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

[Grokmaster]

I used AI, it would have taken me an hour to put it as well as Claud did. . .

Where did Hitler fit in

Firmly on the far right, in the standard political-science and historical classification — though it's worth explaining why, since the "National Socialist" name trips people up.

The core markers historians and political scientists use to place a movement on the spectrum are things like: does it treat human worth as fixed by group identity (race, nation, "blood") or does it treat people as fundamentally equal; is it revolutionary against the existing order or does it seek to restore/purify a mythologized past; does it ally with traditional elites (industrialists, military, church) against organized labor, or the reverse. Nazism scores unambiguously on the far-right side of every one of those axes: it was built on racial hierarchy and biological determinism, it was explicitly counter-revolutionary against Bolshevism and Marxism (Hitler's entire early political identity was formed as an anti-communist street-fighting movement), it crushed independent trade unions and folded them into a state-controlled labor front, and it entered power in 1933 through an alliance with conservative elites — industrialists, the army, the old aristocracy — who saw it as a bulwark against the socialist and communist left, not as a fellow-traveler of the left.

Hitler's tome, "Mein Kampf" (Hitler, 1924), plagiarized "The Communist Manifesto" (Marx, Engells, 1848), which massively plagiarized "The Social Contract" , (Russeau, 1762), the foundational document of socialism = nowhere near "rightwing.

Try actually reading something.

 

[QP!]

Hitler's tome, "Mein Kampf" (Hitler, 1924), plagiarized "The Communist Manifesto" (Marx, Engells, 1848), which massively plagiarized "The Social Contract" , (Russeau, 1762), the foundational document of socialism = nowhere near "rightwing.

Try actually reading something.

There is almost nothing in this claim that is accurate and most of it is fundamentally incorrect across multiple historical, philosophical, and factual levels.

Every single assertion linking these books via plagiarism or defining Nazism as "not right-wing" is a fabrication or a deep distortion of political history.
Here is a point-by-point fact check of the claim:

1. Did Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf plagiarize The Communist Manifesto?
Status: Completely False

• Opposing Ideologies: Mein Kampf (published 1925–1926) did not plagiarize The Communist Manifesto (1848); it explicitly positioned itself as its sworn enemy. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• Core Concepts: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels focused their tract on historical materialism, the abolition of private property, and a borderless global class struggle ("Workers of the world, unite!"). Conversely, Hitler’s text is a rambling autobiographical and ideological manifesto centered on extreme racial hierarchy, biological anti-Semitism, violent anti-communism, and the pursuit of Lebensraum (living space) via military conquest. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• The Origin of the Confusion: This specific internet myth often traces back to highly publicized gaffes, such as when a prominent Fox News anchor accidentally stated on air that Karl Marx wrote Mein Kampf in 1848 (before correcting himself to The Communist Manifesto). There is zero textual or conceptual plagiarism between the two documents. [1]

2. Did The Communist Manifesto plagiarize The Social Contract?
Status: False

• Influence vs. Plagiarism: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels did not plagiarize Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract (1762). While Rousseau was a monumental figure of the Enlightenment who questioned private property and influenced later radical thinkers, his work is philosophically distinct from Marxism. [1, 2]
• Fundamental Disagreements: Rousseau's framework is built around individual citizens surrendering liberties to a sovereign state to achieve a "general will." Marx explicitly critiqued social contract theories. Marx viewed the state not as a neutral contract agreed upon by citizens, but as an instrument of class oppression used by the ruling class to maintain economic dominance. Furthermore, Marx's theories rely on industrial economic analysis, a reality that did not exist in Rousseau's 18th-century agrarian world. [1, 2, 3, 4]

3. Is The Social Contract the "foundational document of socialism"?
Status: False

• The True Context: The Social Contract is a foundational document of modern democratic theory, republicanism, and classical liberalism, not socialism.
• Socialism's Actual Origins: While Rousseau's critique of inequality inspired some early "utopian socialists," the foundational texts of modern socialism and communism are widely recognized to be Marx and Engels' own works, alongside earlier 19th-century French economic thinkers like Henri de Saint-Simon and Charles Fourier. [1, 2]

4. Is Nazism "nowhere near right-wing"?
Status: False (Historical Consensus)

• The Political Spectrum: Political scientists and historians universally classify Nazism and fascism as extreme right-wing ideologies.
• The "Socialist" Misconception: Posters who claim Nazism is left-wing usually point to the word "Socialist" in the Nazi Party's official name (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei). However, Hitler and the party redefined "socialism" away from its economic meaning (welfare, worker ownership) to mean subordination to the German race and state.
• Action over Words: Upon taking power, the Nazi regime immediately banned trade unions, brutally executed or imprisoned communists and socialists, and embarked on a massive campaign of privatizing state-owned industries. The term "National Socialist" was used opportunistically to poach working-class voters away from actual leftist parties. [1, 2, 3]

 

[IBDaMann]

I used AI,

Which is why it is wrong. AI regurgitates the data with which it was trained. AI is trained with the data on the internet, which is comprised of the vocal minority.

