Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why is socialism very often turned into a synonym for communism? Socialism came FIRST, and communism then evolved FROM socialism. They are not the same, and there are even different types of communism.
(Plus, according to an official study, many of the most democratic countries in the world (number one is socialistic) are socialist countries, so socialism in itself is not a bad ideology. Democracy index | Liberty and justice for some | Economist.com)
I had a test in politics and ideologies this Thursday, and according to the four books (plus two films) we had to read about this, nazism is far from socialism. Socialism is on the left, and nazism on the right. (Socialism believes everyone is equal in value, whilst nazism thinks different kinds of people are of different value.)
Communism is on the furthest left, and nazism on the furthest right. They're opposite to each others, so the nazis were no more socialists than Stalin was a conservative.
As has been mentioned here before, the nazis called themselves "socialists" because "socialism" is the ideology for the labourers. It was the labourers, the poor people who were the most affected by the depression in the 30s, who they targeted, because they were the ones most desperate for a strong leader who would make everything better for them. By calling themselves "socialists", they caught the labourers attention and their votes and support.
Maybe they intended to be socialistic in the beginning, but calling onself something and then acting followingly are two totally different things.
I can say I am the nicest person in the world, and then go out and hit my brother or a total stranger.
I can still call myself the nicest person, but I will not be the nicest person.
We just need to look at the actions of for example the nazis to see that they weren't what they said they were.
Stalin said he was a communist, but if one looks up the definition of what a true communist is, he is most certainly not.
The theoretical definition and the practiced definition are not the same.
There is a fact here that we can't ignore: Hitler is the most famous nazi in the world, and he despised communism and socialism. He saw socialism as part of a Jewish conspiracy, and turned around and tried to take down Russia despite their alliency in Operation Barbarossa since he despised Stalins communistic approach.
The Name 'National Socialist' is sort of a misnomer- since the Nazi's where an ultra right wing political organization also know as 'Fascists'. Modern socialism (which the Nazi's where NOT) leans to the left- with various degrees on the spectrum.
On thing is for certain extreme left and right regimes meet in the end- the difference however is there is no private ownership in extreme socialist governments- like Communist Russia- while the far right of Hitler, Mussolini and Franco all supported a corporate private economic idea.
They where (the Nazi's) of course a harsh and brutal totalitarian state, that espoused all the classic ideals of fascism and the far right. Nazi Germany perhaps represents the most far right regime in all of History.
Fascism is described by Wikipedia
An authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests subordinate to the interests of the state. Fascists seek to forge a type of national unity, usually based on (but not limited to) ethnic, cultural, racial, religious attributes. Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: nationalism, statism, militarism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, corporatism, populism, collectivism, and opposition to political and economic liberalism.
Unlike A harsh left wing totalitarian state like Stalinist Russia - there was private property (in Nazi Germany) and there was a strong corporate sector that was supported by the Nazi's. Examples where the Krupp munitions; Also the company that produced Zyklon B- the crystal used in the gas chambers by the Nazi's, and also Mercedes Benz.
Last edited by skytrekker; 12-02-2007 at 07:56 AM..
Well, I would say yes. Someone here wrote that Socialism per definition means idea of a classless society - that's news to me. That sounds more like Communism to me. The word "Socialism" has today been transformed into meaning International Socialism, which's why some people don't think of Nazism, or National Socialism, as a form of Socialism. The International Socialists and Communists look on class, which is determined by occupation and income, as a way of uniting people while National Socialists look upon ethnic and racial backgrounds. The idea that the interests of the collective, the group, should be put before the interests of the individual exists in both ideologies. This collective vs. individual-thing to me is the general spectrum of politics. Then there's the spectrum of economical politics which is centrally-planned or heavily state-influenced vs. free-market and free-trade. Both Communism and National Socialism seek to achieve self-sufficiency as far as it is possible, which's also why Hitler's Germany and the Soviet Union weren't affected by the economic instabilities of 1937, as noted by professor Carroll Quigley on page 360 in his book of dry history entitled Tragedy and Hope:
Quote:
Except for Germany and Russia, most countries in the latter half [Western countries]
of 1937 experienced sharp recession.
I see quite some "Socialistic" points in the NSDAP Program:
All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.
The first obligation of every citizen must be to work both spiritually and physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the interests of the universality, but must have its result within the framework of the whole for the benefit of all Consequently we demand:
Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of rent-slavery.
We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).
We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on land and prevention of all speculation in land.
There are probably a few more and there is even more Socialistic rhetoric in Adolf Hitler's autobiography Mein Kampf.
Here follows a blog post about the subject in which the author argues that Adolf Hitler indeed was a Socialist:
Democratic Peace: Hitler Was A Socialist (http://freedomspeace.blogspot.com/2005/08/hitler-was-socialist.html - broken link)
And here's another link, but the page is a little disorganized:
It's also known that Adolf Hitler's solution to the huge unemployment when he assumed power was the Reicharbeitsdienst, or National Labor Service. All men who had reached the age of 18, and who were physically healthy, had to go through six months of labor service for the state. They would live in camps organized into different districts. They received food and shelter, and the wages were low - sort of like pocket money. ALL young men had to go through this, no matter what class you belonged to. No matter who your father was. You were to be discplined and work as hard as the boy of the farmer of the lower class standing next to you.
