The Nazis were considered "left wing" by the people of that time

[uppi]

The claim in the OP makes no sense at all and is typical of Americans talking about German politics: They have no clue at all.

At the times the Nazis became relevant, the two other major parties were the KPD (the K stands for communist) and the SPD (the S is for social democratic). Both parties were clearly to the left of the NSDAP. If the term left wing makes any sense for that time period it clearly applies to those parties and not the NSDAP.

You could also look at who opposed the Nazis and who allied with them. It were the center and right-wing parties who gave Hitler the power to do what he wanted, not the left-wing parties (and that vote only passed when most of the left-wing politicians were in prison and could not oppose it).

You could make the argument that the Nazis were to the left of today's American Republicans, but that says more about Republicans than it says about the Nazis.

 

[Borachio]

The genius (if I can use the word) of the Nazis is that they managed to appeal to a wide spectrum of German society. More important than the word socialist was the word nationalist, imo.

The appeal of the left wing is limited as far as the middle and upper classes is concerned.

Of course, this is only my opinion, and I'll happily admit to correction by others who know more.

 

[Cutlass]

So you just don't know the difference between right and left. Got it.

 

[BenitoChavez]

Same thing different rhetoric - it's authoritarianism/totalitarianism.

Authoritarianism/totalitarianism operates outside of the left/right dichotomy, but you need to have a large centralized government, or "big government" to wield that authority and both Communists and Nazis achieved that by pursing socialist policies so they could create government bureaucracies that take their orders from the now centralized government authority.

Agreed. Which hearkens back to what Mr. Spengler said:

I'm not sure they were considered "Left Wing." To my memory, they subscribed to ideas from the traditional right and the traditional left (is ethnic nationalism a 'left wing' thing?), and rejected ideas from both. Kind of the whole point was to find something else, something German and Aryan.

They took extreme stances, both left and right, and implemented an Authoritarian government to carry out all their wacko ideas.

 

[onejayhawk]

No. Fascists and Marxist were two variations on the authoritarian left. The fascists managed private industry. The Marxists nationalized it. Yo need to be cutting pretty fine to further distinguish things.

Of course such fine distinctions were made, see Russian, white and Russian, red. If Trotsky is not a Marxist, then you can say that Fascists are not socialists. From that perspective, Catholics and Protestants are different religions.

J

 

[civman110]

They took extreme stances, both left and right, and implemented an Authoritarian government to carry out all their wacko ideas.

But, you're not explaining specifically what makes the Nazis "right wing" other than the fact that they were authoritarian, which as I explained, isn't a quality that is "right" anymore than it is "left" - it's not part of the political spectrum.

No. Fascists and Marxist were two variations on the authoritarian left. The fascists managed private industry. The Marxists nationalized it. Yo need to be cutting pretty fine to further distinguish things.

Of course such fine distinctions were made, see Russian, white and Russian, red. If Trotsky is not a Marxist, then you can say that Fascists are not socialists. From that perspective, Catholics and Protestants are different religions.

J

That's a good way to put it.

 

[abradley]

As usual people compare Nazism/Fascism to Communism as if Communism is the standard for leftism, the Labor Party is right of Communism, is it Right Wing, how about Democrats? As Goldberg points out in his article Fascism was seen to the left of Roosevelt's early New Deal and "Even Trotsky considered fascism to be right-wing socialism or middle-class socialism."

