Nazis were right wing, not left

[Pannonian]

Took me a long time to find this. Why Nazis were considered right wing:




This is the german Reichstag from 1919 - DNVP is one of the ancestors of the Nazi party - and thats the simple reason why they were considered right wing. Again - that doesn't mean anything about right wing today, it doesn't mean that if you're right you're a Nazi, and yes, there are many "normal" politicians who are economically more on the right side than Hitler (Thatcher, Clinton). But my point is still that its just stupid to take the name "national socialist" and go around proclaiming "yeah... they were socialists and therefore left" - i can even agree on "they are neither left nor right by our modern standards" - but historically they've been a right wing party and sprouting the opposite is just dishonest....

[Belize]

That's exactly what a nazi would say.

Only Nazis accuse others of being Nazis. Checkmate.

[Deleted]

because he was to the right of the fucking communists.
That's it -

Actually, right of moderate parties like the SPD and the Zentrum.

EDIT: Like Pannonian posted.

[Deleted]

Took me a long time to find this. Why Nazis were considered right wing:




This is the german Reichstag from 1919 - DNVP is on of the ancestors of the Nazi party - and thats the simple reason why the were considered right. Again - that doesn't mean anything about right wing today, it doesn't mean that if you're right you're a Nazi, and yes, there are many "normal" politicians who are economically more on the right side as Hitler (Thatcher, Clinton). But my point is still that its just stupid to take the name "national socialist" and go around proclaiming "yeah... they were socialists and therefore left" - i can even agree on "they are neither left nor right" - but historically they've been a right wing party and sprouting the opposite is just dishonest....

The best modern comparison to the NSDAP today is what they used to be DAP, the german workers party. (minus literally all of the genocide mind you).
You might know them locally as the social democratic party (yet another derivation of socialism).

[RobertMugabe]

Guys, just because Nationalsozialism has the word "socialism" in it, doesn't mean it has anything to do with it. Ofc when you compare complex political systems, ideologies etc. you will find similarities, but just because SOME today's left-leaning politics agree with that of the Nazis, doesn't mean that Nazism is left. Nazism is a regional and more specific form of Fascism and Fascism is all in all seen as a more extreme form of today's right-wing politics, especially on topics about society.

And thus Nazism was, is and always will be seen as right wing

[Hashtronaut]

But I just want to educate people! Don't you know that knowledge is power?

I have to say though that to watch this forum become an echo of several socio-psychological theory is absolutely fascinating. Like the horseshoe theory, which I have in my profile picture, which shine in this thread.

You're on the right? You're a Neo-Nazi Fascist! You're on the left? You're a Communist Fascist!

And then both sides fail to see their infinite hypocrisy, trying to rationalize their absolutely invalid arguments by pinpointing outlying extremists and then generalizing it to a group.

Like this: If X is a Y, and A is a Y, this mean that all actions made by X represents everyone in Y, including A.

If a conservative is on the right and the alt-right is on the right, this mean that actions made by the alt-right represents all people on the right, including conservatives.

If a moderate is on the left and an authoritarian left is on the left, this mean that actions made by the authoritarian left represents all people on the left, including moderates.

And I mean, the hypocrisy doesn't just stop there. When Obama won back in 2008, a lot of pro-evangelist nutjobs went outside and made quite a bit of damage. The US looked utterly stupid back then.

So therefore, when the democrats clamored that the Trump supporters should stand down if their candidate win in a democratic fashion, they never expected themselves to lose. Of course not, because otherwise they'd be massive hypocrites to be outside and doing riots right now, no? Actually, they are.

In fact, and this is really the icing on the cake, the only person who actually respected the democracy through her loss in all of this is Hillary Clinton herself. Not her strong supporters; they're the ones making the riots. She and only she.

/rant

Preach!
But, honestly this is just how people (who actually have no intention on agreeing and just promoting/protecting their own egos) argue.

Funny how you know my intentions. I don't intend to bash all people on the right side as nazis; on the contrary i brought this subject up as its used more and more to attack the left wing and every socialist ("nationalSOCIALIST"), and i just think thats dishonest, as Nazis have never been seen on the left side for all their lifetime.