Anyway, you are wasting your time broadcasting to the world that you are one of those morons who believes everything that is on the internet, because you think that it must be true if it "comes from the internet". I have spent the entire life of the internet mocking the shit out of stupid people like you who believe everything that is on the internet.

I suppose I am the first person to teach you about the reality of AI. You should be ashamed.

Where did Hitler fit in

Firmly on the far right,

I feel sorry for anyone who believes that fascist socialism is somehow anywhere other than the far left.

since the "National Socialist" name trips people up.

The name "National Socialist" doesn't trip anyone up. The National Socialist Workers Party was a socialist party who advocated for national socialism. Again, nobody was tripped up by that. Those who would end up being tripped up are the world's stupidest people who ended up believing that the far-left National Socialist Workers Party was somehow on the far right just because they would read it on the internet and assume that it must be true because it was on the internet.

The core markers historians and political scientists use to place a movement on the spectrum are things like: does it treat human worth as fixed by group identity (race, nation, "blood") or does it treat people as fundamentally equal; is it revolutionary against the existing order or does it seek to restore/purify a mythologized past; does it ally with traditional elites (industrialists, military, church) against organized labor, or the reverse.

None of this is true. You have to be an absolute moron to even consider the possibility that there might be merit to this ... because you read it on the internet.

Nazism scores unambiguously on the far-right side of every one of those axes:

Nope. Naziism scores firmly on the "fascism flavor of Marxist socialism" side of the axis ... which happens to be the farthest left point possible without being straight up communism.

Jarod, you are an idiot, even if idiots would feel insulted by the association.

 

[IBDaMann]

*** STUPID QUESTION ALERT ***​

How come hitlers ca'lick church and yours never excommunicate him

*** STUPID QUESTION ALERT ***​

Answer 1: Hitler didn't have a Catholic church.
Answer 2: The Catholic church does not excommunicate dead people.

 

[Jarod]

Which is why it is wrong. AI regurgitates the data with which it was trained. AI is trained with the data on the internet, which is comprised of the vocal minority.

Anyway, you are wasting your time broadcasting to the world that you are one of those morons who believes everything that is on the internet, because you think that it must be true if it "comes from the internet". I have spent the entire life of the internet mocking the shit out of stupid people like you who believe everything that is on the internet.

I suppose I am the first person to teach you about the reality of AI. You should be ashamed.


I feel sorry for anyone who believes that fascist socialism is somehow anywhere other than the far left.


The name "National Socialist" doesn't trip anyone up. The National Socialist Workers Party was a socialist party who advocated for national socialism. Again, nobody was tripped up by that. Those who would end up being tripped up are the world's stupidest people who ended up believing that the far-left National Socialist Workers Party was somehow on the far right just because they would read it on the internet and assume that it must be true because it was on the internet.


None of this is true. You have to be an absolute moron to even consider the possibility that there might be merit to this ... because you read it on the internet.


Nope. Naziism scores firmly on the "fascism flavor of Marxist socialism" side of the axis ... which happens to be the farthest left point possible without being straight up communism.

Jarod, you are an idiot, even if idiots would feel insulted by the association.

Triggered?

 

[IBDaMann]

There is almost nothing in this claim that is accurate and most of it is fundamentally incorrect across multiple historical, philosophical, and factual levels.

Too funny!

@QP! insists that Rosseau somehow did not argue, and that Marx somehow did not adopt, that:

* social inequality arises from institutions and the development of private property, not from human nature which is inherently altruistic.
* some people exploit others, not because human nature seeks to control resources but that "society is to blame" for creating the conditions that force that behavior despite the altruistic human nature
* genuine freedom requires participation in a political community governed by the collective will, otherwise people who are legally free are nonetheless enslaved by the conditions established by society.
* the idea of collective self-government emerging from a collective will that engineers society around collective interests instead of private accumulation

Hey, @QP!, you're an idiot. Try actually reading something.

 

[IBDaMann]

Triggered?

