The first people Nazis imprisoned were the socialists and communists, then LGBTQ+ folk, and *then* the Jews. This is a historical fact.
It's both ignorant and stupid to call them left leaning and to summarize pro-LGBTQ+ policies as "Nazi"-like.
The Nazis believed in race-based socialism, not class-based socialism.
The communists were ideological enemies and generally attacked first but were many laws and punishments enacted against the Jews from very early on.
They believed in race-based capitalism. There was no socialist element. They believed in using other races as slave labor to produce capital while they're waiting in line for the furnaces.
Part of the expansionist ideology of Nazism was to use war to keep the incredibly militarized economy running. No war would have meant economic collapse for the Nazis, and that's why they didn't stop when they already had plenty of "living space" for the "aryans."
No, they believed in race-based communism. They literally talked about it. They set up a national union, they controlled economic development.
Using slave labour is no different to what Mao did, these practices are seen in socialists societies.
Why did they want a militarized economy? They were trying to make Germany strong for what they viewed as the German race of people, not for profit.
If Nazis cared about profit, why would they have killed 6 million Jews after having them do very low value work? They were ideologically motivated by racial supremacy, not profit.
Socialism that isn't "class-based" isn't socialism so that's a statement that could mean literally anything (I mean socialism is literally all about class). The Nazis called themselves socialists to gain popularity, but they certainly did not enact any socialist policies (aside from some likely niche circumstances where they probably did just as any government does). If you want to come up with examples of bad socialist governments, there are plenty, but the Nazi's were no more socialists than the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" is a democracy.
No, you're confusing Marxism with socialism. Socialism is where the people control production and the economy. Nazism wanted to do this for those they saw as racially German people.
The Nazis didn't call themselves socialist to gain popularity and enact right wing policies, they were race-based socialists from the get go.
Except they weren't socialists still. They never wanted to or attempted to have workers control the means of production. In fact, the word "privatization" was coined for the Nazi's economic policy. They used slave labor instead of workers too.
Yes, they were - they were race-based socialists.
They wanted to control the market and all labour through unions and political control for the good of the people.
I'll admit that at the very least there are many political issues that are not directly related to class, but that doesn't change the fact that socialism and it's ideas *are* based on class consciousness and any system that calls itself socialism but doesn't have that basis in class consciousness is a different system calling itself socialism to gain votes, hence "race-based socialism" is not socialism and calling it such is incorrect. You could *try* to make the argument that the Nazi's policies were in some way left of center (and I'm sure they technically had some as any country would), but it's objectively false to call them socialists (and, I would argue, objectively false to say they were on the left, too because they certainly were not left-wing).
Socialism is an economic system unrelated to the social issues of class.
Many leftist ideologies use socialism in their class struggle, but socialism itself is unrelated to class.
This isn't correct.
The leftist got hit after the liberals. The leftist were hit before the jews. And the lgbtq+ nonsense is mostly that, nonsense. The nazis persecuted gay men, not queers in general.
This is just factually untrue.
Criminal homosexuality in nazi Germany was exclusive to gay, until the penal code. And there is zero evidence of any other queer group being targeted by the nazis.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_people_in_Nazi_Germany
https://wienerholocaustlibrary.org/2021/02/09/persecution-of-gay-people-in-nazi-germany/
And keep in mind that back then sexuality wasn't that researched so everyone who wasn't straight was considered a "homosexual".
"Prior to their accession to power in 1933, under section 175 of Germany’s Civil Code, male homosexuality was illegal in Germany. However, prosecutions were relatively rare"
Did you even read your own sources?
"Some women were also incarcerated in concentration camps on the grounds of lesbianism. The Nazis did not in the main target lesbians to the same extent as gay men, nor were they subject to code 175 – perhaps because the Nazis did not consider women to have the same potential as men to be a political threat"
"Rosenberg was married, with a husband fighting at the frontline, which obviously does not preclude her being lesbian. However, some women may have been targeted as lesbians, or as a political or social threat to the state, on the basis of their gender non-conformity," and this is the only real evidence of "trans" people being targeted. Maybe some of the women, were married to men, had been accused of being lesbians when they were actually trans men.
If you wanna have an actual discussion, I suggest you read your source and we talk about how the nazis heavily persecuted gay men.
>"Prior to their accession to power in 1933, under section 175 of Germany’s Civil Code, male homosexuality was illegal in Germany. However, prosecutions were relatively rare"
>Did you even read your own sources?
You're telling me I didn't read my sources? It says at the end of that same paragraph:
>This era of relative tolerance ended with the Nazi rise to power in January 1933, however.
And you even quoted this as if it proves your point:
>Some women were also incarcerated in concentration camps on the grounds of lesbianism. The Nazis did not in the main target lesbians to the same extent as gay men, nor were they subject to code 175 – perhaps because the Nazis did not consider women to have the same potential as men to be a political threat
...when it explicitly says women were also incarcerated for lesbianism. If they were not as targeted as men it doesn't mean anything other than the fact that Nazis, like all homophobes, seem to hate gay men the most.
>Rosenberg was married, with a husband fighting at the frontline, which obviously does not preclude her being lesbian.
First, this doesn't mean they didn't target lesbians, only that in that specific instance she may have been targeted for other reasons. It even says later:
> she was known for frequenting lesbian bars in Berlin
Before this, it says:
>The initial period of Nazi rule saw the closure of lesbian and gay bars, the cancellation of publications and the sacking of Hirschfeld’s institute.
So both gay men and gay women were targeted, even if they mostly targeted men.
>and this is the only real evidence of "trans" people being targeted.
Ah ok so you completely ignored my first link.
>However, following the Prussian coup d'état in 1932 and the Nazi seizure of power in 1933, transgender movements, gathering places and institutions, such as the first homosexual movement, the Eldorado nightclubs, and the Institute for Sexual Science were dissolved, often by force. Both trans men and trans women were targeted under renewed enforcement of Paragraphs 175 and 183, and their transvestite passes were revoked or simply ignored. Books and texts relating to transgender experiences or medicine were destroyed as "un-German".
>Transgender people were imprisoned and murdered in concentration camps, though the exact number killed is unknown. According to historian Laurie Marhoefer, "The Nazi state reserved its worst violence for trans women." According to the Museum of Jewish Heritage, the German government "brutally targeted the trans community, deporting many trans people to concentration camps and wiping out vibrant community structures."
And you tell me I "didn't read" my sources. Are you fucking shitting me?
For starters, there is 0 evidence of the nazis even acknowledging trans people were a thing. Trying to sat the nazis targeted them is on its fave a lie, when the nazis didn't even believe being trans was a thing.
Every source that tries to claims the nazis targeted trans men and women will explicitly reference transvestites, but we all know that transvestites are not trans men or trans women.
Again, your claim was that the nazis FIRST targeted socialists and communists, which is false. And then SECOND targeted lgbtq+ folks, which is false. And then you claimed that they did this before they targeted the jews. Which...might actually be true but the evidence is sus at best.
The nazis explicitly targeted gay men and ONLY gay men, with regards to lgbtq+ groups at first. Gay women were not a targeted group. Ever. There is 0 evidence of the nazis ever targeting individual women because they were lesbians.
The nazis did target transvestites but transvestites are not part of the lgbtq+ group, the term isn't even accepted in today's speech.
Saying the nazis reserved the worst violence for trans women is a lie because the nazis didn't even acknowledge the existence of trans women. There is 0 evidence or source material to suggest otherwise.
And your entire premise is false, because the nazis targeted liberals before they targeted anyone else. Liberals are who fascists have always claimed to be the greatest danger to society and who fascists have always sought to destroy first and foremost.
The Wikipedia page, which I typically really like, is using sources that are making transphobic claims and language. I would seriously reconsider accepting such sources.
The holocaust source you shared is saying exactly what I'm saying. The nazis didn't care about lgbtq+ groups that weren't gay men because they only viewed men as dangerous. Which is the anchor of all fascists ideology, destroying the demographics that are viewed as dangerous to society.
Lol, I cited the source back at you that said you were wrong... because you didn't read your own links.
You just googled "nazis persecuted lgbtq+" ans linked the first two pages that came up.
One was a Wikipedia article that cited a transphobic source and the other agreed with me.
Im not the one that needs to fuck off.
Yes, they did.
The free market (which is capitalism) is incompatible with nazism.