To be fair, I believe he wasn't attacking you or your intentions, more so what the arguments tend to degrade into.

[RobertMugabe]

you are closing in on your 1488 post i see

XD /10char

[Deleted]

Actually, right of moderate parties like the SPD and the Zentrum.

EDIT: Like Pannonian posted.

the modern definition of the scale (the one that began life in an american context after the war) put Communism and Nazism at opposite edges because they fought amongst themselves.

[Mayhem]

Facism was in the time considered as the third way - next to captialism and communism. That doesn't mean it outside of a spectrum.

Probably though this is the reason why its so hard to pinpoint for some people (by definitions) as our current perception of the spectrum is heavily influenced by the post-WW2 struggle between communism on the one and capitalism on the other side.

For the time nazism was a thing there was no doubt about it being right-wing, as by the 1930s this was still done after the original system of seating order for parties in the original german Reichstag, where nationalists were without a doubt right wing. (The rise of left-wing nationalist is a more recent invention)

People will keep confusing traditional left right with not traditional left right for decades to come i fear.

[Deleted]

An example of Hitler's political spectrum back in the 1930s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harzburg_Front

A right-wing coalition.

[Pannonian]

Guys, just because Nationalsozialism has the word "socialism" in it, doesn't mean it has anything to do with it. Ofc when you compare complex political systems, ideologies etc. you will find similarities, but just because SOME today's left-leaning politics agree with that of the Nazis, doesn't mean that Nazism is left. Nazism is a regional and more specific form of Fascism and Fascism is all in all seen as a more extreme form of today's right-wing politics, especially on topics about society.

And thus Nazism was, is and always will be seen as right wing

Probably a much better comparison than my first post

[Daws]

Doesn't it basically come down to the Nazi's where neither left or right they used elements of both. Problem is simple minded people can't perceive outside of left and right and face a simple reality - who cares they where evil and they were defeated. Honestly stop trying to score points from which side should take ownership of the Nazi's.

[Shadowferal]

Hmm...interesting...from German National People's Party

Between 1925 and 1928, the party slightly moderated its tone and actively cooperated in successive governments. In the presidential election of 1925, the DNVP supported Karl Jarres for president, who was defeated in the first round by Zentrum's Wilhelm Marx, who however failed to gain a majority. Fearing that Marx would win the second round (something made the more likely by the fact that the SPD's Otto Braun had dropped out to endorse Marx), Admiral Tirpitz made a dramatic visit to the home of the retired Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg to ask him to run for the second round in order to "save" Germany by gaining the presidency for the right. Tirpitz persuaded Hindenburg to run, and though Hindenburg won the election as a non-party candidate, the DNVP strongly supported the Field Marshal. General Otto von Feldmann of the DNVP worked very closely with Hindenburg during the 1925 election as Hindenburg's "political agent". Despite the move to the center at the level of high politics, at the grass-roots of the party the opposite direction prevailed. Starting in 1924, the DNVP's newsletter for women (which was written entirely by female volunteers) started to vehemently insist that German women only marry a "Nordic man" and raise their children to be racists. From the mid-1920s onwards, the women party activists started to draft plans calling for the end of all "Jewish cultural influence" in Germany, banning Jews from working as teachers and writers, making eugenics into state policy with a new class of bureaucrats to be called "racial guardians" to be created in order to assess a couple's "racial worth" before allowing them to marry or not, and breaking German citizenship into two grades of those allowed to marry and those who would not.
-------------------

But then I suppose we all knew racism and Nazism went hand in glove.

[Deleted]

the modern definition of the scale (the one that began life in an american context after the war) put Communism and Nazism at opposite edges because they fought amongst themselves.

It's not modern. Socialism and communism (and anarcho-syndicalism) were considered the last stage of liberalism in the late 1800s/1900s, so they were usually on the left-wing of the assemblies.

[Sodia]

Wow MMO Cham hit a new bottom ... Now you change History and Definitions of things ?? how much SJW this website can be ?? You wont be happy until you reach buzzfeed and feminist frequency level of crap ??

