own party, the Black Front, composed of radical ex-Nazis, in an attempt to split the Nazi Party. Here his lack of intense Anti-Semitism was displayed by his willingness to associate with a Jewish exile from Germany named Helmut Hirsch, who would later be executed for an attempted plot on Hitler. His party proved unable to counter Hitler’s rise to power in 1933, and Strasser spent the years of the Third Reich in exile. The Nazi Left itself was annihilated during the Night of the Long Knives in 1934 (in which his brother perished), leaving Hitler as undisputed party leader and able to pacify both industrialists and the military into accepting his new National Socialist regime. In addition to the “Black Front”, Dr. Strasser also at this time headed the Free German Movement outside Germany which sought to enlist the aid of Germans all over the world in bringing about the downfall of Hitler and Nazism.
thank you for the insults.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program
pay attention to the 25 points…
-Imp
Nice article…
…Henry A. Turner holds that many of the program’s vague calls for economic reform and pro-labor legislation, as well as its endorsement of democratic politics, went directly contrary to Hitler’s own social Darwinist views and dictatorial ambitions. Furthermore, he noted that the program’s calls for land reform and anti-trust legislation threatened the interests of the big business tycoons whose support and funding Hitler was trying to acquire (though his efforts in this direction proved largely unsuccessful).[8] Since he could not abolish the program entirely without causing a stir among the party’s voters, Hitler chose to ban all discussion of it instead and hoped it would be largely forgotten.[9]
What’s that? Hitler used it to manipulate the Socialist elements of German Society? That cannot be, whatever Hitler and the Third Reich officially claimed as there platform, must have been what they practiced…ZZZZZZ…Just like the fact that it’s called the National Socialist Party means that it’s socialist…ZZZZZZ
Impenitent:
thank you for the insults.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program
pay attention to the 25 points…
-Imp
Nice article…
…Henry A. Turner holds that many of the program’s vague calls for economic reform and pro-labor legislation, as well as its endorsement of democratic politics, went directly contrary to Hitler’s own social Darwinist views and dictatorial ambitions. Furthermore, he noted that the program’s calls for land reform and anti-trust legislation threatened the interests of the big business tycoons whose support and funding Hitler was trying to acquire (though his efforts in this direction proved largely unsuccessful).[8] Since he could not abolish the program entirely without causing a stir among the party’s voters, Hitler chose to ban all discussion of it instead and hoped it would be largely forgotten.[9]
What’s that? Hitler used it to manipulate the Socialist elements of German Society? That cannot be, whatever Hitler and the Third Reich officially claimed as there platform, must have been what they practiced…ZZZZZZ…Just like the fact that it’s called the National Socialist Party means that it’s socialist…ZZZZZZ
Conservatives, you will find, cannot ever admit to nationalism being a bad thing, for it deprives them of their own sense of collectivity which they want so much to deny. They’re as collectivist as the hardcore Stalinist, simply on another level (the nation vs. the class).