Myth: Hitler was a leftist.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm | STEVE KANGAS

[Pontiac]

Summary

Many conservatives accuse Hitler of being a leftist, on the grounds that his party was named "National Socialist."

But socialism requires worker ownership and control of the means of production.

In Nazi Germany, private capitalist individuals owned the means of production, and they in turn were frequently controlled by the Nazi party and state.

True socialism does not advocate such economic dictatorship -- it can only be democratic. Hitler's other political beliefs place him almost always on the far right.

He advocated racism over racial tolerance, eugenics over freedom of reproduction, merit over equality, competition over cooperation, power politics and militarism over pacifism, dictatorship over democracy, capitalism over Marxism, realism over idealism, nationalism over internationalism, exclusiveness over inclusiveness, common sense over theory or science, pragmatism over principle, and even held friendly relations with the Church, even though he was an atheist.

[otness_e]

“Endpoint leftism: Totalitarian.

Endpoint rightism: Anarchist.”

Yeah, I have to contest that last point (though I do fully agree with you that totalitarianism is one of the endpoints of leftism, and especially that Fascism is totalitarianism and thus of the left).

I can name several anarchists who were if anything of the far left. Like Bill Ayers, Jean-Paul Sartre, Michel Foucault, Sacco and Vanzetti, Mikhail Bakunen, and even Karl Marx (don’t forget, the state was also intended to fade away in Marx’s vision just as private ownership was supposed to.). As a matter of fact, the guy who founded anarchism, Pierre Joseph Proudhon, advocated for many of the same stuff the Jacobins and Marxists advocated for, even using similar anti-Capitalist slogans such as “property is theft.” Saying Anarchism is the endpoint of rightism is as much of a lie as saying fascism is the endpoint of rightism.

[otness_e]

“Socialism and national socialism only split in the late 19th Century. In the US, Woodrow Wilson was the internationalist socialist, and Teddy Roosevelt was the national socialist.

At the time, the extreme left were called anarchists.”

In a way, they still are, especially when you remember that even the likes of Bill Ayers, Michel Foucault, and Jean-Paul Sartre have proclaimed themselves to be full-on anarchists. Which is yet another reason why right wing should NEVER be conflated with anarchism. Anarchism and Totalitarianism occupy the exact same political side (far left).

[otness_e]

Well, you’re definitely correct that anarchy is not the way to go, and that even the Founding Fathers realized this (well, most of them, anyways: Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine might be in the gray area due to their voicing support for the Jacobins even AFTER the September Massacres).

However, monarchies if anything were not really that control-oriented (for goodness sakes, Louis XVI didn’t even BOTHER trying to have Voltaire and Diderot executed despite their explicitly trying to voice a violent rebellion with their works). They’re actually closer to freedom than to totalitarianism if you really think about it. If anything, Jefferson was closer to a totalitarian in outlook (King George is a totalitarian for actually letting Catholics in Canada practice their religion? Really?). Actually, to be honest, totalitarianism and anarchism are the exact same thing. Look at how Sartre and Foucault have no problem advocating for anarchy and yet singing praises for the likes of Che Guevara and Mao Zedong, or even the Ayatollah.

[otness_e]

““True socialism does not advocate such economic dictatorship — it can only be democratic.” Rubbish. Socialism is ALWAYS coercive. Marxists and Fascists are identical: they are all statists.”

To be fair, he’s actually correct since democratic and dictatorships are one and the same. Just ask the French, especially during their revolution. That being said, that just shows how democracy is just evil incarnate.

[otness_e]

Actually, even among Europeans, Hitler’s closer to the far left (in Europe, one adheres to the monarchy to be a right-winger, and Hitler had no interest in restoring that institution, and if anything he even tried to shut down his own allies’ monarchies in Hungary, for example, and that was DURING the war).

[otness_e]

“The idea that you can’t be socialist unless you’re democratic is nonsense.”

Unless you define “democratic” in the vein of the French Revolution. In which case, that’s actually spot-on (and all the more horrifying).

[otness_e]

Well, to be fair, calling it democratic actually does match up with what Marx and Lenin stated it to be, not to mention that they specifically aimed to reenact Robespierre’s Reign of Terror and saw that as an inspiration for socialism (not to mention Gracchus acted as the founding father of socialism/communism, founding it well before Karl Marx entered the scene).

I view “democratic” in terms of how the French Revolution views it, and that’s EXACTLY why I want democratic elements dead, knowing the carnage the French Revolutionaries wrought.

[otness_e]

Sad thing is, democratic isn’t even often, it’s always a dictatorship just as socialism is. Just look at the French Revolution. Heck, even anarchy is a dictatorship. Look at the first anarchistic element, the Jacobins.