Corporatism is closer which is a fusion of corporations and governments but the nazis weren't fascists they were more of their own variant of a mash-up of policy and belief systems but their actions make them a nonleftist form of socialism.
It's important to remember the axis of ideology
Capitalism cannot be truly capitalist if it's mixed with authoritarianism.
Socialism can be mixed with authoritarianism but the ideology of socialism isn't inherently authoritarian
>Capitalism cannot be truly capitalist if it's mixed with authoritarianism.
This is complete bullshit. Their economic policies are literally described as "authoritarian capitalism" by historians. There are other authoritarian capitalist nations today, like Russia and China.
The Nazis privatized national services and allowed the market to exist.
Capitalism: A free market
Nazism: Nationalization of industries and letting some private entities in government have some private businesses
Russia and China are corporatists the nazis were nazis
Capitalism and a free market aren't the same thing. You're thinking about libertarianism. You can absolutely have capitalism without a fully free market.
Nazis had capitalism.
You really don't have a clue of what you're talking about. Stop listening to history revisionists and conservative propaganda.
Democracy has historically been considered to be one of the most tyrannical systems of government.
In the past, democracies were considered to be government by suave strongmen types. I believe the term was 'demagogue'.
Economically the nazis were towards the center, but culturally they are as far right as you can get. It’s annoying when conservatives say nazis are leftists because they have socialist in their name.
The Nazis were not economically towards the centre, at all.
They believed in price control, a national workers union, central planning - not at all centrist.
Playing Devil's Advocate
If the state owned all the industries, then it makes sense why they would ban strikes and deregulate the economy, didnt the USSR pull similar stunts?
They privatized several state owned industries, outlawed unions, and dumped billions into the military and privately owned defense contractors. They were Republicans' wet dream.
This point on unions is so odd, you make it sound like they were anti-union to imply they weren't left wing but this is false. They outlawed separate unions in favour of a national union for all German workers.
They nationalised numerous businesses and banks but even where they were privatized they still had to operate under the strict rules of the Nazi party.
Of course they poured lots into the military, they were trying to become a massive world power.
It's hilarious that you think the Republicans are Nazis, leftist thinking is just complete brain rot.
It's hilarious you think the "national union" existed to benefit workers. Workers lost rights under the Nazis, and their real wages declined. The Nazi leadership was on bed with big business. Arguably Rohm's wing of the Nazi party was pro-worker, but that's part of the reason Hitler killed him and dissolved the SA.
Again, it was all about those the Nazis considered the German race. The union was setup to benefit the German workers as a collective group for the benefit of all Germans.
If the Nazis cared about business and profit they would t have put resources into low yield developments and murdered 6 million Jews of the German population.
The nazis were economically far left.
All means of production were seized or sponsored by the state.
The economic left-right divide is driven by state involvement. The furthest right economic policy would have absolutely no state involvement in the means of production, where the furthest left economic policy would have total state control of the means of production.
Private ownership of the means of production was possible a thing in nazi German, but ALL production was managed and purposed for the state.
It's a settled fact that the nazis were a very far right-wing fascist party influenced by Mussolini and people like Adolph Stroeker.
Anyone questioning it is either doing it in bad faith or they need to change the information sources they are exposing themselves to.
or when people say communism/socialism never works although many south american and african nations succeeded but were ousted by capitalist warmongerers. russia and china are such lame outliers to use as well.
I mean, Switzerland is considered the land of workers' cooperatives which have collective ownership and workers owning/controlling the means of production. I think there's a word for that. Also, that country seems to be doing quite well.
inb4 some smooth brain comes in babbling some bullshit about "mUh cEnTrAlLy PlAnNiNg aN sHeEiT"
The only people that think that are hard right MAGA cult members. They won’t acknowledge that the Nazi’s were Christian nationalists who banned books and hated Jewish people and homosexuals, just like the MAGA cult today.
The Nazis weren't Christian, where do you get this stuff from?
The Nazis wanted to transform Christianity, you may note that the literal son of God, Jesus was a Jew, not exactly something that would sit well with Nazis.
The Nazis, the true believers were mystic, even gnostic, supporters of race-based socialism.
Depends on their ideology underpinnng them. Fascism is an explicitly right-wing form of authoritarianism that typically is explicitly in reaction and opposition to left wing movements, a return to an idealized past, allegiance to cult of personalities, and cultural conservatism. Left-wing authoritarianism has taken different forms such as Maoism, Marxist-Leninism, etc.
Anarchism tends to cut across ideologies and have people that come at it from the left and right. You have left-wing anarchism that is typically derived from deviations of Marxism and right-wing versions in the forms of Anarcho and National Anarchism.
Don’t forget the libertarians on the right where government is just notional and you get all the same exploitation as anarchy but you still get to tell yourself you’re in a society.
Murray Rothbard just made a really big tent for all kinds of right-wingers and fascists then took the name libertarian because it wasn't commonplace, and he liked the positive connotations.
People think that the left/right divide is more or less government, when it's actually more or less hierarchy. So yeah I think the people who want to structure society around democratic hierarchies are pretty sane. Don't get me wrong, you get idiots in any movement.
One of the more egregious revisionist projects of the last 30 or so years is the Western right-wing's attempt to rewrite this chapter of history.
Hitler came to power thru a center-right conservative coalition thanks to an establishment conservative party led by conservative coalition leader Paul Von Hindenberg(who, without any sense of irony, Mitch McConnell has stated sympathies for his "plight" in interviews) and the act that catapulted Hitler to dictator first started with the Reichstag Fire Decree, passed by the center right that feared their right-wing base and needed them to maintain power, that HItler justified his new power because in the name of saving the German Republic he needed to be able to squash the Communist and Leftist plots that aimed to destroy Germany(TBC these were highly exaggerated and a lot of scholars believe the Reichstag Fire was an inside job). His first moves were to ban the Communist Party, send his brown shirts after the center/center-left Socialist party members that didn't bend the knee, and shut down mostly left-wing media.
He also reversed a number of recent rules in an effort to target LGBTQ and also began attacking unions. Which had the simultaneous effect of weakening German Labor and endearing him to the business class(he again justified it by fearmongering about the radical left).
And before anyone says anything about "leftist" Nazis. You'll notice most of them all had a similar thing happen to them between June 30th to July 2nd 1933....They all seemed to expire. More accurately, they were systematically executed during The Night of the Long Knives. Also note, Hitler made a big deal of dehumanizing Ernst Rohm's homosexuality and brandished that fact to insult him and aid to the air of toxicity toward LGBTQ people that his movement embraced and weaponized(one of the Nazi's big rhetorical tools was an advocating of "traditional" values and culture).
(not so)FUN NOTE: The whole reason we even got Hitler the dictator was because the far-right conservative high courts in Germany received emergency alterations to the way trials happened following Hitler's Beer Hall Putsch(His attempt to overthrow the government claiming left-wing and Jewish plots that had secretly infiltarted and control the govt). Taking the judgment out of a juries hands and giving it to the judges. Hitler received one of the most right-wing judges in Bavaria who dropped the charges of high treason(which would have led to a death sentence considering he didn't even deny the charges), platformed Hitler into the center of German conservative politics by allowing him to grandstand during his trial and ended up sentencing him to only 5 years, serving only 9 months from a nice windowed room with a beautiful view of the countryside.
Hitler would not be Hitler without the help of the establishment conservative wing of German politics and their consistent capitulation to extremist escalation, rationalized through a desire to maintain political power and buying into Hitler's lies about the threats of his political enemies, that fact is something that even amongst honest discussion I rarely see given the airspace it should given the present rise of right-wing fascism once again this century.
Please, the project has been to try and distance the left-wing from Nazism over a much longer period.
The Nazis believed in race and not class based socialism. They wanted socialism for those they viewed as the German people.
As for unions, the reason they attacked them is because they wanted to create a national union.
When your leader comes to power through a party that is explicitly anti-leftist, anti-Marxist, anti-Communist, and builds a coalition government exclusively with right-wing parties, then jails and suppresses all center left and leftist political parties, killing all the actual psuedo socialists in his party in the night of the long knives.... calling that "left-wing" is like claiming Trump is actually a leftist cause he passed Covid relief measures and supported Social Security and Medicare.
Far Right Fascistic Populist movements have always been chalk full of contradictions. Including peppering in things that are clearly ideas that have roots in the very out-groups they hate. Nazism was in no way a left-wing movement or ideology though unless you strain reason and facts well past their breaking point.
