This was written by blitzenxxxx on Yahoo’s AR List. She previously repeatedly stated that she’s a Nazi:
National Socialists are not “far right” or even generally right wing nor are they fascists. It will not be long before this is realised. Already conservatives are becoming much louder in their protests that the so-called “far right” are more like the “far left”. They are correct. We are about National/ethnic unity and collective cooperation for our people, not about capital and individualism.
(Emphasis by GW)
It’s good that we are in agreement here.
I don’t see any difference between Socialists and Nazis, except that the former hate whites and the latter hate blacks (in both cases, the word “hate” is appropriate.) I can’t think of any other issue on which they disagree. (Maybe gays, but considering the huge number of semi-openly gay leaders and “artists” in the Nazi movement, I think there’s a tremendous amount of tolerance for homosexuals and even pedophiles in the National-Socialist movement.)
Both want a large government, both want this country to disarm, neither feels any compassion for the death of people they don’t like, and even on other issues like abortion, New Deal (Hitler was a big fan), etc the two sides are in complete agreement.
I’ve argued since the beginning that the right, the conservatives should distance themselves from the Nazis. I’m glad to see that the Nazis feel the same way about us.
Let them and their “collective cooperation” go their own way. Oh, and isn’t there a simpler word for “collective cooperation? Wait, let me think. Yes, it’s socialism.
Left and Right can refer to either economics or social policies. In either case, Left suggests more state control and Right suggests less state control. It’s hard to make a case that National Socialists favored less state control in either economics or social policies. Regardless, the confusion results not so much from people not knowing what National Socialiam is as not knowing what Left and Right mean. So, if you are ever in a discussion and the topic comes up simply ask your acquaintance if they know what Left and Right mean. If they don’t then explain it. It’s fun to watch the little light bulbs come on.
Nazism was right wing in Germany because the other option were Communists and then-Marxist Social-Democrats. (The difference between the two was like the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks in Russia, both Marxist, but one more democratic than the other.)
So yes, Nazism is to the right of those.
However, Lenin in Soviet Russia was a right-wing too. The only options were to the Left of him and he was widely criticized by them for selling out the Revolution in embracing NEP and other policies (before and after NEP).
That’s why Lenin wrote “Left Wing Communism is an Infantile Disorder.” He didn’t like “left-wing communism”, as opposed to his own, more right-wing brand of communism.
But on the American scale, both the Nazis and the Socialists/Communists belong on the Left.
GW-
You’re making a case for relativism. Obviously, socialism is to the right of communism. And even among various socialist philosphies some are more to the right than others. But that doesn’t make them Right because they are still left of center.
I didn’t mean that Lenin is a right-winger (or Hitler, for that matter).
I just meant that the only reason Hitler was reasoned to be a right-winger in Germany was that he was to the right of his opponents, but he wasn’t a true right-winger.
- His economic policy was based on the New Deal.
- He liberalized abortion.
- He was the first political leader who embraced environmentalism.
- He didn’t believe in marriage and got married only on the day of his death.
I can go on if you need me to, but the point is that Hitler was not a right-winger, he was just to the right of his German opposition.
Just as Lenin being to the right of his opposition in the early 1920s didn’t make him a right-winger, neither does the above make Hitler a “conservative.”
Nazism might be the exception that disproves the Left/Right continuum.
Maybe politics is really just a question of Who Rules?
In traditional societies all over the world, the spirit world, a pantheon or God is the ultimate ruler. Whoever the earthly rep (Emperor, king, etc.), he’s got to justify his decisions by referring to the deity, revealed words, traditions, etc.
Every other form of political organization I can think of basically involves knocking God, the spirits, pantheon, tradition etc. off of their pedestal and putting something/someone up instead.
Liberalism=Individual (see Kalb, Auster, et al.)
Marxism=Proletariat/working class
Nazism=Race/Nation
Fascism=Dear Leader/the State
And so on.
Can anyone think of an ideology that doesn’t follow this rule?
Can anyone suggest a sensible way of reducing these politics to Left vs. Right?
And to the question, are the Nazis “Rightist”? Well, if we’re calling ourselves Rightist/conservative, in the sense that we’re conserving our traditional ways, then no, not by a long shot.
Fred-
“Left suggests more state control and Right suggests less state control.”
That’s brilliant. You have reached the rarified intellectual plateau of Jonah Goldberg.
Its refreshing that 21st Century Americans have finally realized that Monarchy and Autarchy are the ultimate state of leftism.
We must always be on guard against radical revolutionary leftists like Franz Joseph and Bismarck.
Dick-
How would you define “Left” and “Right”?
Hyper individualism is one of the main causes of the trouble that white people are in now. I don’t advocate socialism, but it can’t be denied that white people need some kind of collective solidarity protect themselves from hostile out groups. We need an understanding in our societies that what harms the race can’t be allowed, even if it might make someone money.