Socialism is on the left, and nazism on the right. (Socialism believes everyone is equal in value, whilst nazism thinks different kinds of people are of different value.)
Communism is on the furthest left, and nazism on the furthest right. They're opposite to each others, so the nazis were no more socialists than Stalin was a conservative.
That's interesting. What is your definition of the political spectrum and the economical political spectrum then? And to my knowledge, National Socialism does not strictly evaluate any people or race. (I wonder what the value of the Chinese are or perhaps the British.) The Communists aren't known to "consider everybody equals", no, because they exclude the Capitalists, which basically mean anyone living a better life than themselves, regardless if he is a "true" Capitalist or not. In the Soviet Union and most other known Communist and Socialist states, Capitalists were deprived of their valuables and thrown into slave-labour camps. The same applied to those who challenged the authorities. So I won't buy into the excuse of "well those states were not Communist/Socialist" - they were, more or less.
cosmonewman - that's my point: fascists are only 'right wing' compared to other European socialists ('traditional'). Where does Capitalism fall in your spectrum? Oh, not there at all? Somewhere in the middle? Or does 'Capitalist' mean Jewish (Karl Marx - 'On the Jewish Question')?
Luke81 - thank you for the polite discourse. I don't look only at the name 'National Socialist', but at Nazi policies, for example economic policies:
Workers were required to belong to the State-controlled German Labor Front, were paid wages determined by the State, and took State-controlled vacations (Strength through Joy).
The business owners were required to join the Nazi Party and were under strict State control; were required to produce State-mandated goods under a centrally-planned economy; were required to sell goods at prices set by the State, and organized into State-controlled industry cartels.
You might quibble that because the businesses were privately 'owned' - that's not 'true' socialism - but then you're arguing between absolute State-control versus absolute State-control through State-ownership.
So THAT'S the problem with Socialism, it's just never been done correctly
How about the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party? Or are they not really Socialists either?
I fully agree, well written. The name of the party doesn't tell me anything - they could call themselves "Ultra-right Fascists", and I'd still consider them to be Socialists because of their basic political ideals. I couldn't consider the policies, in particular the economic and social policies, of Hitler's Germany to be "right-wing". There's nothing "right-wing" about them. Will someone please explain to me what is so "right-wing" about seeking to achieve national self-sufficiency? Or nationalizing large industries? Or is it because private property wasn't forbidden that you say they were far-right?
According to my views on the political spectrums, there is little "far-right" in Nazism, or National Socialism, and there was little "far-right" in Hitler's Germany. Some people pull the immigration-card and say "hey! they were anti-immigrant! that's far-right!", but I don't see what immigration policies has to do with the political spectrum anyway. It's something new it seems.
skytrekker - Do you really want to discuss which US political party most resembles fascism? Given your post, you might be surprised... Maybe you could post that on the P&OC forum...
Sweden - thanks for validating my comment about the European view of the political spectrum. Where does capitalism fall on your spectrum? Where does the USA fit?
FYI, the Economist, while a respected publication, is not "an official study". The 'Democracy Index' survey is a reporter's opinion. It is interesting, thanks for the link.
Reactionary, many have done an excellent job here of attempting to show the differences between Socialism and Fascism aka the 'far right'.
There are distinct political and historical differences-
as much as History and yes Political science remain in the genre of 'soft science' they are nonetheless logical and have a basis for their existence, and in the end a strong degree of reality.
As far as going over to the POC on this issue regarding the current events in Washington DC USA- it is also part of history, no?
Also I may add- when many hear something like The National Socialist Party in Germany 1933-1945- they think of 'socialists' and Communists- nothing could be further from the truth. Historically and politically the Nazi's where not socialists but right wing fascists- there is a very distinct difference. Unfortunately many in the USA when they hear the word 'socialist' they think of Communism, and sadly do not understand the concept of 'fascism'.
Last edited by skytrekker; 12-02-2007 at 06:32 PM..
skytrekker - maybe you should start an 'Are Communists socialists?' thread
Maybe you can answer the question then, if Commies are left and Nazis are right, where is capitalism? Where is the US on that spectrum?
Based on economic policy alone, IMO one would have to conclude that capitalism and the US are farther 'right' than the Nazis... which would of course, make Nazis lefties.
however in Political Theory the Nazi's where firm believers in private capital and ownership, and hated the Communists for not allowing it.
Nazi Germany truly represented fascism to its worse extent. I do not agree with you that the Nazi's where 'further left' then the current politics in this country-
Remember the far right has always believed in a Social Darwinist' type of belief, that the strong survive and the weak shall parish. The Nazi's thought that all inferior 'races' should be exported or exterminated.
Economically, Nazi Germany was a corporate state- that allowed the various German companies I alluded to above, huge tax cuts-
To say that current day America is further to the right, is not really accurate. Despite nearly 40 years since the Conservative revolution took place, we have not become what Germany was in 1939 by a long shot- Nazi Germany was much further to the right. It started preemptive wars, scapegoated its citizens and blamed 'inferior races' for the Country's problems, was anti liberal, anti science, anti intellectual, extremely nationalistic, and certainly was a model for 20th century right wing totalitarianism.
In many ways present day USA-resembles right wing fascism- as Americans we can stem this dangerous slide to the netherworld of extremism.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
