Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Aurelius
What is "opposite" about Nationalism and Socialism?

Nationalism and Socialism are two philosophies at opposite ends of the ideological spectrum. Hitler was able to attract both ex-communist workers and their industrialist bosses, by playing both sides off against each other. Hitler's Nationalism emphasized supreme loyalty to the nation and the race, what we'd call patriotism, and the errosion to that effect of personal liberties. At the same time, he appealed to the Left by promising full employment and a redistribution of wealth. The Leftist side of the equation was more or less dropped after the 1934 Night of the Long Knives, by which time he had destroyed the Left and now needed to attract the full support of the middle classes. Certainly by the start of the Second World War, Hitler's Nazism was all Nationalism and no Socialism.

560 posted on 11/15/2002 8:58:05 PM PST by andy_card
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 554 | View Replies ]


To: andy_card
Nationalism and Socialism are two philosophies at opposite ends of the ideological spectrum.

You'd think any 10th grader would know that.

Walt

563 posted on 11/15/2002 9:17:30 PM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 560 | View Replies ]

To: andy_card
"Nationalism and Socialism are two philosophies at opposite ends of the ideological spectrum."

That statement just goes to show how wrong you can be. There is no inherent contradiction whatever between nationalism and socialism. Marxist communism was internationalist, but there is nothing inherent in in the notion of socialism that prevents it from being nationalistic. The whole idea of there being a generic something called "fascism", (with a little "f"), as distinguished from the specifically Italian "Fascism" is basically just a leftist propaganda tool. But, if you insist on a general notion of "fascism" then I think it should be defined as follows: a fascist state is a totalitarian socialist regime not explicitly based on the Marxist model and nationalist rather than internalist in its character and aims. Sweden is probably the only extant fascist state among the industrialized western nations, but many others are a close approximation.

564 posted on 11/15/2002 9:24:49 PM PST by Aurelius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 560 | View Replies ]

To: andy_card
"I am taking a sabatical from FR. I have signed a contract which prohibits me from engaging in any independent partisan political activity, and my lawyer (yes, I consulted him) has advised me that posting on FR is strictly verboten. "

And I didn't think that I was going to get any good news tonight.

569 posted on 11/15/2002 10:10:24 PM PST by Aurelius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 560 | View Replies ]

To: andy_card
Nationalism and Socialism are two philosophies at opposite ends of the ideological spectrum.

That is actually very far from the truth, as was actualized in Nazi political philosophy with disastrous results for everybody else.

Hitler's Nationalism emphasized supreme loyalty to the nation and the race, what we'd call patriotism,

It was much more than simple patriotism. Hitler's vision was a German state of the German Volk embodied in the German Fuehrer. The Volk were the German state by way of composition and their leader, and the state in turn controlled the industry for all practical purposes. Therefore the definition of socialism was met. Contrary to being at odds with socialism, it was the very nationalist element of the Volk that permitted its theoretical achievement to the Nazis.

The Leftist side of the equation was more or less dropped after the 1934 Night of the Long Knives

In political organization as far as marxist-oriented subgroups it was, but not philosophically. Beyond 1934 the Volk concept became integrated with the concept of the Nazi government. The state was said to be a German community of the arian peoples, composed out of those peoples who were said to be symbiotically duty bound to the state and Fuehrer. Throughout the war effort Germans were expected to participate in their communal duties to the state of Germany, which in turn was said to be the Volk. They were expected to work in munitions plant, join the Nazi boy scouts, send their children off to service in the military, and even breed for the future of the German Volk state - truly a very bizarre and apalling system. It was highly oriented around a communal duty embodied and reached through extreme nationalism.

Certainly by the start of the Second World War, Hitler's Nazism was all Nationalism and no Socialism.

Nonsense. By the time the war rolled around, the communal element was pervasive in Nazi society. That there weren't a bunch of socialist political parties and organizations running around in no way precludes the presence of socialism inside the Nazi system. Hitler simply got rid of his competitors in the other marxist parties and later the competitor factions for control of his own party. The remainder (i.e. the Hitler loyalists) were themselves every bit the national socialists of their movement's theoretical background, only they had found the political loyalty that ended up on top. Joe Goebbels is the classic example - a thoroughly marxian-influenced national socialist who found an alliance with Hitler and rode it to the point that he was named the last head of the Nazi state following Hitler's suicide.

571 posted on 11/15/2002 10:35:54 PM PST by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 560 | View Replies ]

To: andy_card
Nationalism and Socialism are two philosophies at opposite ends of the ideological spectrum. Hitler was able to attract both ex-communist workers and their industrialist bosses, by playing both sides off against each other.

Yes, because communism and socialism were so similar, they drew the same people to them. Industrialist bosses, even today, are attracted to socialism because of it's opportunities in the creation of monopolies.

Hitler's Nationalism emphasized supreme loyalty to the nation and the race, what we'd call patriotism, and the errosion to that effect of personal liberties. At the same time, he appealed to the Left by promising full employment and a redistribution of wealth.

This is not inconsistent with socialism. Socialism demands supreme loyalty to the "cause". Because Germany's "people" included only Aryans, the people he was appealing to weren't global workers everywhere...because they weren't any "people" like that, the only ones that counted were his "people".

The Leftist side of the equation was more or less dropped after the 1934 Night of the Long Knives, by which time he had destroyed the Left and now needed to attract the full support of the middle classes. Certainly by the start of the Second World War, Hitler's Nazism was all Nationalism and no Socialism.

Indeed this is false. A quick look at the situation tells us that all industries were under the control of government via strict regulation. The regulations were onerous enough as to be indistinguishable from outright ownership. Pay was dictated, a workers' place in society was dictated, little was left to individual choice or a free market.

The policies in effect exactly parallel those in any other socialist country.
675 posted on 11/17/2002 5:56:08 AM PST by Maelstrom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 560 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson