Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian

[Bono]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

From The Mises Institute

[dazzleman]

You don't need to convince me.

[afleitch]

Socialism isn't necessarily totalitarian, but it does tend to be authoritarian, even when it's quite moderate (like Tony Blair's Labour Party) It is one of many reasons as to why I'm not a socialist.

[jokerman]

Eh, you can't really compare Fascism and Socialism or Communism together.  In fascism, the means of production control the state, and in communism the state controls the means of production.

[Bono]

Eh, you can't really compare Fascism and Socialism or Communism together.  In fascism, the means of production control the state, and in communism the state controls the means of production.

THis is not about Fascism, it's about Nazism.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Everyone with a different viewpoint to me is a Nazi LOL!!1111

[afleitch]

Everyone with a different viewpoint to me is a Nazi LOL!!1111

I know what you mean labelling someone 'Nazi' is usually the last refuge for the self-righteous elite of both sides of the plitical divide who couldn't argue themselves out of a paper bag.

Leftie- 'You want immigration controls....Nazi!'
Rightwing Nut- 'You support abortion...Nazi!'

[Bono]

Everyone with a different viewpoint to me is a Nazi LOL!!1111

Just becuase Nazis were Socialists doesn't mean all socialists are Nazis.
You're claiming something I never did.

[opebo]

Nazis were not socialists at all, very much the opposite.  They were really nothing very special - they were a right-wing nationalist party like all other right-wing nationalist parties (for example the GOP), whose purpose is to decieve the more gullible and hubris-prone portion of the working class into voting against their own interests out of hatred.

[jokerman]

Nazis were not socialists at all, very much the opposite.  They were really nothing very special - they were a right-wing nationalist party like all other right-wing nationalist parties (for example the GOP), whose purpose is to decieve the more gullible and hubris-prone portion of the working class into voting against their own interests out of hatred.

Strangely enough I agree with some of this.

[Bono]

Nazis were not socialists at all, very much the opposite.  They were really nothing very special - they were a right-wing nationalist party like all other right-wing nationalist parties (for example the GOP), whose purpose is to decieve the more gullible and hubris-prone portion of the working class into voting against their own interests out of hatred.

Strangely enough I agree with some of this.

Then you are both idiots.

[A18]

Nazis were not socialists at all, very much the opposite.  They were really nothing very special - they were a right-wing nationalist party like all other right-wing nationalist parties (for example the GOP), whose purpose is to decieve the more gullible and hubris-prone portion of the working class into voting against their own interests out of hatred.

Strangely enough I agree with some of this.

Then you are both idiots.

Correct, Bono. What do you expect from socialists, however?

[Storebought]

I took it for granted that the Nazis, i.e., National Socialists, were of course a socialist party. But it was more "socialist" back in the 1920s, when it was populated with ex-German Army roughs and economic malcontents, oops, I mean, the German proletariat (a term Hitler used repeatedly), than it was in the 1930s.

But even then, Hitler's economic policies, indifferent as they were to one economic theory or another, were to the left of Britain's at the time.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Is it just me or do all discussions of the Nazis end up with one side claiming that the Nazis belonged to the other side, and the other side saying the same in reverse?

[angus]

No soup for you!

Come back six months!

[Storebought]

Is it just me or do all discussions of the Nazis end up with one side claiming that the Nazis belonged to the other side, and the other side saying the same in reverse?

Not the claim I made: I said that, by the 1930s, Hitler could give a flying fig about what scale of the Political Compass his economic policies inhabited. That they just happened to be somewhat to the left of Ramsay McDonald's is the interesting fact.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Not the claim I made

Oh, I wasn't talking about that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True actually; mind you by this point I'm not sure how hard it was to be to the left of Ramsay MacDonald.

[minionofmidas]

I took it for granted that the Nazis, i.e., National Socialists, were of course a socialist party. But it was more "socialist" back in the 1920s, when it was populated with ex-German Army roughs and economic malcontents, oops, I mean, the German proletariat (a term Hitler used repeatedly), than it was in the 1930s.

The National Socialist Workers' Party never had chiefly working class support. In the 1930s a little over a third of its vote came from working class people, but then the same had been true of the Conservative and Liberal parties it displaced.

Sure Nazi economic politics were somewhat collectivist... but that's not making them socialist ... and to claim the opposite is not one bit intellectually honest. That's like claiming anything that is alive is therefore a human being.

[jokerman]

I took it for granted that the Nazis, i.e., National Socialists, were of course a socialist party. But it was more "socialist" back in the 1920s, when it was populated with ex-German Army roughs and economic malcontents, oops, I mean, the German proletariat (a term Hitler used repeatedly), than it was in the 1930s.

The National Socialist Workers' Party never had chiefly working class support. In the 1930s a little over a third of its vote came from working class people, but then the same had been true of the Conservative and Liberal parties it displaced.