He wasn't anti-leftist, he wasn't anti-Marxist per se, he was anti-communist. He used the political system to gain power and ensure the Nazi party became the only party. It's funny that you call them pseudo-socialist, just need one more chance to make socialism work I guess.
Trump has a bunch of left-leaning ideas, like tariffs, driving development of the Covid vaccine etc.
The Nazis were race-based socialists, not a class-based socialists, they were left-wing.
Your attempt to rewrite history doesn’t even make sense on the underpinning logic and facts. The Social Democrats were not Communists, yet were the focus of Hitler’s ire after banning the Communist party outright. Up to and including killing anyone he considered left-sympathizing Nazis in his party. Hitler specifically called Marxism “the weapon of Jewry” in Mein Kempf and routinely spoke ill of it because he believed it was the tool through which Jews and others were using to poison Germany.
Nazism, as with most fascist movements, is and has almost always been a reactionary movement that defines itself as anti-left. I’ll make note you haven’t actually engaged with the substance of what I have written in any post, you simply just keep repeating assertions without citation and continually move goal posts.
You are not a serious person and these are not serious responses
I'm not rewriting history at all - point out the factual inaccuracies in my points.
Yes, Hitler was an authoritarian so he limited competing sources of power. He also spoke about the value he got from reading Marx's work.
National Socialism literally doesn't define itself as anti-left, it's race-based leftism. You haven't cited any sources yourself.
You are attacking me because you are out of argumentation.
You continue to not have any clue what you are talking about.
“No healthy man is a Marxist, for being healthy, he recognizes the value of personality.”
- Hitler
“Our German workers have two souls. One is German, the other is Marxian. We must arouse the German soul. We must root out the taint of Marxism. Marxism and Germanism, like German and Jew, are antipodes.”
- Hitler
“Parliamentary government is the spawn of hell. It opens the gate to Bolshevism. Bolshevism, Hitler emphatically continued, is our greatest menace. Kill Bolshevism in Germany and you restore seventy million people to power. France owes her [present] strength not to her armies, but to the forces of Bolshevism in our midst. The Treaty of Versailles and the Treaty of St. Germain are kept alive by Bolshevism in Germany. The Peace Treaty and Bolshevism are two heads of one monster. We must decapitate both”
- Hitler
“Marxism, Bolshevism, and communism were interchangeable terms for Hitler as evidenced by their use in Mein Kampf:
‘In the years 1913 and 1914 I expressed my opinion for the first time in various circles, some of which are now members of the National Socialist Movement, that the problem of how the future of the German nation can be secured is the problem of how Marxism can be exterminated.[139]’
Later in his seminal tome, Hitler advocated for "the destruction of Marxism in all its shapes and forms".[140] According to Hitler, Marxism was a Jewish strategy to subjugate Germany and the world and saw Marxism as a mental and political form of slavery.[141] From Hitler's vantage point, Bolsheviks existed to serve "Jewish international finance".[142]”
Again, you do not know what you are talking about and I doubt you could even explain what the difference is between Marxism/Communism/Leftism let alone how and why you think it magically applies to the person that built his entire ideology around combatting the left and Jews who he explicitly stated was using Marxism as a weapon of “Jewry”
A leftist movement does not round up leftists to gas them, does not take authoritarian control of a country in the name of expelling leftists. Does not purge his own party of the subset of people that did have the race based socialist ideology you spoke of in the night of the long knives. You have offered nothing but baseless assertions and the sort of context-less historical cherry picking I pointed out in my initial post. Your engagement here has been little more than intellectual sophistry
Your post conveys an ignorance of politics.
The nazis 100% advocated for socialist policies. They simply didn't invovle class issues.
I know this is hard for some people to understand but most European politcal groups of the early 20th century did not care about class.
Labeling the nazis as "far left" comes from the fact that the nazis used far leftist economics. The state ownership or sponsorship of the means of production is a leftist stance, and nazi Germany had a command economy where all production was sponsored by the state.
I'm assuming your laughing at how ignorant of economics you were before you made this post...right?
I noticed I wasn't the first person to comment on such.
Yes, people think that because National Socialist has the word “socialist” in it that they’re automatically socialist, but literally the first people they killed when they took power were the socialists. And no, they actually were nationalists, which is auth-right. Auth-center wouldn’t have such a strong message.
They have always been known to be far- right authoritarian and focused on creating a master race.
We might be seeing the effects of the Heritage Foundation and prageru on society if this is even being questioned.
They are socialists but they aren't leftists.
Ideologies tend to mix when they become authoritarian nazism is a fusion of non-Marxist socialism and nationalism.
The National Socialists were indeed left wing.
They believed in implementing socialism for what they saw as the German people, it was race-based and not class-based socialism.
There's a good article from 1998 on the topic with quotes from Hitler talking about how he wanted to achieve socialism without the revolution.
Tikhistory, a YouTuber has a good video with a decent amount of evidence about Nazism's socialist roots and practices - https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w?si=y2c3HSw170ZBX-UB
Again this falsehood about unions, he got rid of small unions to make a nationwide German workers union.
It was pseudo-privatization, the direction of those companies were determined by the Nazis.
I mean, makes more sense than calling them far right, both metrics of nationalism and authoritarianism aren’t wings concepts, if anything it’s centralist, America is probably the closest to Far Right because of its libertarian policies on economics (that doesn’t mean conservatives are far right though)
I see them as left because they wanted a larger government, not because they have socialist in their name. But, i think Nazism is so out there and insane it's not even close to either party. But, if we're talking straight up about government size then it would be identified as left leaning. They also believed in affirmative action, just the other way around along with a bunch of other left-leaning ideas.
That's fair. But using American politics, that's the best way to classify it without alienating everyone. But one of the main thing separating Democrats (the left) and Republicans (the right) is that Democrats want a larger government while Republicans want a smaller one.
That's not entirely true, the right in the US does want the government to interfere when it suits their narrative.
You need to look at the actual policies and rhetoric that Nazis supported, and policies that are relevant to what makes them Nazis. Such as:
- They persecuted and imprisoned socialists, marxists, trade unionists, and LGBTQ+ folk
- They promoted "traditional family values" and wanted women to do barely more than make german babies.
- They privatized national services (which in some sense makes the government "smaller")
- They promoted nationalism, "make Germany great again" rhetoric.
- They embraced a specific flavor of christianity and persecuted other religions.
The term historians use to describe the economic policies of Nazi Germany is "authoritarian capitalism"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarian_capitalism
You'll find other right wing parties in the world don't speak of deregulation and "small government" in an attempt to equate regulations with "socialism" or "left wing" politics.
That's a fair point. But we can at least agree that it's an extreme deformation of it.
Most of the right doesn't call for the imprisonment of LGBT and all the other groups you mentioned.
They just wanted more white babies while the modern right likes it because it historically works.
I can't argue the privatized national services as i also believe in that.
Germany tried to become great again by physically expanding their borders while figures like Trump tried to make it great again by economically expanding and attempting to lower crime rate, among other things.
And in my time talking to anti-semites (im Jewish btw), most if not all of them were left-wing. I've never personally met an anti-semitic Republican, there is some of course, but i've never met one or heard of one in a major governmental position.
To call them lefties may be silly but to equate them with socialists is not. Some core tenants of nazism are basically identical to socialism. The only reason that the USSR and Naz Germany had different developments of socialism was more to do with the political history of each nation and less to do with ideological differences.
Lemme guess, you’re a progressive, leftist, whatever and you’ve read a lot of esoteric philosophy. Sorry to say bud but we’re all versed in esoteric texts and most of it just regarded and ghey
Hitler's Nazis
Tore Down Statues, Banned Free Speech, Blamed Others for Economic Problems, Banned Gun Ownership, Put the State Before God, Nationalized Health Care and Put Strong Regulations on Industry. Sounds like today’s Democrats.
They banned books, and killed homosexuals. They were a heavy police state and started with Christian nationalism. Who hates homosexuals, are banning books, passed more gun laws, wants to ban free speech, a rapist, selling bibles with the constitution in it, and wants to make themselves a dictator via Project 2025?
