Hitler was on the Right side of the spectrum. . .

Hume said:
Maybe, but this is the world. Not heaven.

Our American Revolution was extremely violent but all our schools celebrate them as heroes.
Click to expand...
I understand your point, but those we killed in the revolution did not deserve it either, neither did the Indigenous Americans.
 
QP! said:
The poster is redefining political science terms to fit their conclusion.

Their response relies on historical half-truths and a fundamental misunderstanding of what actually defines "the Left" versus "the Right."
Here is a direct, point-by-point rebuttal of those claims:

1. "Statist Capitalism is a form of Socialism"

This is a logical contradiction. By definition, Capitalism preserves private property and private profit, whereas Socialism is defined by the public or social ownership of the means of production. Nazi Germany explicitly protected private ownership and corporate profits.
  • The Reality: While the Nazi state heavily regulated the economy, it did so to prepare for war—not to redistribute wealth to the working class. If "state intervention" automatically equals socialism, then every wartime government in history (including the U.S. and Great Britain during WWII) would be "socialist." Historians call Hitler’s model fascist corporatism or a command capitalist economy, where big business and the state form a partnership. True socialism seeks to eliminate the capitalist class; Hitler partnered with them.

2. "Society over the individual is a hallmark of the Left"

This is an oversimplification that ignores the fundamental difference between Collectivism and Nationalism. "Society over the individual" is a feature of authoritarianism across the entire political spectrum, not just the Left.
  • The Reality: The Left's traditional concept of collectivism is built on class solidarity (workers of the world unite) and universal egalitarianism. Hitler’s collectivism was built on racial supremacy (Volksgemeinschaft). Hitler did not believe all members of society were equal; he believed in a strict, brutal hierarchy based on race, biology, and social Darwinism. Fascism and extreme right-wing ultranationalism always demand that the individual sacrifice themselves for the "Nation" or the "Race"—which is the exact opposite of left-wing internationalism.

3. "Just because Hitler went after other Leftist political parties... does not preclude him from being on the Left."

It is true that left-wing factions (like Stalinists and Trotskyists) have historically fought each other. However, Hitler didn't just purge competing left-wing factions; he dismantled the entire ideological foundation of the Left.
  • The Reality: When left-wing factions fight, they are usually arguing over how to achieve a socialist utopia. Hitler didn't fight leftists to achieve socialism; he fought them because he explicitly viewed Marxism and Communism as an existential, biological threat to civilization (what he called "Judeo-Bolshevism"). He didn't just target political rivals; he outlawed the very concepts of trade unionism, class struggle, and universal equality.

4. The Night of the Long Knives: The Literal Purge of the Nazi "Left"

If you want absolute proof that Hitler rejected left-wing policies, look at what he did to his own party.
  • The Reality: Early on, there was a faction within the Nazi party (led by Gregor and Otto Strasser) that genuinely believed in the "Socialist" part of National Socialism and wanted to redistribute wealth. In 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives, Hitler had the Strasserites and the anti-capitalist wing of his party assassinated


    . He explicitly chose to side with the traditional right-wing elite, conservative military generals, and wealthy industrialists over the socialist elements of his own movement.

Summary Core Argument

The poster is mistaking Authoritarian Control for Left-Wing Ideology.

A regime can be authoritarian, collectivist, and state-driven without being left-wing. By stripping away private property rights from "undesirables" while enriching private corporations, and by replacing class equality with strict racial hierarchy, Hitler acted as the textbook definition of the far-right.
Click to expand...
This is all just more hair splitting and trivial objections.

Show where Hitler was for greater personal freedoms, less government regulation and control of industry and the economy. Show where he wanted greater tolerance towards race, religion, travel, or individual choice of any sort.

THOSE are hallmarks of the Right. All the above does is reframe a different type of Leftist ideology as somehow on the Right because the mainstream Left doesn't want to be associated with it.
 
Jarod said:
I understand your point, but those we killed in the revolution did not deserve it either, neither did the Indigenous Americans.
Click to expand...
A good chunk of indigenous tribes east of the Mississippi brought their destruction on themselves through taking sides in wars between Europeans and / or American colonials and then Americans.
 
QP! said:
Oh so all someone has to do is use a name and that makes them the thing? It is that easy?? No one ever lies or purposely coopts another identity to try and sell themselves as something they are not in the world you live in?
Click to expand...
Words have meaning, shitbird. This world was created with words.
Americans killed a lot of Nazis. Socialist Nazis.
Not saying it didn't fuck 'em up, because it did, and I dealt with that growing up, punk.
Everything was the government with Nazis, and it is with you, too. I subscribe to the American way. :dunno:
Those that came before me killed Nazis. I'm not going to let shitbird leftists like you run all willy nilly with your bullshit when I know what those that came before me went through. That's my honor and thanks to them, and I toted them to their resting places, too.
Your dishonest bullshit can fuck off. Way over there.
I could kick the fuck out of you with your commie bullshit.
Fuck off far away with it, k?
 