IMO the main difference between Left and Right is collectivism and free enterprise, where does this fit with that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism
Fascism operated from a Social Darwinist view of human relations. The aim was to promote superior individuals and weed out the weak.[6] In terms of economic practice, this meant promoting the interests of successful businessmen while destroying trade unions and other organizations of the working class.[7] Fascist governments encouraged the pursuit of private profit and offered many benefits to large businesses, but they demanded in return that all economic activity should serve the national interest.[8] Historian Gaetano Salvemini argued in 1936 that fascism makes taxpayers responsible to private enterprise, because "the State pays for the blunders of private enterprise... Profit is private and individual. Loss is public and social."[9]

and to quote Goldberg again, because he cuts through the rubbish:

I agree, so let me offer some counter pontification. Pseudoerasmus illuminates a great source of confusion among critics of Liberal Fascism — and among some fans as well. When I say that fascism or Nazism was of the Left, I’m using as my yardstick the Anglo-American, classical-liberal, tradition. Many people want to track the Left by a kind of lineage interpretation. So they go back and look at intellectuals (usually quite selectively) and say something like: These people called themselves the Left, the people they hated were “the Right,” they hated the Nazis therefore the Nazis were right-wing. Others look at voting blocs or interest groups and offer a very similar kind of analysis. The Nazis got X voters, X voters were on the right, therefore the Nazis were right-wing. This might seem like approaching things through “historical terms,” but it largely ignores the substance of the policies in question, uses a very limited benchmark for what is “left-wing,” and obscures the fact that the center of gravity intellectually in the 1920s and 1930s was much farther to the left than is widely understood. So, yes, sure fascism was seen as being to the “right” of Communism, because it was. Even Trotsky considered fascism to be right-wing socialism or middle-class socialism. It seems to me that the key word there is socialism, which is properly understood as a phenomenon of the Left. (The Soviets also considered not only the New Deal fascist and right-wing, but the American Socialist Party, too. Why take their judgment so seriously?)

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/417926/was-fascism-right-wing-again-jonah-goldberg

My Bold

 

[Power_of_Beer]

Well its not really the ethnic cleansing part that's conservative, its the reverting back to a previous state that's conservative. Nazi Germany wanted "Germany for the Germans" before all the other ethnic groups came. The Soviet Union and Communist China were trying to "progress" society by creating something new, a Communist nation. Its just their chosen method of "progression" meant eliminating all political opposition which resulted in massacres, famines, etc.

The Nazi party was not conservative. Its aims were very progressive: conquest of vast lands in the east, extermination of millions of non-germans, economic autarky. These were politics that have never been employed before. Being conservative in Weimar Germany was being a monarchist, and thats something the Nazis opposed. There were overlaps in certain views though, like the extreme nationalism.

The economic points of the 25 points program were obsolete in the late 20s, when the partys left wing lost power, and Hitler realized that he needs support of the German Industrial elites - they made it clear that the party heavily supports privatization. This is something that clearly distinguished them from the far left.

 

[Tahuti]

As Goldberg points out in his article Fascism was seen to the left of Roosevelt's early New Deal and "Even Trotsky considered fascism to be right-wing socialism or middle-class socialism."

These are two essentially contradictory assertions. Only the latter is true: Socialism can be right-wing. Joseph de Maistre inspired a number of Utopian Socialists. Crossovering between monarchists and Utopian Socialists was quite common in the early 19th century.

What makes Fascism left-wing at certain parts is the denial of inequality between people of a certain nation or race. Basically, racism is how fascism and nazism make up for their beliefs in egalitarianism as far as it concerns their own ethnic group.

IMO the main difference between Left and Right is collectivism and free enterprise, where does this fit with that: and to quote Goldberg again, because he cuts through the rubbish:My Bold

The main difference between Right and Left are views on egalitarianism. Right considers hierarchy to be good, the Left considers it bad.

 

[Hygro]

Yeah, wasn't it me who said DPRK != democratic last time it came around? Pretty sure I cribbed it from somewhere else.

Edit: Yes it was.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/archive/index.php/t-552205-p-2.html

Yeah we were all gunning to be the knob who says it. I was so excited to snatch it this time around.

 

[Yeekim]

Or maybe we need to accept that attempts to fit centuries of political spectrum onto a single axis is ... rather limiting?

 

[Hygro]

I think it's important to distinguish conservatives with reactionaries. Reactionaries are born from conservatives but kind of in the same way vodka is born from potatoes. Reactionaries are proactive in their desire for change, just not progressively so.