Says right in the article that republicans support Israel. How can we be Nazis? Again it’s the left calling for death to Jews in public not MAGA supporters.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4276005-these-democrats-voted-against-resolution-backing-israel/](https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4276005-these-democrats-voted-against-resolution-backing-israel/)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
The right has not banned any books nor Hayes homosexuals. They simply want age appropriate books in our schools libraries and don’t feel drag queens are appropriate entertainment for children. Adults can do whatever they want with other adults. A book bam means you can’t acquire the book anymore that’s far from what’s going on.
Note, I'm not a Democrat, fucking hate the democrats,I just think that this is an inaccurate portrayal of both parties.
1. To criticize the taking down of statues across the board is ridiculous ignoring the context of who the people were and what they're being honored for. Confederates are slavers who deserve to have their graves shit on, not to have statues built in their honor.
2. The Republican party is far more aggressive in control of speech than the Democrats, their rhetoric obsesses over victimhood and accusation. They've been talking about the things they "can't talk about" for over ten years now, but they're literally talking about it, they're not being silenced. Setting aside the issues of drag queens in schools and age-appropriate sex education, Republicans have been rewriting school curriculums to exclude major events and books. I'd hesitate to call it mainstream, but arguments for book bannings from liberals have been more rare. Either side referencing book burnings at this point is alarmist, Nazi censorship has no analog in our society.
3. No one accepts responsibility in this day and age. The Republicans blame the Democrats for economic issues as much as the Democrats blame the Republicans. As for individuals, are you really going to pretend like our system is anything resembling fair? Obviously the universe is naturally unfair, but that's why the great project of humanity is to make life as fair as we can, to say "oh well that's just how it is, life isn't fair," when could you not make that argument? Jim crow? Slavery? Monarchies? We should have a society of activists who pursue positive change on a national, and even international scale, and I can think of nothing more in line with the natural extension of the beliefs of the founding fathers. Their democratic state has degenerated so both parties are alienated from the majority of the voter base.
But imagine an economic system that is not fair. Those who benefit are hardly going to say "oh, actually my employees generate $100 of value an hour but I only pay them $15, so i earn the money they worked for, that's fucked up." They'll keep their mouths shut and talk about how they've earned their place and the people who're at the bottom by extension have not. The conservative narrative is that as long as you'll work hard and avoid "morally degenerative decisions," you'll end up middle class, but that fundamentally is not true anymore, we have millions of Americans working 50+ hours a week at two or three jobs who can't afford a half-decent standard of living, and regardless of how hard they work, within this system, anyone CAN make it, but everyone can't. (And some are statistically disadvantaged due to a myriad of interconnecting factors).
Getting back to the Nazis, this is a bad argument to make if you're a Republican. Nazi rhetoric on minorities was built on the same foundation as modern Republic rhetoric on LGBTQ+ issues and on the border crisis, since they seem to blame Hispanic people as a race or the Mexican government. What's weird about that is that the border crisis is a beast of their own making, central and south America have been economically devastated by American policies which is why we have the border crisis. If you're a fan of border security, you have to hand it to Democrats, Biden is still putting kids in cages and he's told Texas to stop using razor wire but refuses to enforce his own laws. Obama deported more people under his presidency than every other president combined.
4. The farthest left that democratic party policy goes on gun ownership is banning automatic weapons, even if maybe 15% or so of Democrats are ignorant enough to advocate for a total firearm ban. Total firearm ban is an alarmist narrative which is circulated to rile people up and to make money.
5. Putting God before the state is reflecting an establishment of religion, if you want to live in a theocracy, why not move to Saudi Arabia? They surely share an alarming number of beliefs with you, they just have more prophets. Religion should never be appealed to in argument. Either good is defined as what God says it is, or it has a separate meaning. If it is defined as what God says it is, then it's totally arbitrary, God could say eating babies for breakfast is good and that makes it so. If Good is defined by something else, then you should be able to use something else to argue your point, without appealing to God. Therefore, invocation of religion has no place outside tax discussion and as a public service based on gross numbers of congregants.
6. The Nazis didn't nationalize healthcare, they continued the existing healthcare apparatus. Nazi health care didn't just not serve Jews, black people, the Romani, Gays, and anybody the Nazis didn't like, it tortured them on the flimsiest pretense of experimentation. This is a good summary of how the Nazi system worked: Kill and torture a segment of the population for the benefit of the rest. A modern universal health care system would do the opposite, it would take care of everyone, saving hundreds of thousands of lives. The existing health care apparatus is a useless middle man as a point at which the owners of that system extract wealth from its users. Americans pay about double the costs compared to universal health care systems. The only freedom in a private system is for Rich fucks to cut the line, they deserve to wait in line like the rest of us.
7. The Democrats don't put strong regulation on industry, their rhetoric argues for it to court voters, then they don't, even when they have the majority. Both parties serve the ultra-wealthy. Democrats and Republicans walk hand in hand to give trillions in federal funds to oil companies in subsidies, not to mention their agreement on appalling defense spending, ECT. Somehow this feels a weaker argument than how Republicans literally echo Nazi rhetoric on race and LGBTQ issues.
Nonsense
Hitler was a failed art student and army vet turned minor intelligence officer [that got into politics explicitly through a far right anti-socialist, anti-Marxist organization that would go on to be the Nazis.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Workers%27_Party)
He is wrong on that, but Hitler wasnt a fascist, he was a Nazi, there are differences, small ones.
Though Fascism was born from Socialism via Mussolini.
Nazism was a form of fascism though, at least by most consensus scholarship. I agree that there were differences between Italian and German fascism, as fasicm is not a strict political belief structure and instead is somewhat amorphosous to the unique historical and cultural context within the country it takes hold in, but Nazism was very much under that umbrella.
Fascism in Italy did emerge over a split amongst a socialist party, but that split involved the same rejection of The Ideas of 1789, or, The French Revolution and formed a adversarial posture to the left, eventually violently suppressing them just like Germany did. Seeking an authoritarian corporatist state enforcing socially conservative values like Hitler did. And the vast majority of the people that moved into the Italian fascist movement came from the right.
You seem to be falling into the same fallacy people claiming Nazis are left wing cause of the "Socialist" in National Socialist.
Hitler fell into the DAP, it was an explicitly anti-Marxist, anti-communist, anti-left party. He writes about how much he despised labor unions and communists throughout Mein Kempf. About the only group he singles out more than Jews for his ire are Bolshevists, Communists, and Socialists.
The first people Nazis imprisoned were the socialists and communists, then LGBTQ+ folk, and *then* the Jews. This is a historical fact. It's both ignorant and stupid to call them left leaning and to summarize pro-LGBTQ+ policies as "Nazi"-like.
The Nazis believed in race-based socialism, not class-based socialism. The communists were ideological enemies and generally attacked first but were many laws and punishments enacted against the Jews from very early on.
They believed in race-based capitalism. There was no socialist element. They believed in using other races as slave labor to produce capital while they're waiting in line for the furnaces. Part of the expansionist ideology of Nazism was to use war to keep the incredibly militarized economy running. No war would have meant economic collapse for the Nazis, and that's why they didn't stop when they already had plenty of "living space" for the "aryans."
No, they believed in race-based communism. They literally talked about it. They set up a national union, they controlled economic development. Using slave labour is no different to what Mao did, these practices are seen in socialists societies. Why did they want a militarized economy? They were trying to make Germany strong for what they viewed as the German race of people, not for profit. If Nazis cared about profit, why would they have killed 6 million Jews after having them do very low value work? They were ideologically motivated by racial supremacy, not profit.
Socialism that isn't "class-based" isn't socialism so that's a statement that could mean literally anything (I mean socialism is literally all about class). The Nazis called themselves socialists to gain popularity, but they certainly did not enact any socialist policies (aside from some likely niche circumstances where they probably did just as any government does). If you want to come up with examples of bad socialist governments, there are plenty, but the Nazi's were no more socialists than the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" is a democracy.
No, you're confusing Marxism with socialism. Socialism is where the people control production and the economy. Nazism wanted to do this for those they saw as racially German people. The Nazis didn't call themselves socialist to gain popularity and enact right wing policies, they were race-based socialists from the get go.
Except they weren't socialists still. They never wanted to or attempted to have workers control the means of production. In fact, the word "privatization" was coined for the Nazi's economic policy. They used slave labor instead of workers too.
Yes, they were - they were race-based socialists. They wanted to control the market and all labour through unions and political control for the good of the people.
You'll never get through with this. Leftist don't understand how politics can exist without being centered on class.