Last edited:
Guno צְבִי said:
View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/d_3o71mCC_A
Click to expand...
Super retard post. Someday I might figure out what is wrong with guno.
Or not. :dunno:
www.britannica.com

Nazi Party | Beliefs, Rise, Leadership, & History | Britannica

The Nazi Party was the political party of the mass movement known as National Socialism. Under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the party came to power in Germany in 1933 and governed by totalitarian methods until 1945. Antisemitism was fundamental to the party’s ideology and led to the...
www.britannica.com www.britannica.com

National Socialism? 'Sup niggajewfake?
 
Matt Dillon said:
Words have meaning, shitbird. This world was created with words.
Americans killed a lot of Nazis. Socialist Nazis.
Not saying it didn't fuck 'em up, because it did, and I dealt with that growing up, punk.
Everything was the government with Nazis, and it is with you, too. I subscribe to the American way. :dunno:
Those that came before me killed Nazis. I'm not going to let shitbird leftists like you run all willy nilly with your bullshit when I know what those that came before me went through. That's my honor and thanks to them, and I toted them to their resting places, too.
Your dishonest bullshit can fuck off. Way over there.
I could kick the fuck out of you with your commie bullshit.
Fuck off far away with it, k?
Click to expand...
Right.

And since the DPRK , is the Democratic peoples' republic of Korea and words have meaning that means Kim Jong Un and his father before him were elected in a Democracy as the "words have meaning" and all you have to do is call yourself a thing and then you are that.

You need to be less stupid. People lie. You lie.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
A good chunk of indigenous tribes east of the Mississippi brought their destruction on themselves through taking sides in wars between Europeans and / or American colonials and then Americans.
Click to expand...
That doesn’t mean they deserved to be killed or lose their land.
 
Matt Dillon said:
Super retard post. Someday I might figure out what is wrong with guno.
Or not. :dunno:
www.britannica.com

Nazi Party | Beliefs, Rise, Leadership, & History | Britannica

The Nazi Party was the political party of the mass movement known as National Socialism. Under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the party came to power in Germany in 1933 and governed by totalitarian methods until 1945. Antisemitism was fundamental to the party’s ideology and led to the...
www.britannica.com www.britannica.com

National Socialism? 'Sup niggajewfake?
Click to expand...
I can call my house the Taj Mahal, that doesn’t make it the Taj.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QP!
T. A. Gardner said:
This is all just more hair splitting and trivial objections.

Show where Hitler was for greater personal freedoms, less government regulation and control of industry and the economy. Show where he wanted greater tolerance towards race, religion, travel, or individual choice of any sort.

THOSE are hallmarks of the Right. All the above does is reframe a different type of Leftist ideology as somehow on the Right because the mainstream Left doesn't want to be associated with it.
Click to expand...
The poster is confusing the modern American/libertarian political spectrum with the universal, historical spectrum of the 1930s.

They are defining the "Right" strictly as modern American conservatism or libertarianism (free markets, small government, individual liberty). However, historians define the "Right" vs. "Left" spectrum by how they view social equality and hierarchy. The Left seeks to dismantle traditional hierarchies to create equality; the Right seeks to preserve or enforce rigid hierarchies to maintain order, tradition, or nation.

Here is what debunks their argument:

Their first mistake is they are redefining the entire historical political spectrum based purely on modern American libertarianism. Free markets, small government, and individual liberty are hallmarks of classical liberalism and libertarianism—they are not the defining features of the global, historical Right.

By that logic, absolute monarchies, military dictatorships, and feudal systems would be 'Left-wing' because they feature massive government control and no personal freedom. That is historically absurd.

Here is why his argument falls apart:

1. Totalitarianism is not exclusive to the Left
Both the Far-Left and the Far-Right can be authoritarian and totalitarian. Political scientists use the Political Compass (which separates the economic axis from the authoritarian axis) to explain this.
  • The Far-Left Totalitarian (e.g., Stalin): Uses total state control to forcibly flatten society, abolish private property, and eliminate social classes.
  • The Far-Right Totalitarian (e.g., Hitler): Uses total state control to enforce a rigid racial hierarchy, crush labor, protect private corporate monopolies, and launch nationalist wars.
Authoritarianism is the method, but the goals of Hitler and Stalin were on opposite sides of the spectrum.

2. Hitler’s economic control was Right-Wing "Corporatism"
Hitler did not want a free market, but his regulation of industry was fundamentally right-wing.
  • Left-wing regulation seizes corporate wealth to distribute it to the workers.
  • Hitler’s regulation protected corporate wealth and used state power to enrich industrialists (like Krupp and Porsche) in exchange for weapons. He banned strikes, froze workers' wages, and forced labor to benefit private corporate profits. That is called corporatism or crony capitalism, which is a hallmark of right-wing fascism, not left-wing socialism.