The main difference between Right and Left are views on egalitarianism. Right considers hierarchy to be good, the Left considers it bad.

A study recently came out suggesting that absence of hierarchies are fatiguing to our brains. It's not clear if it's biologically intrinsic or if it's because of the difficulty in escaping our social programming.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Forgive me if I'm being ignorant, but isn't fascism usually called "the third way" as it rejects both capitalism and communism?

I'd say it's still more right-wing in a lot of ways. Very traditional, very much about preserving a ( largely imagined ) glorious past.

A study recently came out suggesting that absence of hierarchies are fatiguing to our brains. It's not clear if it's biologically intrinsic or if it's because of the difficulty in escaping our social programming.

I think hierarchy is baked into reality. The real question is, is it a healthy, functional, organically forming hierarchy based on real needs and real abilities, or is it skewed unfairly or simply declared by the central bureau or something.

 

[Leonel]

I dunno dude, Points 4 - 8 look like pretty conservative points and I would have thought Point 22 was conservative too in bringing back the draft.

 

[civman110]

I dunno dude, Points 4 - 8 look like pretty conservative points and I would have thought Point 22 was conservative too in bringing back the draft.

#4 & 8 aren't conservative ideologies. Ultra-ethnic-nationalism isn't "right wing" as many others have mentioned.

#22 has nothing to do with a draft and once again - a draft is not exclusive to the "right wing."

 

[Tahuti]

I think it's important to distinguish conservatives with reactionaries. Reactionaries are born from conservatives but kind of in the same way vodka is born from potatoes. Reactionaries are proactive in their desire for change, just not progressively so.

I'd disagree. Reactionary is primarily a state of mind. I think at least, as I don't believe individuals or groups of individuals have the power to change the political system. In fact, most intellectually respectable self-appointed reactionaries I know are quite withdrawn from mainstream society: Those who think they can cause political change on their own are more likely to be literal Fascists.

One of the reasons why I quit the 'Ask the Reactionary' thread is simply because I am uncertain whether I'd fulfill the role of one satisfactorily to give a clear answer. What formaldehyde calls a reactionary I'd likely oppose myself too.

A very liberal (irony!) interpretation of the term reactionary is simply to denote a line of thinking that is roughly like "We should abandon our smugness about this age and realise that we aren't any smarter or better than our ancestors." The other interpretation is to literally restore the Pre-1789 world order. I have never supported the latter.

Anyway, you're likely going to agree with me all the time if you agree with the New Left's analysis on how the status quo works, yet believe their proposals for change are unrealistic.

 

[Leonel]

#4 & 8 aren't conservative ideologies. Ultra-ethnic-nationalism isn't "right wing" as many others have mentioned.

#22 has nothing to do with a draft and once again - a draft is not exclusive to the "right wing."

Are we talking US left-wing or Europe left-wing?

 

[civman110]

Are we talking US left-wing or Europe left-wing?

It doesn't matter. A draft and genocide aren't conservative principles, no more than they are leftist ones.

 

[Cutlass]

No. Fascists and Marxist were two variations on the authoritarian right. The fascists managed private industry. The Marxists nationalized it. Yo need to be cutting pretty fine to further distinguish things.

Of course such fine distinctions were made, see Russian, white and Russian, red. If Trotsky is not a Marxist, then you can say that Fascists are not socialists. From that perspective, Catholics and Protestants are different religions.

J

ftfy.

 

[chijohnaok]

I dunno dude, Points 4 - 8 look like pretty conservative points and I would have thought Point 22 was conservative too in bringing back the draft.

#4 & 8 aren't conservative ideologies. Ultra-ethnic-nationalism isn't "right wing" as many others have mentioned.

#22 has nothing to do with a draft and once again - a draft is not exclusive to the "right wing."

I would agree with Civman110.

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) has introduced legislation to reinstate the draft in every Congress since 2003.

Rangel might take offense if you called him a "conservative" or a "right winger".