Fascism is Not Right Wing, it is socialist.

Okay, pure Socialism is evil... So?
What's your point?
Pure Capitalism sucks. They both do.

All I can see this as a hit-thread on the people who you disagree with politically (for whatever reasons.)

You can claim that historically, promises of "National Socialism" led to Fascism, but the concept of Fascism and Socialism are almost diametrically opposed

@Xuenchen: Your third paragraph immediately starts off with a "no true scotsman" fallacy.

Genuine Progressives (not the Right Wing definitions of "Progressives") don't rely or condone massive oppressive authoritarian policies.

I changed three words.

What we have here is basically a thread that is apologist in nature, not only for Hitler, but also for Mussolini, hidden within the wrapper of an anti-socialist rant.

Well done OP do you actually work for an agency?

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Progressive ideology relies heavily on massive authoritarian polices.

Most of which are ultra oppressive on the majority of a population.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Who "defined" capitalism as we know it to be defined today?

The first problem when approaching this particular issue is that there is a language barrier. Certain terms and phrases may appear to say one thing when viewed through our modern understanding of them. But they were used in different ways and meant something a bit different back then.

One example would be the word socialism.

People see the word socialism in the name of the Nazi party, National Socialist German Workers' Party, and assume that the word "socialist" is used with the same meaning as we believe today. But it's more complicated than that. It would be better if you understood how it was applied by those that lived back then.

The Nazi ideology was based on "Volksgemeinschaft". It means a community of people. A unified nation. A union. That is the context in which the term "socialist" is used. It's more applicable to ultra-nationalism than it is to actual socialism. You have to remember that socialism is an economic and political model. Very little of which was incorporated by the Nazis.

Anyway, you have to better understand the differences in terminology between the 1930's and 2015 to better understand Nazis, fascism and socialism.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn

You can claim that historically, promises of "National Socialism" led to Fascism, but the concept of Fascism and Socialism are almost diametrically opposed

How so?

The similarities outweigh the minor differences.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Pure Capitalism sucks.

Hows that ?

No one living has seen it in action.

a reply to: schuyler

I can also post a bunch of quotes
And articles but the subject wont change the fact that fascism is a right wing doctrine.

a reply to: neo96

Quoting goebels does not change the fact that fascisms is a right wing doctrine.

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969

I can also post a bunch if quotes
And articles but the subject wont change the fact that fascism is a right wing doctrine.

But genuine "Right Wing" is not authoritarian.

You and many others are accepting the standard Left Wing ivory tower academic definitions as rock solid.

a reply to: dukeofjive696969

So the right wing goes around expousing the virtues of socialism, and the evils of 'capitalism'.

Not in this country they don't.

So...fascism is liberal...got it.

So, are all you guys advocating the opposite then? Okay, cool -- I'll start reading up on Communism then.

Basically, this thread is telling me that every single despotic fascist regime is left wing and liberal, and that the right is ... well .. "right" and has nothing in common or nothing to do with any kind of of tyrannical power structures or oppressive, militaristic, and nationalistic ideologies

originally posted by: NateTheAnimator


....Socialism and Communism are not synonymous terms.

While not all socialists are communists, all communists are socialist.

To Karl Marx socialism was but a transitional stage to transform a capitalist nation into a communist one. All communist nations started as socialist.

a reply to: dukeofjive696969


Saying that quoting goebels does not change the fact that fascisms is a ring wing document, doest't change the fact that it's not.

Lol, we could go on all day like this...

a reply to: MystikMushroom

You DO have to admit climate change is ultra,ultra nationalistic Citizen of the Earth.

The power structure of that animal is going to be tyrannical in nature,oppressive, and sooner or later will be militaristic in nature.

The right doesn't push we own the world now do theY ?

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

My point is to point out how fallacious the claim is that fascism dictatorships like Nazi Germany and Italy were right wing, when they were very left wing. They just differed in some points to other branches of socialism.

a reply to: xuenchen

Me and other are accepting what history as tough us, the harder you try does not change the fact.

a reply to: Wookiep

Yea we could, if you need facts go to a library, books are your friend.

Good Day.

Interesting read, The OP, but also other contributions, like Goebbels words....

The difficulty we are all faced with is that we try to name a set of ideals and rules and fix it in place. As if all who call themselves socialist or communist or capitalist strictly adhere to these labels and their predetermined characteristics.

The name of the Nazi party, and their rhetoric and the basis of their rise and struggle do sound very much socialist in principle..... and honestly the whole left / right paradigm to me has always been to constricting to explain anything, but if I look up the definition of socialism......

""socialism is characterized by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production." So in theory Nazi Germany was socialist, but in practice it was a dictatorship with very very little democracy going on. In the end businesses were functioning for the common good of the Nazi war machine and not the people themselves. As companies have become so powerful nowadays with their lobbies and bottom lines. The revolving door system with the government who themselves seem to service specific interests, I can imagine that people would like to equate practical fascism as it has existed with modern Authoritarian Corporatism.

Kind Regards

a reply to: GamleGamle

personally believe that what socialism actually is... is still changing in the eyes of the people. Academically it may have been set, but it is still an ongoing sociology /economic / political theory that is still very much in a trial and error phase.
I think we are arriving at a point where a Democratic Socialistic Capitalism is the preferred form of governance for now. It will try to strike a balance by moving away from the pre-planned economics of communism and to an extent socialism, by leaving free market workings in place for the most part. At the same time trying to manage Greed, Exploitation and Corruption of the kind that Capitalism more often than not has in its wake, by outlining and enforcing a stricter code of conduct geared to the needs of the community. What this community actually is will ebb and flow between local and global until technological advancement is able to spread the wealth all over the planet. The ones who spread the wealth will determine the rules initially, eventually it will become more egalitarian. At some point in time Classical Capitalism in the sense of being responsible for our basic need for survival will vanish, but it will always exist in one form or another I am sure......, but the basics of civilization will be more socialism-ish, I say ish, in that it will probably be more technocratic instead of democratic.....at some point information processing will be such that it is more reliable in making sound decisions than the people's democracy. People will of course squabble over how to best interpret the information, but the needs of the many do outweigh the needs of the few.... this may sound scary, but people will become increasingly weary of all the power struggles based on nothing but greed and egoism. The only reason why Capitalism exists as it does is because it leads to some creative ingenuity, but more importantly, people at this point in time see free trade of goods and services as one of the few ways of curbing the impulse of violent confrontation.

As economic / social / educational / health equality arises in most parts of the world, religious and political extremes will diminish. The true question is not what system works the best. The question is when will the Fearful and power hungry see that living for something bigger than themselves will lead to true fulfillment.

Kind Regards