3. Racism and Nationalism are historically Far-Right
You asked where Hitler wanted tolerance toward race or religion. He didn't—and that is exactly what makes him Far-Right.
  • The political Left is historically rooted in egalitarianism and internationalism (the idea that all human beings or workers are equal, regardless of nationality or race).
  • The political Right has historically focused on nationalism, traditionalism, and social hierarchy. Hitler took right-wing nationalism to its absolute, psychotic extreme: ultra-nationalism and racial supremacy. Forcing a rigid hierarchy where one race is superior to all others is the ultimate rejection of left-wing egalitarianism.

Summary
Mainstream historians don't 'reframe' Hitler to protect the Left. They categorize him as Far-Right because his core ideology was built on hyper-nationalism, the preservation of private corporate property, the destruction of labor unions, and a fanatical belief in human inequality.


He was a totalitarian dictator, but he operated entirely on the Far-Right of the political spectrum."
 
Jarod said:
That doesn’t mean they deserved to be killed or lose their land.
Click to expand...
That was the normal thing at the time when you LOSE A WAR! They took sides in a WAR and they LOST! That had consequences, and one of those consequences was losing your land. The other consequence was you were likely to die in that war, and the winners were going to treat the losers harshly. That's how war in the 16th to 18th Century were fought.
 
Jarod said:
I can call my house the Taj Mahal, that doesn’t make it the Taj.
Click to expand...

QP! said:
The poster is confusing the modern American/libertarian political spectrum with the universal, historical spectrum of the 1930s.

They are defining the "Right" strictly as modern American conservatism or libertarianism (free markets, small government, individual liberty). However, historians define the "Right" vs. "Left" spectrum by how they view social equality and hierarchy. The Left seeks to dismantle traditional hierarchies to create equality; the Right seeks to preserve or enforce rigid hierarchies to maintain order, tradition, or nation.

Here is what debunks their argument:

Their first mistake is they are redefining the entire historical political spectrum based purely on modern American libertarianism. Free markets, small government, and individual liberty are hallmarks of classical liberalism and libertarianism—they are not the defining features of the global, historical Right.

By that logic, absolute monarchies, military dictatorships, and feudal systems would be 'Left-wing' because they feature massive government control and no personal freedom. That is historically absurd.

Here is why his argument falls apart:

1. Totalitarianism is not exclusive to the Left
Both the Far-Left and the Far-Right can be authoritarian and totalitarian. Political scientists use the Political Compass (which separates the economic axis from the authoritarian axis) to explain this.
  • The Far-Left Totalitarian (e.g., Stalin): Uses total state control to forcibly flatten society, abolish private property, and eliminate social classes.
  • The Far-Right Totalitarian (e.g., Hitler): Uses total state control to enforce a rigid racial hierarchy, crush labor, protect private corporate monopolies, and launch nationalist wars.
Authoritarianism is the method, but the goals of Hitler and Stalin were on opposite sides of the spectrum.

2. Hitler’s economic control was Right-Wing "Corporatism"
Hitler did not want a free market, but his regulation of industry was fundamentally right-wing.
  • Left-wing regulation seizes corporate wealth to distribute it to the workers.
  • Hitler’s regulation protected corporate wealth and used state power to enrich industrialists (like Krupp and Porsche) in exchange for weapons. He banned strikes, froze workers' wages, and forced labor to benefit private corporate profits. That is called corporatism or crony capitalism, which is a hallmark of right-wing fascism, not left-wing socialism.

3. Racism and Nationalism are historically Far-Right
You asked where Hitler wanted tolerance toward race or religion. He didn't—and that is exactly what makes him Far-Right.
  • The political Left is historically rooted in egalitarianism and internationalism (the idea that all human beings or workers are equal, regardless of nationality or race).
  • The political Right has historically focused on nationalism, traditionalism, and social hierarchy. Hitler took right-wing nationalism to its absolute, psychotic extreme: ultra-nationalism and racial supremacy. Forcing a rigid hierarchy where one race is superior to all others is the ultimate rejection of left-wing egalitarianism.

Summary
Mainstream historians don't 'reframe' Hitler to protect the Left. They categorize him as Far-Right because his core ideology was built on hyper-nationalism, the preservation of private corporate property, the destruction of labor unions, and a fanatical belief in human inequality.