Forfeiting so rapidly? Was your plan all along to simply waste JPP bandwidth with a stupid thread that you knew from the beginning was based on false OP?

 

[Into the Night]

There is almost nothing in this claim that is accurate and most of it is fundamentally incorrect across multiple historical, philosophical, and factual levels.

Every single assertion linking these books via plagiarism or defining Nazism as "not right-wing" is a fabrication or a deep distortion of political history.
Here is a point-by-point fact check of the claim:

1. Did Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf plagiarize The Communist Manifesto?
Status: Completely False

• Opposing Ideologies: Mein Kampf (published 1925–1926) did not plagiarize The Communist Manifesto (1848); it explicitly positioned itself as its sworn enemy. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• Core Concepts: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels focused their tract on historical materialism, the abolition of private property, and a borderless global class struggle ("Workers of the world, unite!"). Conversely, Hitler’s text is a rambling autobiographical and ideological manifesto centered on extreme racial hierarchy, biological anti-Semitism, violent anti-communism, and the pursuit of Lebensraum (living space) via military conquest. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• The Origin of the Confusion: This specific internet myth often traces back to highly publicized gaffes, such as when a prominent Fox News anchor accidentally stated on air that Karl Marx wrote Mein Kampf in 1848 (before correcting himself to The Communist Manifesto). There is zero textual or conceptual plagiarism between the two documents. [1]

Hitler was both a communist and a fascist. Both are socialism. Go read Mein Kampf and the writings of Karl Marx.

2. Did The Communist Manifesto plagiarize The Social Contract?
Status: False

• Influence vs. Plagiarism: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels did not plagiarize Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract (1762). While Rousseau was a monumental figure of the Enlightenment who questioned private property and influenced later radical thinkers, his work is philosophically distinct from Marxism. [1, 2]
• Fundamental Disagreements: Rousseau's framework is built around individual citizens surrendering liberties to a sovereign state to achieve a "general will." Marx explicitly critiqued social contract theories. Marx viewed the state not as a neutral contract agreed upon by citizens, but as an instrument of class oppression used by the ruling class to maintain economic dominance. Furthermore, Marx's theories rely on industrial economic analysis, a reality that did not exist in Rousseau's 18th-century agrarian world. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Go read the writings of Karl Marx.

3. Is The Social Contract the "foundational document of socialism"?
Status: False

• The True Context: The Social Contract is a foundational document of modern democratic theory, republicanism, and classical liberalism, not socialism.
• Socialism's Actual Origins: While Rousseau's critique of inequality inspired some early "utopian socialists," the foundational texts of modern socialism and communism are widely recognized to be Marx and Engels' own works, alongside earlier 19th-century French economic thinkers like Henri de Saint-Simon and Charles Fourier. [1, 2]

Hitler was a socialist.
Karl Marx was a socialist.
Democrats today are socialist.

4. Is Nazism "nowhere near right-wing"?
Status: False (Historical Consensus)

• The Political Spectrum: Political scientists and historians universally classify Nazism and fascism as extreme right-wing ideologies.
• The "Socialist" Misconception: Posters who claim Nazism is left-wing usually point to the word "Socialist" in the Nazi Party's official name (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei). However, Hitler and the party redefined "socialism" away from its economic meaning (welfare, worker ownership) to mean subordination to the German race and state.
• Action over Words: Upon taking power, the Nazi regime immediately banned trade unions, brutally executed or imprisoned communists and socialists, and embarked on a massive campaign of privatizing state-owned industries. The term "National Socialist" was used opportunistically to poach working-class voters away from actual leftist parties. [1, 2, 3]

Hitler only imprisoned Stalinists. He didn't imprison Nazi socialists.
Hitler did not privatize anything.

 

[martin]

Triggered?

Forget him. Ideologues say what they're programmed to say. They're best left to themselves.

 

[Guno צְבִי]

Hitler's tome, "Mein Kampf" (Hitler, 1924), plagiarized "The Communist Manifesto" (Marx, Engells, 1848), which massively plagiarized "The Social Contract" , (Russeau, 1762), the foundational document of socialism = nowhere near "rightwing.

Try actually reading something.

^^^^^^^^^^^
Did you even finish H.S.?

 

[Walt]

Hitler's tome, "Mein Kampf" (Hitler, 1924), plagiarized "The Communist Manifesto" (Marx, Engells, 1848), which massively plagiarized "The Social Contract" , (Russeau, 1762), the foundational document of socialism = nowhere near "rightwing.

