Posted on 01/18/2008 11:23:43 AM PST by Postal Dude
Your comments summarize very well. Was a complex issue. I have been watching the following from net flix that might be helpful to some:]
http://www.netflix.com/WatchNowMovie/The_Nazis_A_Warning_from_History/70034545?trkid=199332
Chavez in Venezuela comes to mind...
So, you have just described Nazis in terms derived from the seating arrangements in the French Chamber of Deputies after the French Revolution of 1789 and a political movement from Italy.
Terms are being thrown around without any regard to original meaning and they therefore become meaningless.
During the fall of the Soviet Union, the die-hard Communists were described as "right-wing".
Socialists want power concentrated in the hands of the State. That was the case in both the USSR and Nazi Germany.
The Soviets paid lip service to "the People" and the Nazis paid lip service to "der Volk" but their goal was absolute power in the hands of the State and the crushing of the individual.
The Soviets preached class hatred and the Nazis preached both class and racial hatred.
Same church. Different pews.
I would add that Nazism was very much a cult (personality driven) and not very pure ideology. It would seem that timing and circumstance were very much a key part of the rise to power.
It is really quite simple. Hitler hated everyone that was not a pure Aryan. Period. Whether that be the Russians, the Jews, whoever. He created his own religion to destroy all other religions. To claim that he is even remotedly close to right-wing philosophy is absurd.
Well considering the fact that most abortion clinics are in poor, minority neighbourhoods, I'd say that YES, liberals consider minorities less than themselves.
I particularly recommend to you the speeches of Der Fuehrer himself. Onz dozens of occasions, one especially famous one being his address to the party conclave at Nurnberg on 1 May 1927 he specifically and in so many words identifies the NSDAP as socialists.
The text of many of his speeches can be found on the 'Net, in the original German (which, sadly, I can't read -- I need translations.)
FReegards to you!
Yes, that's liberal.
Cause if it's "in" the internet, you know it's true!
This is what happened to Pat Buchanan....he was sooooooo far to the right, he went “round the bend” and met up with the Far, Far left!
Some do. Some don’t. The Soviets were quite similar to the Nazis in their view of Chechens, Kazakhis, Ingush, Dagostani and numberous other ethnicities. They did not, however, usually find it practical to attempt to exterminate them, preferring instead to keep a harsh military thumb on them.
You’re not getting enough emotion across.
Use more exclamation points.
I think you're right. What most posters to this thread have failed to distinguish is that Communist USSR, Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany were all totalitarian. Top-down iron-fisted control was what they shared in common, not economic views.
Natural Law, as recognized in the U.S. Constitution, was abolished in favor of central planning and secular human control. That still holds true today in the EU, other socialist and Communist nations around the world, and with the American Left.
The totalitarian threat as described by George Orwell is still very much with us although the EU welfare states have substituted a committee of unelected bureaucrats in Brussels instead of one-man dictatorship. The U.S. is inching more and more in the same direction but with international corporations vying with bureaucrats for the "ruler" role.
The "man-as-God" idea of eugenics and elimination of "undesirables" fostered by such as American Margaret Sanger (Planned Parenthood's founder) inspired Hitler's appeal to pagan Germanic Aryan roots and "racial purity." Hatred of Jews was deeply embodied in the German (not to mention Western European) character. Combined with the economic misery brought on Germany by World War I, it rallied the masses behind Hitler in his drive for absolute power.
Whether Nazism was "socialist" or not begs the issue. The real danger to the world, then and now, is totalitarianism. It wears many costumes and tells politically palatable lies, promising Utopia for the downtrodden while passing favors to powerful elites. Does that remind anyone of any current American politicians?
I wouldn't say the nazis were left-wing; they were more of a synthesis of right-wing and left-wing ideas. You can say that for the fascists, maybe even for stalinists.
For me, the point is that right-wing vs. left-wing matters a lot less than the conflict between those who support liberty and constitutionalism on the one side and those who favor tyranny on the other.
When people argue politics, they want all the good to be on one side and all the bad to be on the other. They neglect the similarities between the two sides at any given time.
Right, left, or center, members of the generation born around the turn of the 20th century had things in common that they don't share with those of us who were born later.
Good post.
Well, I don’t know if you noticed, but I put fewer dashes before “Democrats.”
You were still too generous!!
Sure does. And Iraq under Saddam.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.