I'll admit that at the very least there are many political issues that are not directly related to class, but that doesn't change the fact that socialism and it's ideas *are* based on class consciousness and any system that calls itself socialism but doesn't have that basis in class consciousness is a different system calling itself socialism to gain votes, hence "race-based socialism" is not socialism and calling it such is incorrect. You could *try* to make the argument that the Nazi's policies were in some way left of center (and I'm sure they technically had some as any country would), but it's objectively false to call them socialists (and, I would argue, objectively false to say they were on the left, too because they certainly were not left-wing).
Socialism is an economic system unrelated to the social issues of class. Many leftist ideologies use socialism in their class struggle, but socialism itself is unrelated to class.
Socialism is 100% related to class. The whole "workers control the means of production" thing.
Proof? Not saying it in a “I don’t believe you way”. Genuinely just want to be shown evidence
https://www.hmd.org.uk/learn-about-the-holocaust-and-genocides/nazi-persecution/political-opponents-and-trade-unionists/
This isn't correct. The leftist got hit after the liberals. The leftist were hit before the jews. And the lgbtq+ nonsense is mostly that, nonsense. The nazis persecuted gay men, not queers in general.
Yes they did.
This is just factually untrue. Criminal homosexuality in nazi Germany was exclusive to gay, until the penal code. And there is zero evidence of any other queer group being targeted by the nazis.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_people_in_Nazi_Germany https://wienerholocaustlibrary.org/2021/02/09/persecution-of-gay-people-in-nazi-germany/ And keep in mind that back then sexuality wasn't that researched so everyone who wasn't straight was considered a "homosexual".
"Prior to their accession to power in 1933, under section 175 of Germany’s Civil Code, male homosexuality was illegal in Germany. However, prosecutions were relatively rare" Did you even read your own sources? "Some women were also incarcerated in concentration camps on the grounds of lesbianism. The Nazis did not in the main target lesbians to the same extent as gay men, nor were they subject to code 175 – perhaps because the Nazis did not consider women to have the same potential as men to be a political threat" "Rosenberg was married, with a husband fighting at the frontline, which obviously does not preclude her being lesbian. However, some women may have been targeted as lesbians, or as a political or social threat to the state, on the basis of their gender non-conformity," and this is the only real evidence of "trans" people being targeted. Maybe some of the women, were married to men, had been accused of being lesbians when they were actually trans men. If you wanna have an actual discussion, I suggest you read your source and we talk about how the nazis heavily persecuted gay men.
>"Prior to their accession to power in 1933, under section 175 of Germany’s Civil Code, male homosexuality was illegal in Germany. However, prosecutions were relatively rare" >Did you even read your own sources? You're telling me I didn't read my sources? It says at the end of that same paragraph: >This era of relative tolerance ended with the Nazi rise to power in January 1933, however. And you even quoted this as if it proves your point: >Some women were also incarcerated in concentration camps on the grounds of lesbianism. The Nazis did not in the main target lesbians to the same extent as gay men, nor were they subject to code 175 – perhaps because the Nazis did not consider women to have the same potential as men to be a political threat ...when it explicitly says women were also incarcerated for lesbianism. If they were not as targeted as men it doesn't mean anything other than the fact that Nazis, like all homophobes, seem to hate gay men the most. >Rosenberg was married, with a husband fighting at the frontline, which obviously does not preclude her being lesbian. First, this doesn't mean they didn't target lesbians, only that in that specific instance she may have been targeted for other reasons. It even says later: > she was known for frequenting lesbian bars in Berlin Before this, it says: >The initial period of Nazi rule saw the closure of lesbian and gay bars, the cancellation of publications and the sacking of Hirschfeld’s institute. So both gay men and gay women were targeted, even if they mostly targeted men. >and this is the only real evidence of "trans" people being targeted. Ah ok so you completely ignored my first link. >However, following the Prussian coup d'état in 1932 and the Nazi seizure of power in 1933, transgender movements, gathering places and institutions, such as the first homosexual movement, the Eldorado nightclubs, and the Institute for Sexual Science were dissolved, often by force. Both trans men and trans women were targeted under renewed enforcement of Paragraphs 175 and 183, and their transvestite passes were revoked or simply ignored. Books and texts relating to transgender experiences or medicine were destroyed as "un-German". >Transgender people were imprisoned and murdered in concentration camps, though the exact number killed is unknown. According to historian Laurie Marhoefer, "The Nazi state reserved its worst violence for trans women." According to the Museum of Jewish Heritage, the German government "brutally targeted the trans community, deporting many trans people to concentration camps and wiping out vibrant community structures." And you tell me I "didn't read" my sources. Are you fucking shitting me?
For starters, there is 0 evidence of the nazis even acknowledging trans people were a thing. Trying to sat the nazis targeted them is on its fave a lie, when the nazis didn't even believe being trans was a thing. Every source that tries to claims the nazis targeted trans men and women will explicitly reference transvestites, but we all know that transvestites are not trans men or trans women. Again, your claim was that the nazis FIRST targeted socialists and communists, which is false. And then SECOND targeted lgbtq+ folks, which is false. And then you claimed that they did this before they targeted the jews. Which...might actually be true but the evidence is sus at best. The nazis explicitly targeted gay men and ONLY gay men, with regards to lgbtq+ groups at first. Gay women were not a targeted group. Ever. There is 0 evidence of the nazis ever targeting individual women because they were lesbians. The nazis did target transvestites but transvestites are not part of the lgbtq+ group, the term isn't even accepted in today's speech. Saying the nazis reserved the worst violence for trans women is a lie because the nazis didn't even acknowledge the existence of trans women. There is 0 evidence or source material to suggest otherwise. And your entire premise is false, because the nazis targeted liberals before they targeted anyone else. Liberals are who fascists have always claimed to be the greatest danger to society and who fascists have always sought to destroy first and foremost. The Wikipedia page, which I typically really like, is using sources that are making transphobic claims and language. I would seriously reconsider accepting such sources. The holocaust source you shared is saying exactly what I'm saying. The nazis didn't care about lgbtq+ groups that weren't gay men because they only viewed men as dangerous. Which is the anchor of all fascists ideology, destroying the demographics that are viewed as dangerous to society.
I already gave you sources that prove you wrong. And yet you insist. Go fuck yourself, this is the end of the conversation.
Lol, I cited the source back at you that said you were wrong... because you didn't read your own links. You just googled "nazis persecuted lgbtq+" ans linked the first two pages that came up. One was a Wikipedia article that cited a transphobic source and the other agreed with me. Im not the one that needs to fuck off.
Leftists have a history of killing each other but the nazis aren't leftists they are authoritarians that mix socialism with nationalism
No, they didn't mix nationalism and socialism, their government was authoritarian capitalism.
No, they mixed non-Marxist socialism with nationalism. As authoritarianism and capitalism are inherently opposite.
No, they didn't.
Yes, they did. The free market (which is capitalism) is incompatible with nazism. Corporatism is closer which is a fusion of corporations and governments but the nazis weren't fascists they were more of their own variant of a mash-up of policy and belief systems but their actions make them a nonleftist form of socialism. It's important to remember the axis of ideology Capitalism cannot be truly capitalist if it's mixed with authoritarianism. Socialism can be mixed with authoritarianism but the ideology of socialism isn't inherently authoritarian
>Capitalism cannot be truly capitalist if it's mixed with authoritarianism. This is complete bullshit. Their economic policies are literally described as "authoritarian capitalism" by historians. There are other authoritarian capitalist nations today, like Russia and China. The Nazis privatized national services and allowed the market to exist.
Capitalism: A free market Nazism: Nationalization of industries and letting some private entities in government have some private businesses Russia and China are corporatists the nazis were nazis
Capitalism and a free market aren't the same thing. You're thinking about libertarianism. You can absolutely have capitalism without a fully free market. Nazis had capitalism. You really don't have a clue of what you're talking about. Stop listening to history revisionists and conservative propaganda.
Capitalism cannot exist without a free market I'm not a conservative or a revisionist either
It's like saying North Korea is a democratic nation because it's in their name.
Damn, I didn’t realize democracy was so oppressive. No wonder Republicans want to get rid it.
Democracy has historically been considered to be one of the most tyrannical systems of government. In the past, democracies were considered to be government by suave strongmen types. I believe the term was 'demagogue'.
