Comments on: Hitler Was A Socialist, (And Not A Right Wing Conservative)

By: 25 Signs That America Is Rapidly Becoming More Like Nazi Germany | goinggermany.info

Mon, 05 Mar 2012 11:12:17 +0000

[...] Socialist theologian Gregor Strasser once stated the following…. We National Socialists are enemies, deadly enemies, of the present capitalist system with [...]

By: den led

den led — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 19:46:25 +0000

den led…

[...]Hitler Was A Socialist, (And Not A Right Wing Conservative) « DemocraticPeace Blog[...]…

By: Adam Powell

Adam Powell — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 14:52:25 +0000

Hitler was a right-wing conservative. His speeches and writing before 1933 have to be treated with skepticism. He was trying to appeal to a broad audience. He needs to be judged by his actions in power.
Hitler took over the German Workers Party who mixed right-wing nationalism, racism and socialism, like many other small parties in Central Europe at the time. The socialism was slowly junked. For example, Point 17 of the 25 Point Program of the (now renamed) Nazi Party was amended by Hitler. Instead of expropriating large land holdings (left wing for sure) this would now apply only to Jews.
Those who still believed in the socialist elements of the Nazi Party were marginalised (Drexler) or killed (Strasser and Rohm).
Hitler banned labour unions and left wing parties and generally appeased big business and the German army. A society of relative wage decline for the average worker and soaring profits for corporations is hardly socialist – more like Bush’s USA.

Hitler economic policies had Keynesian elements at first, but only because they fulfilled Hitler’s purpose of rearming Germany. In 1937, with the 4 Year Plan, Keynesian ended.
Ultimately he was right wing because of the society he envisaged and tried to create. This is where people (sorry but Americans are most guilty of this) mix up socialism. Socialists want to create a more equal society, though with differnt methods. More government control is not an end but a means. Hitler’s guiding philsophy was a racially pure Greater Germany that would then dominate the inferior East in a Social Darwinist struggle. This is hardly left-wing. Inequality was one of his ‘granite foundations’.
He also didn’t approve of gender equaliity or sexual freedom – aspirations for most of the left as well.

By: Militant Libertarian » Steven Pinker’s Statist Gospel

Militant Libertarian » Steven Pinker’s Statist Gospel — Sat, 22 Oct 2011 09:21:07 +0000

[...] Nature, Pinker – to his credit – does recognize R.J. Rummel’s pioneering research into the phenomenon [...]

By: Wordpress video training

Wordpress video training — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 22:27:38 +0000

WordPress video training…

[...]Hitler Was A Socialist, (And Not A Right Wing Conservative) « DemocraticPeace Blog[...]…

By: funniest videos

funniest videos — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:01:05 +0000

funniest videos…

[...]Hitler Was A Socialist, (And Not A Right Wing Conservative) « DemocraticPeace Blog[...]…

By: hi, thanks for your awesome article about Six Flags. I think it is the most wonderfull thing in the universe. Leave me a comment. And again many thanks for your good blog.

Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:39:49 +0000

ey, thank you for your good blogpost about Six Flags. I think it is the best thing in the universe. Leave me a comment. And again thank you for your wonderfull blogpost….

[...]Hitler Was A Socialist, (And Not A Right Wing Conservative) « DemocraticPeace Blog[...]…

By: JoeyDaKine

JoeyDaKine — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 15:02:00 +0000

Wow. Talk about normative ethics. So many of the interpretations of facts and quotes are twisted into pretzels just to fit your preconceived notions.

Poor Wolfgang, he wrote so much just to prove how right-wing Hitler was yet his argument used so many castles-in-the-sky premises that I’m surprised he didn’t include an Enya soundtrack.

“The Nazi’s and USSR were not true socialist countries; there has never been a true socialist country.” Apparently, for Wolfgang and the others who refuse to believe their lying eyes and ears. Hitler, Lenin, & Stalin each called themselves socialists and leaders of “worker’s parties” and wrote extensively about being socialists — but apparently this doesn’t really mean they were socialists because socialist CARE about the people. Socialists don’t take control of people and force people to do what they don’t want to do — or else.

Socialists SHARE control over production. Socialist love diversity. Socialists love freedom and cooperation and pacifism and idealism and internationalism and gun control and vegetarianism and equality.

Give me a break. Socialism and Marxism sound great on paper, in theory. “Let’s all share; let’s all think about it and vote on it; let’s cooperate.” But then reality sets in: people disagree and the power-seekers take control; they force others to do work they don’t want to do; they try to force others to believe what they believe.

Look at today’s left: they say right-wingers are racially intolerant yet they constantly force us to consider race whenever a decision is to be made. Racial categories grow and grow rather than we becoming rainbow or colorblind. If we say uncontrolled immigration is dangerous then we are accused of being racist. If we say that we need to protect ourselves from aggressors trying to kill us then we are accused of being war-mongerers. If I say, “Just leave me alone and let me work,” they say, “No, you are part of the whole and must follow our lead.”

They say they believe in tolerance but are the most intolerant people you’ll ever meet. They point out bad eggs whenever criticizing conservatives (exceptions rather than the majority) and use these bad eggs to justify their beliefs that those on the right are racists homophobes.

They love to brand people who believe in individual freedoms as group-haters and evil-doers. I want as much freedom as possible. Does that mean I want to be able to steal my neighbor’s lawn mower? Of course not — but that is how the left portrays us.

The Tea Party movement in the U.S. had literally hundreds of thousands of protesters (some show them in the millions), were mostly well-behaved (albeit angry at the politicians) and cleaned up after their rallies — yet the left and the media found a few bad eggs in the crowds and judged the whole movement as racist and anti-government (it was not racist or anti-government but anti-BIG govt, i.e. socialist/communist).

The Wall Street Occupiers, on the other hand, have only thousands — much less than the Tea Partiers — blocked street traffic, and have left a huge mess in their wake.

Like all left-wingers, they have lovely ideals but very little practical sense about how to create the best conditions for all individuals and groups in a large society. Their brand of socialism is fantasy and will never work as long as people are people.

By: Angel

Angel — Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:07:40 +0000

Sounds a lot like china although they force abortions on those they think are of the wrong gender.

By: Saurabh

Saurabh — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:15:06 +0000

This is the stupidest kind of propaganda there can be. Hitler’s socialism was “national socialism”. He identified the “Aryan nation” as the most important thing of all and used that notion to kill people and wage wars. It was “Aryan national socialism”. Aryan should have been the prefix for the national socialist party (It should have been Aryan National Socialist Party).
His agenda was seldom as evolved when it came to economy as that of communism or socialism. Socialism of Canada for example, talks of society as a whole. All the people together. That is not fascism. Hitler’s socialism just consisted of the “Aryan society”. And economically speaking, he was an absolute capitalist. That was half the reason he went after Jews. For the money they had. Nazis stole all that the German Jews had.