Sure Nazi economic politics were somewhat collectivist... but that's not making them socialist ... and to claim the opposite is not one bit intellectually honest. That's like claiming anything that is alive is therefore a human being.

^^^^
Pro-government intervention and collectivism does not equal socialism and pro-working class policy.  They did intervene in the economy, but only on behalf of the ruling aristocratic class.  You can not measure economic philosophy on terms of big government----small government, which would put two distinctly different ideologies, Fascism and Socialism together.

[Bono]

I took it for granted that the Nazis, i.e., National Socialists, were of course a socialist party. But it was more "socialist" back in the 1920s, when it was populated with ex-German Army roughs and economic malcontents, oops, I mean, the German proletariat (a term Hitler used repeatedly), than it was in the 1930s.

The National Socialist Workers' Party never had chiefly working class support. In the 1930s a little over a third of its vote came from working class people, but then the same had been true of the Conservative and Liberal parties it displaced.

Sure Nazi economic politics were somewhat collectivist... but that's not making them socialist ... and to claim the opposite is not one bit intellectually honest. That's like claiming anything that is alive is therefore a human being.

^^^^
Pro-government intervention and collectivism does not equal socialism and pro-working class policy.  They did intervene in the economy, but only on behalf of the ruling aristocratic class.  You can not measure economic philosophy on terms of big government----small government, which would put two distinctly different ideologies, Fascism and Socialism together.

According to you, on both extremes there is high government intervention. Where is small government, then?

[jokerman]

I took it for granted that the Nazis, i.e., National Socialists, were of course a socialist party. But it was more "socialist" back in the 1920s, when it was populated with ex-German Army roughs and economic malcontents, oops, I mean, the German proletariat (a term Hitler used repeatedly), than it was in the 1930s.

The National Socialist Workers' Party never had chiefly working class support. In the 1930s a little over a third of its vote came from working class people, but then the same had been true of the Conservative and Liberal parties it displaced.

Sure Nazi economic politics were somewhat collectivist... but that's not making them socialist ... and to claim the opposite is not one bit intellectually honest. That's like claiming anything that is alive is therefore a human being.

^^^^
Pro-government intervention and collectivism does not equal socialism and pro-working class policy.  They did intervene in the economy, but only on behalf of the ruling aristocratic class.  You can not measure economic philosophy on terms of big government----small government, which would put two distinctly different ideologies, Fascism and Socialism together.

According to you, on both extremes there is high government intervention. Where is small government, then?

Umm, no, that's not what I'm saying.  What I'm saying is that you have to measure it on two different dimensions.

[Bono]

I took it for granted that the Nazis, i.e., National Socialists, were of course a socialist party. But it was more "socialist" back in the 1920s, when it was populated with ex-German Army roughs and economic malcontents, oops, I mean, the German proletariat (a term Hitler used repeatedly), than it was in the 1930s.

The National Socialist Workers' Party never had chiefly working class support. In the 1930s a little over a third of its vote came from working class people, but then the same had been true of the Conservative and Liberal parties it displaced.

Sure Nazi economic politics were somewhat collectivist... but that's not making them socialist ... and to claim the opposite is not one bit intellectually honest. That's like claiming anything that is alive is therefore a human being.

^^^^
Pro-government intervention and collectivism does not equal socialism and pro-working class policy.  They did intervene in the economy, but only on behalf of the ruling aristocratic class.  You can not measure economic philosophy on terms of big government----small government, which would put two distinctly different ideologies, Fascism and Socialism together.

According to you, on both extremes there is high government intervention. Where is small government, then?

Umm, no, that's not what I'm saying.  What I'm saying is that you have to measure it on two different dimensions.

That could be argued for much more dimensions. How about foreign policy? How about gun control? Where does it fit?
Point is, either you have an ndimensional chart where you emasure every little quirk on the ideology, or you have a simple one dimensional spectrum.

[Citizen James]

The National socialists were about as socialistic as the PRC is a republic.

Like the communists, the Nazis were very authoritarian.   Modern socialists are nations like Norway and Sweden.

[John Dibble]

My view of the Nazi economic policy is pretty simple - they would do whatever they though was of benefit to the Nazi Party, which to them was pretty much the same thing as the nation. If they needed to force a business to do something, they would do it. If leaving a business alone to do what it did was beneficial, they'd do that. The policy was simply whatever it took to push the Nazi agenda and the Nazi war machine forward. Overall, their policies might be considered socialist, but they really didn't have a consistent economic theory or ideology that they ran on.

[Bono]

The National socialists were about as socialistic as the PRC is a republic.

Like the communists, the Nazis were very authoritarian.   Modern socialists are nations like Norway and Sweden.

That's social-democratic, not socialist, and Norway's socialism is overated anyways.