Mein Kampf called for the elimination of Communism, and said that any ideas of class struggle is wrong. The Social Contract barely touched on economics, because economics was not a thing yet. You could not be more wrong.

 

[LurchAddams]

All of his actual, enacted, social and economic policies were on the Left.
As with other far Left governments, Hitler enacted an absolute dictatorship to achieve his ends.
That Hitler pushed Nationalism over Internationalism doesn't preclude his being on the Left.

You're describing trump. You don't realize it because you're insane.

 

[martin]

Many communes, much of the Old West in the US, that sort of thing. Simply being to the Right of someone more radical on the Left doesn't put you on the Right.

View attachment 95954

It comes back this graph.

Your graph is ridiculous. For the Left there is one overriding policy: individual liberty. Welcome to The Bill of Rights. The Right never stops nicking at its edges.

 

[martin]

There is almost nothing in this claim that is accurate and most of it is fundamentally incorrect across multiple historical, philosophical, and factual levels.

Every single assertion linking these books via plagiarism or defining Nazism as "not right-wing" is a fabrication or a deep distortion of political history.
Here is a point-by-point fact check of the claim:

1. Did Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf plagiarize The Communist Manifesto?
Status: Completely False

• Opposing Ideologies: Mein Kampf (published 1925–1926) did not plagiarize The Communist Manifesto (1848); it explicitly positioned itself as its sworn enemy. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• Core Concepts: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels focused their tract on historical materialism, the abolition of private property, and a borderless global class struggle ("Workers of the world, unite!"). Conversely, Hitler’s text is a rambling autobiographical and ideological manifesto centered on extreme racial hierarchy, biological anti-Semitism, violent anti-communism, and the pursuit of Lebensraum (living space) via military conquest. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• The Origin of the Confusion: This specific internet myth often traces back to highly publicized gaffes, such as when a prominent Fox News anchor accidentally stated on air that Karl Marx wrote Mein Kampf in 1848 (before correcting himself to The Communist Manifesto). There is zero textual or conceptual plagiarism between the two documents. [1]

2. Did The Communist Manifesto plagiarize The Social Contract?
Status: False

• Influence vs. Plagiarism: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels did not plagiarize Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract (1762). While Rousseau was a monumental figure of the Enlightenment who questioned private property and influenced later radical thinkers, his work is philosophically distinct from Marxism. [1, 2]
• Fundamental Disagreements: Rousseau's framework is built around individual citizens surrendering liberties to a sovereign state to achieve a "general will." Marx explicitly critiqued social contract theories. Marx viewed the state not as a neutral contract agreed upon by citizens, but as an instrument of class oppression used by the ruling class to maintain economic dominance. Furthermore, Marx's theories rely on industrial economic analysis, a reality that did not exist in Rousseau's 18th-century agrarian world. [1, 2, 3, 4]

3. Is The Social Contract the "foundational document of socialism"?
Status: False

• The True Context: The Social Contract is a foundational document of modern democratic theory, republicanism, and classical liberalism, not socialism.
• Socialism's Actual Origins: While Rousseau's critique of inequality inspired some early "utopian socialists," the foundational texts of modern socialism and communism are widely recognized to be Marx and Engels' own works, alongside earlier 19th-century French economic thinkers like Henri de Saint-Simon and Charles Fourier. [1, 2]

4. Is Nazism "nowhere near right-wing"?
Status: False (Historical Consensus)

• The Political Spectrum: Political scientists and historians universally classify Nazism and fascism as extreme right-wing ideologies.
• The "Socialist" Misconception: Posters who claim Nazism is left-wing usually point to the word "Socialist" in the Nazi Party's official name (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei). However, Hitler and the party redefined "socialism" away from its economic meaning (welfare, worker ownership) to mean subordination to the German race and state.
• Action over Words: Upon taking power, the Nazi regime immediately banned trade unions, brutally executed or imprisoned communists and socialists, and embarked on a massive campaign of privatizing state-owned industries. The term "National Socialist" was used opportunistically to poach working-class voters away from actual leftist parties. [1, 2, 3]

You gave him a better answer than he deserves.

 

[IBDaMann]

Mein Kampf called for the elimination of Communism,

The socialist mantra.

and said that any ideas of class struggle is wrong.

Giovanni Gentile, the creator of fascism, made socialism far more popular by eliminating the focus on class struggle and replaced it with nationalism. That theme resonated with Hitler who became a socialist.

To this day, socialism still reverberates within the nationalism of the various countries, which is why Europe and the EU are so far to the left as a continent and why all their policies are socialist in nature. It's no wonder the American colonies broke free from that shit; we don't put up with that crap.