He was a totalitarian dictator, but he operated entirely on the Far-Right of the political spectrum."
Click to expand...
The retardation in you is strong.
www.britannica.com

Were the Nazis Socialists? | Britannica

Were the Nazis socialists? No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934.
www.britannica.com www.britannica.com
 
QP! said:
Summary of Left vs. Nazi Ideology

Policy/ConceptLeft-Wing Ideology (Socialism/Communism)Hitler's Actual Enacted Policy (Nazism)
Means of ProductionPublic, state, or collective worker ownership.De jure private property; massive privatization.
Labor UnionsChampioned; controlled or run by workers.Completely banned; replaced by state control.
Core Social FocusInternational worker solidarity and equality.Strict racial purity, nationalism, and hierarchy.
Treatment of LeftistsAligned or ideologically linked.Systematically imprisoned, banned, and executed.

The Verdict: The poster is repeating a common internet myth that confuses the tactical use of the word "Socialist" in the Nazi party's branding with their actual governing actions. In practice, Hitler’s economic and social regimes were defined by fascism, corporatism, and extreme right-wing ultranationalism. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Click to expand...
One of the resentment that enabled Hitler to take power, was the German people’s hatred of the Soviets, after WWI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QP!
QP! said:
The poster is confusing the modern American/libertarian political spectrum with the universal, historical spectrum of the 1930s.

They are defining the "Right" strictly as modern American conservatism or libertarianism (free markets, small government, individual liberty). However, historians define the "Right" vs. "Left" spectrum by how they view social equality and hierarchy. The Left seeks to dismantle traditional hierarchies to create equality; the Right seeks to preserve or enforce rigid hierarchies to maintain order, tradition, or nation.

Here is what debunks their argument:

Their first mistake is they are redefining the entire historical political spectrum based purely on modern American libertarianism. Free markets, small government, and individual liberty are hallmarks of classical liberalism and libertarianism—they are not the defining features of the global, historical Right.

By that logic, absolute monarchies, military dictatorships, and feudal systems would be 'Left-wing' because they feature massive government control and no personal freedom. That is historically absurd.

Here is why his argument falls apart:

1. Totalitarianism is not exclusive to the Left
Both the Far-Left and the Far-Right can be authoritarian and totalitarian. Political scientists use the Political Compass (which separates the economic axis from the authoritarian axis) to explain this.
  • The Far-Left Totalitarian (e.g., Stalin): Uses total state control to forcibly flatten society, abolish private property, and eliminate social classes.
  • The Far-Right Totalitarian (e.g., Hitler): Uses total state control to enforce a rigid racial hierarchy, crush labor, protect private corporate monopolies, and launch nationalist wars.
Authoritarianism is the method, but the goals of Hitler and Stalin were on opposite sides of the spectrum.

2. Hitler’s economic control was Right-Wing "Corporatism"
Hitler did not want a free market, but his regulation of industry was fundamentally right-wing.
  • Left-wing regulation seizes corporate wealth to distribute it to the workers.
  • Hitler’s regulation protected corporate wealth and used state power to enrich industrialists (like Krupp and Porsche) in exchange for weapons. He banned strikes, froze workers' wages, and forced labor to benefit private corporate profits. That is called corporatism or crony capitalism, which is a hallmark of right-wing fascism, not left-wing socialism.

3. Racism and Nationalism are historically Far-Right
You asked where Hitler wanted tolerance toward race or religion. He didn't—and that is exactly what makes him Far-Right.
  • The political Left is historically rooted in egalitarianism and internationalism (the idea that all human beings or workers are equal, regardless of nationality or race).
  • The political Right has historically focused on nationalism, traditionalism, and social hierarchy. Hitler took right-wing nationalism to its absolute, psychotic extreme: ultra-nationalism and racial supremacy. Forcing a rigid hierarchy where one race is superior to all others is the ultimate rejection of left-wing egalitarianism.

Summary
Mainstream historians don't 'reframe' Hitler to protect the Left. They categorize him as Far-Right because his core ideology was built on hyper-nationalism, the preservation of private corporate property, the destruction of labor unions, and a fanatical belief in human inequality.


He was a totalitarian dictator, but he operated entirely on the Far-Right of the political spectrum."
Click to expand...
Grok is just totally wrong here. Grok's grasp of things is based on the mainstream academic version of political science which is basically a subjective version of facts. There is no measurability, repeatability, or objectiveness in it.
 
Jarod said:
One of the resentment that enabled Hitler to take power, was the German people’s hatred of the Soviets, after WWI.
Click to expand...
ron-swanson-dont-even-care.gif
 
T. A. Gardner said:
.
Click to expand...
Quoting Hitler himself on why he stole the word "socialist." In a 1923 interview with journalist George Sylvester Viereck, Hitler explicitly admitted he was redefining the word to steal it from the Left:

"Our adoption of the term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true socialism is not."
Click to expand...
 
QP! said:
Quoting Hitler himself on why he stole the word "socialist." In a 1923 interview with journalist George Sylvester Viereck, Hitler explicitly admitted he was redefining the word to steal it from the Left:
Click to expand...
That doesn't mean he wasn't a Socialist. It just means he wasn't a Marxian Socialist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top