[Elim Garak]

The meaningless label is actually the meaningless label not the meaningless label. It is so meaningless.

[Deleted]

This video was put out by the Nazis in 1935, it explains fascism perfectly.

That video is Nazi propaganda.

[Deleted]

Hmm...interesting...from German National People's Party

Then they lost seats to the NSDAP and became a junior party.

[Deleted]

Guys, just because Nationalsozialism has the word "socialism" in it, doesn't mean it has anything to do with it. Ofc when you compare complex political systems, ideologies etc. you will find similarities, but just because SOME today's left-leaning politics agree with that of the Nazis, doesn't mean that Nazism is left. Nazism is a regional and more specific form of Fascism and Fascism is all in all seen as a more extreme form of today's right-wing politics, especially on topics about society.

And thus Nazism was, is and always will be seen as right wing

Not all political questions are social in nature, you get that right?
And fascism is, was, and will always continue to be a syncretic political ideology - Just because you are socially conservative does not mean you are fiscally conservative, or the other way around.
Focusing on only one specific area and ignoring the other issues is not helpful.

[Independent voter]

Here's an interview with the guy who came up with the phrase "alt-right". Just a typical racist like we had back in the 1950's only he tries to make it more palatable for a larger audience.

He's the same guy who go punched yesterday, or was it the day before...