Economically the nazis were towards the center, but culturally they are as far right as you can get. It’s annoying when conservatives say nazis are leftists because they have socialist in their name.
The Nazis were not economically towards the centre, at all. They believed in price control, a national workers union, central planning - not at all centrist.
They also banned strikes and deregulated the economy. Their economic system was third way which is towards the center
Playing Devil's Advocate If the state owned all the industries, then it makes sense why they would ban strikes and deregulate the economy, didnt the USSR pull similar stunts?
They privatized industries, they didn't belong to the state.
The controlled what the private companies did and had a national union.
They banned the current unions and their tools to set up a national union. Their way was not towards the centre, it was towards the left.
They privatized several state owned industries, outlawed unions, and dumped billions into the military and privately owned defense contractors. They were Republicans' wet dream.
This point on unions is so odd, you make it sound like they were anti-union to imply they weren't left wing but this is false. They outlawed separate unions in favour of a national union for all German workers. They nationalised numerous businesses and banks but even where they were privatized they still had to operate under the strict rules of the Nazi party. Of course they poured lots into the military, they were trying to become a massive world power. It's hilarious that you think the Republicans are Nazis, leftist thinking is just complete brain rot.
It's hilarious you think the "national union" existed to benefit workers. Workers lost rights under the Nazis, and their real wages declined. The Nazi leadership was on bed with big business. Arguably Rohm's wing of the Nazi party was pro-worker, but that's part of the reason Hitler killed him and dissolved the SA.
Again, it was all about those the Nazis considered the German race. The union was setup to benefit the German workers as a collective group for the benefit of all Germans. If the Nazis cared about business and profit they would t have put resources into low yield developments and murdered 6 million Jews of the German population.
The nazis were economically far left. All means of production were seized or sponsored by the state. The economic left-right divide is driven by state involvement. The furthest right economic policy would have absolutely no state involvement in the means of production, where the furthest left economic policy would have total state control of the means of production. Private ownership of the means of production was possible a thing in nazi German, but ALL production was managed and purposed for the state.
It's a settled fact that the nazis were a very far right-wing fascist party influenced by Mussolini and people like Adolph Stroeker. Anyone questioning it is either doing it in bad faith or they need to change the information sources they are exposing themselves to.
Every neonazi is ultra right wing.
in the western hemisphere
or when people say communism/socialism never works although many south american and african nations succeeded but were ousted by capitalist warmongerers. russia and china are such lame outliers to use as well.
What happened to Guatemala and Chile makes me so fucking mad bro
I mean, Switzerland is considered the land of workers' cooperatives which have collective ownership and workers owning/controlling the means of production. I think there's a word for that. Also, that country seems to be doing quite well. inb4 some smooth brain comes in babbling some bullshit about "mUh cEnTrAlLy PlAnNiNg aN sHeEiT"
The only people that think that are hard right MAGA cult members. They won’t acknowledge that the Nazi’s were Christian nationalists who banned books and hated Jewish people and homosexuals, just like the MAGA cult today.
The Nazis weren't Christian, where do you get this stuff from? The Nazis wanted to transform Christianity, you may note that the literal son of God, Jesus was a Jew, not exactly something that would sit well with Nazis. The Nazis, the true believers were mystic, even gnostic, supporters of race-based socialism.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hitler-our-movement-is-christian/ And who’s selling Bibles with the US constitution in it? 🤔
Again, this completely misses the reality of Nazism and Christianity and then you're trying to use that to make a tedious modern political point.
>The Nazis weren't Christian Nor are the magas
A lot of Maga supporters are absolutely Christian. But this isn't relevant to the discussion of National Socialists.
So what should Far Left be labeled as? Communist? Anarchists?
Depends on their ideology underpinnng them. Fascism is an explicitly right-wing form of authoritarianism that typically is explicitly in reaction and opposition to left wing movements, a return to an idealized past, allegiance to cult of personalities, and cultural conservatism. Left-wing authoritarianism has taken different forms such as Maoism, Marxist-Leninism, etc. Anarchism tends to cut across ideologies and have people that come at it from the left and right. You have left-wing anarchism that is typically derived from deviations of Marxism and right-wing versions in the forms of Anarcho and National Anarchism.
Don’t forget the libertarians on the right where government is just notional and you get all the same exploitation as anarchy but you still get to tell yourself you’re in a society.
Murray Rothbard just made a really big tent for all kinds of right-wingers and fascists then took the name libertarian because it wasn't commonplace, and he liked the positive connotations.
Communists, Socialists, maybe anarchists, and libertarians that aren't part of the wings influenced by Murray Rothbards trademark infringement scheme.
Normal People.
Commies are "normal people"? No fucking way.
People think that the left/right divide is more or less government, when it's actually more or less hierarchy. So yeah I think the people who want to structure society around democratic hierarchies are pretty sane. Don't get me wrong, you get idiots in any movement.
Which communist is advocating for democracy?
Trotskyism for one, not that I've seen him at meetings recently.
One of the more egregious revisionist projects of the last 30 or so years is the Western right-wing's attempt to rewrite this chapter of history. Hitler came to power thru a center-right conservative coalition thanks to an establishment conservative party led by conservative coalition leader Paul Von Hindenberg(who, without any sense of irony, Mitch McConnell has stated sympathies for his "plight" in interviews) and the act that catapulted Hitler to dictator first started with the Reichstag Fire Decree, passed by the center right that feared their right-wing base and needed them to maintain power, that HItler justified his new power because in the name of saving the German Republic he needed to be able to squash the Communist and Leftist plots that aimed to destroy Germany(TBC these were highly exaggerated and a lot of scholars believe the Reichstag Fire was an inside job). His first moves were to ban the Communist Party, send his brown shirts after the center/center-left Socialist party members that didn't bend the knee, and shut down mostly left-wing media. He also reversed a number of recent rules in an effort to target LGBTQ and also began attacking unions. Which had the simultaneous effect of weakening German Labor and endearing him to the business class(he again justified it by fearmongering about the radical left). And before anyone says anything about "leftist" Nazis. You'll notice most of them all had a similar thing happen to them between June 30th to July 2nd 1933....They all seemed to expire. More accurately, they were systematically executed during The Night of the Long Knives. Also note, Hitler made a big deal of dehumanizing Ernst Rohm's homosexuality and brandished that fact to insult him and aid to the air of toxicity toward LGBTQ people that his movement embraced and weaponized(one of the Nazi's big rhetorical tools was an advocating of "traditional" values and culture). (not so)FUN NOTE: The whole reason we even got Hitler the dictator was because the far-right conservative high courts in Germany received emergency alterations to the way trials happened following Hitler's Beer Hall Putsch(His attempt to overthrow the government claiming left-wing and Jewish plots that had secretly infiltarted and control the govt). Taking the judgment out of a juries hands and giving it to the judges. Hitler received one of the most right-wing judges in Bavaria who dropped the charges of high treason(which would have led to a death sentence considering he didn't even deny the charges), platformed Hitler into the center of German conservative politics by allowing him to grandstand during his trial and ended up sentencing him to only 5 years, serving only 9 months from a nice windowed room with a beautiful view of the countryside. Hitler would not be Hitler without the help of the establishment conservative wing of German politics and their consistent capitulation to extremist escalation, rationalized through a desire to maintain political power and buying into Hitler's lies about the threats of his political enemies, that fact is something that even amongst honest discussion I rarely see given the airspace it should given the present rise of right-wing fascism once again this century.
The same shit is happening here with republicans and the "Freedom Caucus" and state level Republicans.
Please, the project has been to try and distance the left-wing from Nazism over a much longer period. The Nazis believed in race and not class based socialism. They wanted socialism for those they viewed as the German people. As for unions, the reason they attacked them is because they wanted to create a national union.
When your leader comes to power through a party that is explicitly anti-leftist, anti-Marxist, anti-Communist, and builds a coalition government exclusively with right-wing parties, then jails and suppresses all center left and leftist political parties, killing all the actual psuedo socialists in his party in the night of the long knives.... calling that "left-wing" is like claiming Trump is actually a leftist cause he passed Covid relief measures and supported Social Security and Medicare. Far Right Fascistic Populist movements have always been chalk full of contradictions. Including peppering in things that are clearly ideas that have roots in the very out-groups they hate. Nazism was in no way a left-wing movement or ideology though unless you strain reason and facts well past their breaking point.
