Posted on 03/22/2005 7:20:59 AM PST by Pikamax
Mussolini actually had been a socialist. So his roots very definitely were "on the left."
But the controversy is a little silly. Nazism and Fascism were syntheses of "right" and "left" ideas of the day, and it's hard now to unsort out the mixed elements and put such movements firmly on one side or the other.
In the context of the 1920s and 1930s -- international communism defined as the "left" and street fighting between National Socialists or Fascists and Communists -- one can make a case that Hitler and Mussolini were more right than left, but that only goes so far, and you miss a lot if you try to pigeonhole their movements according to a right-left schema.
There, thats better.
Hitler only tolerated reading of the New Testament and railed against the Old Testament. He personally worshipped Norse gods.
Suggest your take some time and read Hitler's "Table Talk". He clearly viewed Christianity and Judism in the same light and had for each the same goal.
I am sure that had he made his thoughts public, his universal appeal would certaily have suffered. Use of the religious symbols by the Nazis was a convenient ruse similar to Stalin's sudden "return to religion" after being attacked by Germany.
"Christians were widely condemned as "right wing fanatics"
On this one point, after reading any of the Schiavo threads, I think they may have been right.
"3. Why did facsists never suppress the right, allowing it to survive intact ?"
Stalin, being actually much more viscious than Hitler, first got rid of the moderate politicians, then the left, and then he nailed the right. A grand slam. He got them all. Then they had a dictator, him.
Last but not least, the US has NEVER gone to war much less begun hostilities for 'gain'.
We invade culturally and economically, all over the globe. Now, that's a good thing IMO, but we do invade and stay, just not in the typical way. Ask the French, who get all bent out of shape because our movies, computer stuff, fast food joints, etc. are everywhere.
In a word, yes.
Aside from the monarchies (another form of totalitarian state), Europeans have always embraced the idea of a strong central government and social engineering. This is one of the main reasons that Marx's ideas caught on so well.
At the time, most of these types of movements would have had other labels, but, when looking at them from today's perspective, it is quite easy to recognize the degree of "socialism" involved in them. To some degree, one could make the argument that Marx did nothing more than look to several of these movements while writing "Das Kapital".
You earlier conceded that the right/left in Europe is unlike the right/left in the US. I agree. BUT, I contend that the European spectrum consists almost entirely of what we in the US would refer to as "left".
To the extreme left you have/had:
the anarchists,
the communists,
the Greens, [semi-communist, totalitarian tendencies, very heavy control of capital]
"social" parties (SPD in Germany), [heavy socialists tendencies, very strong central government, heavy control of capital]
National Socialists, [moderate socialist, strong central government, controls on capital]
Conservatives (CDU, CSU in Germany) [light social tendencies, strong on central government, "free" on capital]
Free Democrats (Moderates) ["libertarian", decentral, capitalist]
You contend that the Nazi's favored the "right" and destroyed the "left". In essence this is correct. However, it was the far "left" that posed the most threat to the concept of Nazism as it wanted to go much further down the road of state control. The "right" were "natural" allies as the Nazi's weren't as extreme (on the face) as the communists. The Nazi's ensured a strong central government and left enough "free enterprise" in place to satisfy the "right". In fact, even the SPD of the time supported Hitler's rise as he was a "better" choice than the communist alternative.
So, as I said at the beginning, yes, European governments are and were for the most part "socialist". The exact degree of socialism depends on which group is actually in power at any one moment.
I would invite you to reread the link I posted earlier. There are some very compelling arguments there that do a far better job of describing Nazism's relationship to socialism than I can.
That's another thing, and probably what has the Muslims so wired up. Cultures have clashed before but not with the impact or to the complete extent that the computer age has permitted this time. Muslims stood it off before but cannot now. Technology and politics have always been married but the situation is much more life and death for them than for us.
The Nazis used any religion to further their power. For example, the Nazis raised two Muslim Waffen SS Divisions during the war. These were the only true "religious" SS Division the Nazis ever created (and it is safe to say that the Germany was not a Muslim nation). Himmler was fascinated by the thought of Muslims to be fearless soldiers willing to kill for their religion. One of these Muslim Waffen SS divisions (The Hanjer Division) was responsible for the murder of over 90 percent of the Yugoslavian Jewish population. And these Muslim Waffen SS Divisions did where Islamic religious symbols on their German Army uniforms...
You owe me a new keyboard.
Bonhoeffer was a great man. I love his poem (which has become a song) "By gracious powers".
"My cousin Francis [I of France] and I are in complete agreement: he wants Vienna, and so do I."
--Emperor Charles V
Conservatives were more scared of the Bolsheviks (can't say I would have blamed them) and they saw Hitler as the best way to keep Germany from it. They thought they could control Hitler, and then he would fade quickly. They were dead wrong. Sometimes the enemy of your enemy is still your enemy.
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.