KELLY MCEVERS, HOST:
The new chief strategist for President-elect Donald Trump once said a website he used to run, Breitbart News, is a platform for the so-called alt-right. We're about to hear more about that movement from the man who says he came up with the term alt-right. His name is Richard Spencer, and in 2008, he began arguing there should be an alternative to George W. Bush-era Republicans and conservatives.
Richard Spencer now runs a small think tank that pushes alt-right ideas. To be clear, the alt-right movement is also a white nationalist movement that's associated with racism, misogyny and anti-Semitism. What the alt-right wants, Spencer says, is an awakening of identity politics, meaning white identity politics.
The alt-right used to exist mostly on the Internet, but with the rise of Donald Trump and his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, the movement is starting to hold conferences where hundreds of people attend. Spencer and others in the alt-right movement were suspended from Twitter this week. But now that Trump has been elected, Spencer says he believes the alt-right will continue to grow.
RICHARD SPENCER: This is the first time we've really entered the mainstream, and we're not going away. I mean this is just the beginning. And I'm very excited.
MCEVERS: Just a warning here. There are words and phrases and ideas in the next seven minutes that many people will find offensive, even hateful. But because this group has influence, we think you should hear what the alt-right is and what it wants from a Trump administration. So I ask Spencer that, and he said his end goal is a white ethno state sometime in the future.
SPENCER: What I would ultimately want is this ideal of a safe space effectively for Europeans. This is a big empire that would accept all Europeans. It would be a place for Germans. It would be a place for Slavs. It would be a place for Celts. It would be a place for white Americans and so on.
For something like that to happen and really for Europeans to survive and thrive in this very difficult century that we're going to be experiencing, we have to have a sense of consciousness. We're going to have to have that sense of identity.
MCEVERS: Going forward, should only white European people be considered U.S. citizens?
SPENCER: Well, no, I mean the citizenship of the United States - like, this is not something that can be changed right away. So I mean I think we need to differentiate identity and citizenship.
MCEVERS: So in your idea, like, there's a United States of America where different people still have citizenship but they're living in separate enclaves; they're living in places where they are kept separate from one another.
SPENCER: What I'm saying is that Europeans defined America. They defined what it is. Of course there are people who are non-European who are here, who are citizens and so on. What I would...
MCEVERS: Who many would argue also defined America.
SPENCER: Sure, and they did to a certain degree. But European people were the indispensable central people that defined this nation socially and politically and culturally and demographically obviously.
I care about us more. That's all I'm saying. But I respect identitarians of other races. And I actually can see eye to eye with them in a way that your average conservative can't.
MCEVERS: But you also believe that people of different races inherently do not get along. Isn't that right?
SPENCER: I think world history believes that (laughter). I mean I don't - it's not just my opinion. I don't see very many counterexamples.
MCEVERS: So you ride the subway in New York City. And you're sitting in a subway car, and you're looking at people from all over everywhere. And nobody's punching each other. Nobody's stabbing anyone. Everyone's going about their life, going to work, you know? You don't see that as, like, a way where people are getting along?
SPENCER: Do we really like each other? Do we really love each other? Do we really have a sense of community in that subway car? What I see are a lot of...
MCEVERS: Or a cul-de-sac or in kindergarten.
SPENCER: Whenever many different races are in the same school, what will happen is that there'll be a natural segregation at lunchtime, at PE, at - in terms of after-school play.
MCEVERS: Richard Spencer's views are obviously not easy to hear, but we do think they're important to hear because of the link between the alt-right and Donald Trump's team. I asked Richard Spencer what policies he's pushing for - natural conservation, he said, a foreign policy that's friendlier to Russia and this.
SPENCER: Immigration is the most obvious one. And I think we need to get beyond thinking about immigration just in terms of illegal immigration. Illegal immigration is not nearly as damaging as legal immigration. Legal immigration - they're here to stay. Their children are here and so on.
And I think a really reasonable and I think palatable policy proposal would be for Donald Trump to say, look; we've had immigration in the past. It's brought some fragmentation. It's brought division. But we need to become a people again. And for us to do that, we're going to need to take a break from mass immigration. And we're going to need to preference people who are going to fit in, who are more like us. That is European immigration.
MCEVERS: You know, how likely do you think it is that some of these policies that you want to see happen will happen?
SPENCER: What I want is influence. And sometimes influence can be invisible. If we can get these ideas out there, if people can see the compelling and powerful nature of them, I think we really can change policy.
MCEVERS: I just want to go down a list of things. And you tell me if they are OK or not OK.
SPENCER: OK.
MCEVERS: Graffiti that says make America white again.
SPENCER: I don't - look; graffiti is illegal, but...
MCEVERS: The slogan make America white again.
SPENCER: I don't have a huge problem with that I mean that people...
MCEVERS: OK.
SPENCER: ...Are just expressing their opinion.
MCEVERS: Swastikas.
SPENCER: A swastika is an ancient symbol. I don't - like, you know, if you're asking me, do I have a problem with people expressing themselves and maybe, you know...
MCEVERS: With a swastika.
SPENCER: People want to express themselves. They can do whatever they want.
MCEVERS: So that's an OK - wearing white robes or hoods like the KKK.
SPENCER: Look. I'm - you're not going to get me to condemn any of this because you haven't said anything that is really fundamentally illegal or immoral. I might not agree with some people. I might not like this. I might like that, not like that. But the fact is these are people expressing themselves. I'm not going to condemn any of that.
MCEVERS: Do you agree with those expressions?
SPENCER: I agree with people who want to get in touch with their identity as a European. That can take a number of different forms. I don't support any kind of physical threats or anything like that. I think that does cross the line.
But in terms of people coming to terms with who they are, I don't oppose it. And I actually would respect - deeply respect the right of non-white people to try to understand themselves and to express themselves as they see fit.
MCEVERS: What about Republicans in particular?
SPENCER: Not a fan.
MCEVERS: Right.
SPENCER: Well, I like their voters. Like, the voters are great. I - the fact that they just chose Donald Trump - that is great. I love them. In terms of Republican operatives, in terms of the conservative movement - not a fan.
MCEVERS: I guess I'm thinking of just Republicans in general - like, people maybe who did - who also voted for Donald Trump but who will say, you know, that your views are racist and are extreme and don't have a place in this country. How do you deal with them?
SPENCER: If I had told you in 1985 that we should have gay marriage in this country, you probably would have laughed at me. And I think most people would have. Or at least - at the very least, you would have been a bit confused, and you would have told me, oh that's ridiculous. The fact is, opinions do change. People's consciousness does change. Paradigms are meant to be broken. That's what the alt-right is doing.
MCEVERS: That was Richard Spencer, the leader of the so-called alt-right, a white nationalist movement that supported Donald Trump. Spencer says he is not in contact with the Trump transition team. We asked the Trump team to comment about links between Chief Strategist Steve Bannon and the alt-right, but we did not hear back.