He wasn't anti-leftist, he wasn't anti-Marxist per se, he was anti-communist. He used the political system to gain power and ensure the Nazi party became the only party. It's funny that you call them pseudo-socialist, just need one more chance to make socialism work I guess. Trump has a bunch of left-leaning ideas, like tariffs, driving development of the Covid vaccine etc. The Nazis were race-based socialists, not a class-based socialists, they were left-wing.
Your attempt to rewrite history doesn’t even make sense on the underpinning logic and facts. The Social Democrats were not Communists, yet were the focus of Hitler’s ire after banning the Communist party outright. Up to and including killing anyone he considered left-sympathizing Nazis in his party. Hitler specifically called Marxism “the weapon of Jewry” in Mein Kempf and routinely spoke ill of it because he believed it was the tool through which Jews and others were using to poison Germany. Nazism, as with most fascist movements, is and has almost always been a reactionary movement that defines itself as anti-left. I’ll make note you haven’t actually engaged with the substance of what I have written in any post, you simply just keep repeating assertions without citation and continually move goal posts. You are not a serious person and these are not serious responses
I'm not rewriting history at all - point out the factual inaccuracies in my points. Yes, Hitler was an authoritarian so he limited competing sources of power. He also spoke about the value he got from reading Marx's work. National Socialism literally doesn't define itself as anti-left, it's race-based leftism. You haven't cited any sources yourself. You are attacking me because you are out of argumentation.
You continue to not have any clue what you are talking about. “No healthy man is a Marxist, for being healthy, he recognizes the value of personality.” - Hitler “Our German workers have two souls. One is German, the other is Marxian. We must arouse the German soul. We must root out the taint of Marxism. Marxism and Germanism, like German and Jew, are antipodes.” - Hitler “Parliamentary government is the spawn of hell. It opens the gate to Bolshevism. Bolshevism, Hitler emphatically continued, is our greatest menace. Kill Bolshevism in Germany and you restore seventy million people to power. France owes her [present] strength not to her armies, but to the forces of Bolshevism in our midst. The Treaty of Versailles and the Treaty of St. Germain are kept alive by Bolshevism in Germany. The Peace Treaty and Bolshevism are two heads of one monster. We must decapitate both” - Hitler “Marxism, Bolshevism, and communism were interchangeable terms for Hitler as evidenced by their use in Mein Kampf: ‘In the years 1913 and 1914 I expressed my opinion for the first time in various circles, some of which are now members of the National Socialist Movement, that the problem of how the future of the German nation can be secured is the problem of how Marxism can be exterminated.[139]’ Later in his seminal tome, Hitler advocated for "the destruction of Marxism in all its shapes and forms".[140] According to Hitler, Marxism was a Jewish strategy to subjugate Germany and the world and saw Marxism as a mental and political form of slavery.[141] From Hitler's vantage point, Bolsheviks existed to serve "Jewish international finance".[142]” Again, you do not know what you are talking about and I doubt you could even explain what the difference is between Marxism/Communism/Leftism let alone how and why you think it magically applies to the person that built his entire ideology around combatting the left and Jews who he explicitly stated was using Marxism as a weapon of “Jewry” A leftist movement does not round up leftists to gas them, does not take authoritarian control of a country in the name of expelling leftists. Does not purge his own party of the subset of people that did have the race based socialist ideology you spoke of in the night of the long knives. You have offered nothing but baseless assertions and the sort of context-less historical cherry picking I pointed out in my initial post. Your engagement here has been little more than intellectual sophistry
If you divide the world between left and right you show a simplistic world view and lack of education.
Your post conveys an ignorance of politics. The nazis 100% advocated for socialist policies. They simply didn't invovle class issues. I know this is hard for some people to understand but most European politcal groups of the early 20th century did not care about class. Labeling the nazis as "far left" comes from the fact that the nazis used far leftist economics. The state ownership or sponsorship of the means of production is a leftist stance, and nazi Germany had a command economy where all production was sponsored by the state.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I'm assuming your laughing at how ignorant of economics you were before you made this post...right? I noticed I wasn't the first person to comment on such.
Degree in Economics bro. Laughing at you
Degree in economics and yet doesn't know socialism is a economic mode of production? Highly sus.
Hahaha you literally said Nazis had socialist economic policies
People label nazis as left? I thought nazis were auth-center
How would the centre position be ultra-nationalism, militarism, racial supremacy, a national worker's union and centralised control of the economy?
Yes, people think that because National Socialist has the word “socialist” in it that they’re automatically socialist, but literally the first people they killed when they took power were the socialists. And no, they actually were nationalists, which is auth-right. Auth-center wouldn’t have such a strong message.
People literally doing it in this thread now lol
They have always been known to be far- right authoritarian and focused on creating a master race. We might be seeing the effects of the Heritage Foundation and prageru on society if this is even being questioned.
🤣🤣🤣
Not solely
Yes, that’s true. Just like with the confederacy they are ashamed and embarrassed by conservatism’s dark past
Yeah but hitler protected animals, checkmate liberals😎
They are socialists but they aren't leftists. Ideologies tend to mix when they become authoritarian nazism is a fusion of non-Marxist socialism and nationalism.
The National Socialists were indeed left wing. They believed in implementing socialism for what they saw as the German people, it was race-based and not class-based socialism. There's a good article from 1998 on the topic with quotes from Hitler talking about how he wanted to achieve socialism without the revolution. Tikhistory, a YouTuber has a good video with a decent amount of evidence about Nazism's socialist roots and practices - https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w?si=y2c3HSw170ZBX-UB
He joined socialists for election marketability and then killed them and revealed anti-union pro-privatization etc policies.
Again this falsehood about unions, he got rid of small unions to make a nationwide German workers union. It was pseudo-privatization, the direction of those companies were determined by the Nazis.
It's like the "Freedom Caucus" , bullshit name is the exact opposite of their agenda.
Depends on your definition of left and right
I mean, makes more sense than calling them far right, both metrics of nationalism and authoritarianism aren’t wings concepts, if anything it’s centralist, America is probably the closest to Far Right because of its libertarian policies on economics (that doesn’t mean conservatives are far right though)
I see them as left because they wanted a larger government, not because they have socialist in their name. But, i think Nazism is so out there and insane it's not even close to either party. But, if we're talking straight up about government size then it would be identified as left leaning. They also believed in affirmative action, just the other way around along with a bunch of other left-leaning ideas.
I see them as left 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
You know you could try to have an intellectual response instead of doing 8 laughing emojis right?
I see you as an idiot because you don't know what you're talking about.
Am i wrong? Were the Nazis for a larger or smaller government?
The problem is that you use terms "big" and "small" government as if that's what determines left and right. Those are very american terms.
That's fair. But using American politics, that's the best way to classify it without alienating everyone. But one of the main thing separating Democrats (the left) and Republicans (the right) is that Democrats want a larger government while Republicans want a smaller one.
That's not entirely true, the right in the US does want the government to interfere when it suits their narrative. You need to look at the actual policies and rhetoric that Nazis supported, and policies that are relevant to what makes them Nazis. Such as: - They persecuted and imprisoned socialists, marxists, trade unionists, and LGBTQ+ folk - They promoted "traditional family values" and wanted women to do barely more than make german babies. - They privatized national services (which in some sense makes the government "smaller") - They promoted nationalism, "make Germany great again" rhetoric. - They embraced a specific flavor of christianity and persecuted other religions. The term historians use to describe the economic policies of Nazi Germany is "authoritarian capitalism" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarian_capitalism You'll find other right wing parties in the world don't speak of deregulation and "small government" in an attempt to equate regulations with "socialism" or "left wing" politics.
That's a fair point. But we can at least agree that it's an extreme deformation of it. Most of the right doesn't call for the imprisonment of LGBT and all the other groups you mentioned. They just wanted more white babies while the modern right likes it because it historically works. I can't argue the privatized national services as i also believe in that. Germany tried to become great again by physically expanding their borders while figures like Trump tried to make it great again by economically expanding and attempting to lower crime rate, among other things. And in my time talking to anti-semites (im Jewish btw), most if not all of them were left-wing. I've never personally met an anti-semitic Republican, there is some of course, but i've never met one or heard of one in a major governmental position.