The Social Contract barely touched on economics

... because sound economic principles are the enemy of socialism. A socialist would bet money that the S&P 500 Index will be below 5,000 by next Friday. Denial of human nature is the bread and butter of socialism.

S&P 500 Index: 7,650.50

@Walt, what are you doing chiming in?

 

[IBDaMann]

You're describing trump.

... and no explanation will be forthcoming. Fascist socialists are the extreme left. Plain vanilla socialists are just a nudge to the right of the extreme left. The DNC is somewhere in between.

Trump is just right of center, focused more on supporting individual freedoms and eliminating DNC lawfare and election cheating.

You don't realize it because you're insane.

I might very well be, but two things can be true at the same time.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I used AI, it would have taken me an hour to put it as well as Claud did. . .

Where did Hitler fit in

Firmly on the far right, in the standard political-science and historical classification — though it's worth explaining why, since the "National Socialist" name trips people up.

The core markers historians and political scientists use to place a movement on the spectrum are things like: does it treat human worth as fixed by group identity (race, nation, "blood") or does it treat people as fundamentally equal; is it revolutionary against the existing order or does it seek to restore/purify a mythologized past; does it ally with traditional elites (industrialists, military, church) against organized labor, or the reverse. Nazism scores unambiguously on the far-right side of every one of those axes: it was built on racial hierarchy and biological determinism, it was explicitly counter-revolutionary against Bolshevism and Marxism (Hitler's entire early political identity was formed as an anti-communist street-fighting movement), it crushed independent trade unions and folded them into a state-controlled labor front, and it entered power in 1933 through an alliance with conservative elites — industrialists, the army, the old aristocracy — who saw it as a bulwark against the socialist and communist left, not as a fellow-traveler of the left.

Slow hate day, Jeri?

But I get your point.

The Nazis were collectivist totalitarians with one party rule, absolute control of the economy, violent suppression of opposition parties, state control of religion, and party control of the press.

That's vastly different than you Communists, who are collectivist totalitarians with one party rule, absolute control of the economy, violent suppression of opposition parties, state control of religion, and party control of the press.

 

[Uncensored2008]

They are wrong. AI is a parrot.

It also matters how you phrase the question. Jeri put up a dishonest query and got a dishonest answer, as he sought.

The Nazis and the Communists are both Totalitarians. Jeri is trying to take heat off of his party which is getting slaughtered over transitioning to full on Communism. He is trotting out the old, fully debunked lie that Nazis were somehow "right wing."

The reality is that the left, and especially the American left LOVED Adolf Hitler, just as they loved his twin, Joseph Stalin. Notable leftists such as Margaret Sanger and Charlie Chaplin heaped praise on BOTH men.

The democrats face a disastrous midterm because the Soviet style Communism they promote doesn't resonate with the American people the way the childish brats who rule their party thought it would.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No and they explain it, tell me why you believe he was on the Left?

Hitler was a collectivist totalitarian who sought to enslave the world under his rule.

No different than Stalin.

To save time, I'll just playback what you frauds always say;

Typical exchange with a democrat:

democrat: Fascism is right wing
American: What makes it right wing?
d: Because it's fascist
A: Okay, but what makes fascism right wing?
d: because it's capitalist
A: Weren’t Mussolini and Hitler collectivists with the state controlling the means of production?
d: They were corporatists
A: So they sold stock in an exchange?
d: well, there were private owners
A: So there was no exchange or stock involved like a corporation would use?
d: greedy Capitalists pigs
A: but there was no stock for the public to buy and ownership was set by the party that ruled the government?
d: see - capitalists
A: Government controlling the means of production is capitalism?
d: Racist
A: isn't racism a collectivist concept? The denial of individualism in favor of group identity?
d: Racism is right wing
A: From the trail of tears, slavery, the Klan, Jim Crow, to BLM, haven't the democrats been behind virtually all racism in America?
d: Democrats were Republicans back then
A: That's just stupid. Back to fascism.
d: Fascism is right wing
A: Fascism holds that the state - the government, is supreme. Isn't that what democrats claim?
d: Republicans are fascists
A: Don't Republicans advocate for individual civil rights?
d: We need courts to make laws at the federal level to ensure rights for women by imposing law from the top
A: shouldn't people decide for themselves on a state by state basis?
d: You're destroying democracy

 

[Uncensored2008]

Gardner supports Trump. All you need to know as to his knowledge of fascism and authoritarianism.

Says the Platner supporter.