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.
No that is simply incorrect--what you are putting forth is right wing propaganda. Hitler was a Nationalist--and that is the exact political movement that Trump is pushing today--Nationalism. Socialism has nothing to do with eugenics or fascism, but nationalism does.
Any socialism at all in Germany was purged in the 30s. It was capitalist businessmen favoring Nazis--not socialists. Righties. Private businesses were not destroyed by the Nazis, and the right-wing nationalism was laden with racism. They went after Jewish businesses and redistributed ownership to nationalists, but certainly never destroyed them. Nazis were business friendly.
"...Right-Wingers often claim Hitler and the Nazis were socialist leftist because their party was named "National Socialist." The term "Socialist" was a popular political term like "Democratic" is today. The totalitarian state of North Korea calls itself the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea."
"Right-Wing Fundamentalists love to make this argument the Nazis were leftists because it disguises the fact that the Nazis were pro-Christian, anti-modernist, anti-liberal, anti-Marxist (Russia was their terrorist state and the Nazis killed, or jailed thousands of German communists), anti-abortion, anti-atheist, pro-traditional values and anti-evolutionists.."
^^This. Hitler is one of my favorite subjects and I've been studying Nazi Germany for decades. If you actually take time to read what Hitler said and practiced, you'd see that he was no leftist. Nationalism is not leftist. Also note that Hitler was vehemently anti-communist. You have to realize that the same words came mean different things at different times in history and in different situations. You can't just look at the word "socialist" and thing it meant the same thing to Hitler as it does to you.
No, it isn't. You're just loathe to admit it. Can't get any more collectivist (Lefty) than confiscating the wealth someone else has earned, killing them, and then redistributing their wealth.
Cutting off most of my post does not make your case any stronger.
^^This. Hitler is one of my favorite subjects and I've been studying Nazi Germany for decades. If you actually take time to read what Hitler said and practiced, you'd see that he was no leftist. Nationalism is not leftist. Also note that Hitler was vehemently anti-communist. You have to realize that the same words came mean different things at different times in history and in different situations. You can't just look at the word "socialist" and thing it meant the same thing to Hitler as it does to you.
Nationalism is neither left or right.
Hitler was to the left of FDR on economic issues. Many Keynesians praised Hitler between 1933 and 1936 while those on the right, Mises is a prime example, condemned him.
Yes, given the choice between Marxism and Fascism businesses preferred fascism.
Classical liberalism believed in free markets, free trade and free men. That sure as hell is not what socialists and fascists believe in.
No it means that people can't be defined by their groups. It also assume that characteristics are mutable. Realist believe that there are things about people that can't be changed. So basically they don't believe in the idea of individualism because they don't believe in free will
You are making terrible arguments here. Recognizing group differences does not mean that you don't believe in free will. I don't even understand the thought process that brought you to that conclusion.
Yes, there are many things that a person can't change about himself. Can you change your height? No. You can't change your brain either. It's not really that difficult to understand.
No it means that people can't be defined by their groups. It also assume that characteristics are mutable. Realist believe that there are things about people that can't be changed. So basically they don't believe in the idea of individualism because they don't believe in free will
That's not what they believe at all. They believe groups can be defined by their group identity but individuals within a group vary. What your describing sounds more like the left's racial politics.
You are making terrible arguments here. Recognizing group differences does not mean that you don't believe in free will. I don't even understand the thought process that brought you to that conclusion.
Yes, there are many things that a person can't change about himself. Can you change your height? No. You can't change your brain either. It's not really that difficult to understand.
lol, funny how you extend this to "physical" characteristics as your one example. When you know good and well that race realist don't measure height. No race realist spend an incredible amount of time talking about people's propensity for violence, intellect, and lack of morality as being immutable traits inherit and genetically predisposed based on their groups.
The is is no way to promote race realism and individualism. One is strictly concerned with how group characteristics define you as a person, meaning that to some degree you must look at the group before you look at the individual.
That's not what they believe at all. They believe groups can be defined by their group identity but individuals within a group vary. What your describing sounds more like the left's racial politics.
Then describe to me what actually makes you different than the left? Seems like individual choice is clearly not what realist and the alternative right emphasize.
The is is no way to promote race realism and individualism. One is strictly concerned with how group characteristics define you as a person, meaning that to some degree you must look at the group before you look at the individual.
This is a strawman. No, they are concerned about how a group's characteristics define a group and that the characteristics has a genetic and heritable basis.
This is a strawman. No, they are concerned about how a group's characteristics define a group and that the characteristics has a genetic and heritable basis.
So exactly is this an individualistic viewpoint? You marry yourself to a practice that does it's best to put people in groups, and then you come here and say that people on the alternative right are all about individualism. Yet you'd be hard pressed to hear any alt right addressing people as individuals at all. I mean trust me I've heard enough alt right nonsense over the years, and it's about as much at odds as individualism is as marxism is.
So why don't you educate me, like seriously. How is the Alt Right pro individualism.
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.