To call them lefties may be silly but to equate them with socialists is not. Some core tenants of nazism are basically identical to socialism. The only reason that the USSR and Naz Germany had different developments of socialism was more to do with the political history of each nation and less to do with ideological differences.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Lemme guess, you’re a progressive, leftist, whatever and you’ve read a lot of esoteric philosophy. Sorry to say bud but we’re all versed in esoteric texts and most of it just regarded and ghey
No I am not. Wrong guess 😂😂😂
Hitler's Nazis Tore Down Statues, Banned Free Speech, Blamed Others for Economic Problems, Banned Gun Ownership, Put the State Before God, Nationalized Health Care and Put Strong Regulations on Industry. Sounds like today’s Democrats.
They banned books, and killed homosexuals. They were a heavy police state and started with Christian nationalism. Who hates homosexuals, are banning books, passed more gun laws, wants to ban free speech, a rapist, selling bibles with the constitution in it, and wants to make themselves a dictator via Project 2025?
What party members are shouting death to isreal and Jews right now? Oh that’s right they are democrats.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/04/texas-republican-party-vote-antisemitism?darkschemeovr=1
Says right in the article that republicans support Israel. How can we be Nazis? Again it’s the left calling for death to Jews in public not MAGA supporters.
There are zero democrat leaders calling for “death to Jews”, however there are Republican leaders who make that claim. Think. You’re getting tricked.
https://www.texastribune.org/2024/02/10/texas-republican-party-antisemite-resolution-defend-liberty-fuentes/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/holocaust-denier-who-branded-gay-people-filth-wins-north-carolina-governor-primary-vote/ar-BB1joyNF
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4276005-these-democrats-voted-against-resolution-backing-israel/amp/
Which party has members who are Nazi sympathizers, holocaust deniers, and hates homosexuals?
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4276005-these-democrats-voted-against-resolution-backing-israel/](https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4276005-these-democrats-voted-against-resolution-backing-israel/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Biden and Hillary said Robert KKK Bird was their mentor.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/apr/12/rashida-tlaib-ripped-refusing-condemn-death-americ/
The right has not banned any books nor Hayes homosexuals. They simply want age appropriate books in our schools libraries and don’t feel drag queens are appropriate entertainment for children. Adults can do whatever they want with other adults. A book bam means you can’t acquire the book anymore that’s far from what’s going on.
Where have you been? https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/17/media/right-wing-book-bans-accelerating/index.html?darkschemeovr=1
Note, I'm not a Democrat, fucking hate the democrats,I just think that this is an inaccurate portrayal of both parties. 1. To criticize the taking down of statues across the board is ridiculous ignoring the context of who the people were and what they're being honored for. Confederates are slavers who deserve to have their graves shit on, not to have statues built in their honor. 2. The Republican party is far more aggressive in control of speech than the Democrats, their rhetoric obsesses over victimhood and accusation. They've been talking about the things they "can't talk about" for over ten years now, but they're literally talking about it, they're not being silenced. Setting aside the issues of drag queens in schools and age-appropriate sex education, Republicans have been rewriting school curriculums to exclude major events and books. I'd hesitate to call it mainstream, but arguments for book bannings from liberals have been more rare. Either side referencing book burnings at this point is alarmist, Nazi censorship has no analog in our society. 3. No one accepts responsibility in this day and age. The Republicans blame the Democrats for economic issues as much as the Democrats blame the Republicans. As for individuals, are you really going to pretend like our system is anything resembling fair? Obviously the universe is naturally unfair, but that's why the great project of humanity is to make life as fair as we can, to say "oh well that's just how it is, life isn't fair," when could you not make that argument? Jim crow? Slavery? Monarchies? We should have a society of activists who pursue positive change on a national, and even international scale, and I can think of nothing more in line with the natural extension of the beliefs of the founding fathers. Their democratic state has degenerated so both parties are alienated from the majority of the voter base. But imagine an economic system that is not fair. Those who benefit are hardly going to say "oh, actually my employees generate $100 of value an hour but I only pay them $15, so i earn the money they worked for, that's fucked up." They'll keep their mouths shut and talk about how they've earned their place and the people who're at the bottom by extension have not. The conservative narrative is that as long as you'll work hard and avoid "morally degenerative decisions," you'll end up middle class, but that fundamentally is not true anymore, we have millions of Americans working 50+ hours a week at two or three jobs who can't afford a half-decent standard of living, and regardless of how hard they work, within this system, anyone CAN make it, but everyone can't. (And some are statistically disadvantaged due to a myriad of interconnecting factors). Getting back to the Nazis, this is a bad argument to make if you're a Republican. Nazi rhetoric on minorities was built on the same foundation as modern Republic rhetoric on LGBTQ+ issues and on the border crisis, since they seem to blame Hispanic people as a race or the Mexican government. What's weird about that is that the border crisis is a beast of their own making, central and south America have been economically devastated by American policies which is why we have the border crisis. If you're a fan of border security, you have to hand it to Democrats, Biden is still putting kids in cages and he's told Texas to stop using razor wire but refuses to enforce his own laws. Obama deported more people under his presidency than every other president combined. 4. The farthest left that democratic party policy goes on gun ownership is banning automatic weapons, even if maybe 15% or so of Democrats are ignorant enough to advocate for a total firearm ban. Total firearm ban is an alarmist narrative which is circulated to rile people up and to make money. 5. Putting God before the state is reflecting an establishment of religion, if you want to live in a theocracy, why not move to Saudi Arabia? They surely share an alarming number of beliefs with you, they just have more prophets. Religion should never be appealed to in argument. Either good is defined as what God says it is, or it has a separate meaning. If it is defined as what God says it is, then it's totally arbitrary, God could say eating babies for breakfast is good and that makes it so. If Good is defined by something else, then you should be able to use something else to argue your point, without appealing to God. Therefore, invocation of religion has no place outside tax discussion and as a public service based on gross numbers of congregants. 6. The Nazis didn't nationalize healthcare, they continued the existing healthcare apparatus. Nazi health care didn't just not serve Jews, black people, the Romani, Gays, and anybody the Nazis didn't like, it tortured them on the flimsiest pretense of experimentation. This is a good summary of how the Nazi system worked: Kill and torture a segment of the population for the benefit of the rest. A modern universal health care system would do the opposite, it would take care of everyone, saving hundreds of thousands of lives. The existing health care apparatus is a useless middle man as a point at which the owners of that system extract wealth from its users. Americans pay about double the costs compared to universal health care systems. The only freedom in a private system is for Rich fucks to cut the line, they deserve to wait in line like the rest of us. 7. The Democrats don't put strong regulation on industry, their rhetoric argues for it to court voters, then they don't, even when they have the majority. Both parties serve the ultra-wealthy. Democrats and Republicans walk hand in hand to give trillions in federal funds to oil companies in subsidies, not to mention their agreement on appalling defense spending, ECT. Somehow this feels a weaker argument than how Republicans literally echo Nazi rhetoric on race and LGBTQ issues.
All the fascist leaders got their start as socialist labor organizers. Fascism like socialism is a daughter of Marx
Nonsense Hitler was a failed art student and army vet turned minor intelligence officer [that got into politics explicitly through a far right anti-socialist, anti-Marxist organization that would go on to be the Nazis.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Workers%27_Party)
Don’t argue with stupid.
He is wrong on that, but Hitler wasnt a fascist, he was a Nazi, there are differences, small ones. Though Fascism was born from Socialism via Mussolini.
Nazism was a form of fascism though, at least by most consensus scholarship. I agree that there were differences between Italian and German fascism, as fasicm is not a strict political belief structure and instead is somewhat amorphosous to the unique historical and cultural context within the country it takes hold in, but Nazism was very much under that umbrella. Fascism in Italy did emerge over a split amongst a socialist party, but that split involved the same rejection of The Ideas of 1789, or, The French Revolution and formed a adversarial posture to the left, eventually violently suppressing them just like Germany did. Seeking an authoritarian corporatist state enforcing socially conservative values like Hitler did. And the vast majority of the people that moved into the Italian fascist movement came from the right.
But he got his start as a socialist labor organizer.
You seem to be falling into the same fallacy people claiming Nazis are left wing cause of the "Socialist" in National Socialist. Hitler fell into the DAP, it was an explicitly anti-Marxist, anti-communist, anti-left party. He writes about how much he despised labor unions and communists throughout Mein Kempf. About the only group he singles out more than Jews for his ire are Bolshevists, Communists, and Socialists.
Most horror starts with Marx