So much for the gender equality, eh.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Fascism -- the fourteen elements common to all of them
- Thread starter Evangelicalhumanist
- Start date
Heyo
Veteran Member
When people are so uneducated that they think Hitler was socialist and Stalin was fascist, my eyes roll.
It is usually seen on the right-wing side of the political spectrum. But then again, they don't like education so it's to be expected.
Last edited:
Heyo
Veteran Member
Yep. When you shave off the top layer, which was almost exclusively male in the west and the east, gender equality was stronger in the east.
Hitler as a socialist....it's complicated.
Interesting arguments for & against.
Secret Chief
Very strong language
Why do rightwingers deny it. Nazism is too close to home for some I guess.
"The Myth: Adolf Hitler, instigator of World War II in Europe and driving force behind the Holocaust, was a socialist.
The Truth: Hitler hated socialism and communism and worked to destroy these ideologies. Nazism, confused as it was, was based on race, and fundamentally different from class-focused socialism."
- Was Adolf Hitler a Socialist?
"The Myth: Adolf Hitler, instigator of World War II in Europe and driving force behind the Holocaust, was a socialist.
The Truth: Hitler hated socialism and communism and worked to destroy these ideologies. Nazism, confused as it was, was based on race, and fundamentally different from class-focused socialism."
- Was Adolf Hitler a Socialist?
Last edited:
He did, however, take over and gut the National Socialist Party...aka NAZI
Secret Chief
Very strong language
"Hitler found himself investigating the German Workers Party, which had been founded by Anton Drexler on a mixture of ideology which still confuses to this day. It was not, as Hitler then and many now assume, part of the left wing of German politics, but a nationalist, anti-Semitic organization...
...Hitler thus co-authored with Drexler a 25 Point program of demands, and pushed through, in 1920, a change of name: the National Socialist German Workers Party, or NSDAP, Nazi. There were socialist-leaning people in the party at this point, and the Points did include socialist ideas, such as nationalizations. Hitler had little interest in these and kept them to secure party unity while he was challenging for power."
- How the Nazi Party Was Created
This article is based upon a particular understanding
of socialism...not one upon common usage, ie,
dictionary definitions. But as the article points out,
Nazism was socialist early on because it favored
nationalization. And while Hitler backed off on that,
he created a militarized economy that looks much
like a command economy with a degree of control that
usurps ownership. This leans towards the dictionary
definitions of "socialism".
If the left can call the Scandinavian model "socialist",
then Nazi Germany would qualify.
That link doesn't mention GDP and a militarized budget is not a militarized economy. They are different things. Having a military means you have a budget. Having a militarized economy means you're putting everything into war. We're not. Our economy is not mainly based around war, doesn't come from conquering or conquered territories. Our military is a continual financial burden.
Gross Domestic Produce (GDP) is how much income all individuals and corporations make altogether, and taxes including military spending come from that. What matters is the ratio of spending when you are determining whether a nation has militarized its economy. The USA releases that data but closed governments aren't honest and won't release anything that they perceive to be negative, so stop trusting their data. The link also doesn't mention GDP or explain the ratio. It leaves that out, so it doesn't work for the OP question. Also it presumes to know what other countries spent on their military as if those other countries would honestly reveal it. As if they'd tell us purposely how many tanks, planes, bombs, ships, people etc. No, they won't tell us that.
I deny that we're a military fascist country. Its a ridiculous notion if that is what you're implying. Maybe you're not.
To get a picture of how much the USA is militarized we'd need to compare military spending to its GDP.
Heyo
Veteran Member
There are two links. Maybe you missed that.
I'm not. There are 14 criteria for fascism, Supremacy of the military is just one.
The first link alone shows that this criterion fit the US.
It isn't necessary to compare military spending to the GDP as the point is that its a major part of government funding.
The second link is only to show that you claim that the US isn't spending more on the military compared to the GDP is false. Do the maths.
US military spending is more than the next 10 countries combined.
US GDP is half of that of the above countries.
I.e. US military spending is double that of the next 10 countries when compared to GDP.
Secret Chief
Very strong language
From Encyclopedia Britannica, "The world standard in knowledge since 1768":
"Were the Nazis socialists? No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934. But to address this canard fully, one must begin with the birth of the party
...
Over the following years the brothers Otto and Gregor Strasser did much to grow the party by tying Hitler’s racist nationalism to socialist rhetoric that appealed to the suffering lower middle classes. In doing so, the Strassers also succeeded in expanding the Nazi reach beyond its traditional Bavarian base. By the late 1920s, however, with the German economy in free fall, Hitler had enlisted support from wealthy industrialists who sought to pursue avowedly anti-socialist policies. Otto Strasser soon recognized that the Nazis were neither a party of socialists nor a party of workers, and in 1930 he broke away to form the anti-capitalist Schwarze Front (Black Front).
...
Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character.
...
In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month.
...
Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished."
- Were the Nazis Socialists?
"Were the Nazis socialists? No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934. But to address this canard fully, one must begin with the birth of the party
...
Over the following years the brothers Otto and Gregor Strasser did much to grow the party by tying Hitler’s racist nationalism to socialist rhetoric that appealed to the suffering lower middle classes. In doing so, the Strassers also succeeded in expanding the Nazi reach beyond its traditional Bavarian base. By the late 1920s, however, with the German economy in free fall, Hitler had enlisted support from wealthy industrialists who sought to pursue avowedly anti-socialist policies. Otto Strasser soon recognized that the Nazis were neither a party of socialists nor a party of workers, and in 1930 he broke away to form the anti-capitalist Schwarze Front (Black Front).
...
Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character.
...
In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month.
...
Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished."
- Were the Nazis Socialists?
Ah, yes two links. I did fail to integrate those.
For the sake of anyone unfamiliar with the USA I grew up in one of the few military towns. Most of us had a father or someone in the military, but we didn't live with military songs in our hearts. We weren't hoping to get into the military ourselves or desirous of fighting. We were relatively poor compared to people whose parents had better jobs. The military was also not good for families, and we knew that. It took at least one parent away for long periods of time, and many children had trouble dealing with that. It was not Ok, and everyone was worried something might happen to their military person. It was not an enviable situation, and I don't think US people in my generation glorified it.
Secret Chief
Very strong language
So the millions of Allied troops that died, died fighting socialism did they?
I believe they died fighting a rampaging predator
with ambitions of conquering the world. To claim
it was to defeat a label seems ridiculous.
Secret Chief
Very strong language
I think to ignore the politics that drove it and not call it for what it is, is ridiculous.
Describe it accurately...that's the best approach.
But some features of the description will be more
relevant than others at times.
Secret Chief
Very strong language
I agree. Fascism.
That's one description, but it doesn't really
address why we went to war with them.
We don't do that with most fascists.
Secret Chief
Very strong language
Could you provide a link to one of your standard dictionaries that gives a definition of Nazism being a form of socialism? (and I assume the material I quoted in #52 from the Brittanica doesn't find favour for some reason)
Last edited:
I gave an explanation based upon dictionary definitions of socialism.
I didn't make the underlined claim.