Hitler Was Not a Leftist

Picture: Public Doman

Most people will respond to the title of this post with “No duh!”  But there’s been a lot of effort by conservatives on the Internet to portray Hitler as a leftist.  After all, economic laissez-faire is the sole definition of the right, and anything else is therefore left, right?

Wrong.  No true, intelligent libertarian accepts the one-dimensional left/right political spectrum as accurate, which is why they’ve proposed a two-dimensional political compass.  And as I posted a while back, Noah Millman has proposed an even more descriptive three-dimensional political taxonomy.

While I don’t agree with all the points presented in the following article, enough of them are true to prove that while the Nazis may or may not have been true right-wingers, they certainly weren’t leftists.  (For the record, they viewed themselves as syncretists, not that you have to take their word for it.)

Steve Kangas writes:

Myth: Hitler was a leftist.

Fact: Nearly all of Hitler’s beliefs placed him on the far right.

———————–

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.

———————–

Argument

To most people, Hitler’s beliefs belong to the extreme far right. For example, most conservatives believe in patriotism and a strong military; carry these beliefs far enough, and you arrive at Hitler’s warring nationalism. This association has long been something of an embarrassment to the far right. To deflect such criticism, conservatives have recently launched a counter-attack, claiming that Hitler was a socialist, and therefore belongs to the political left, not the right.

The primary basis for this claim is that Hitler was a National Socialist. The word “National” evokes the state, and the word “Socialist” openly identifies itself as such.

However, there is no academic controversy over the status of this term: it was a misnomer. Misnomers are quite common in the history of political labels. Examples include the German Democratic Republic (which was neither) and Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s “Liberal Democrat” party (which was also neither). The true question is not whether Hitler called his party “socialist,” but whether or not it actually was.

In fact, socialism has never been tried at the national level anywhere in the world. This may surprise some people — after all, wasn’t the Soviet Union socialist? The answer is no. Many nations and political parties have called themselves “socialist,” but none have actually tried socialism. To understand why, we should revisit a few basic political terms.

Perhaps the primary concern of any political ideology is who gets to own and control the means the production. This includes factories, farmlands, machinery, etc. Generally there have been three approaches to this question. The first was aristocracy, in which a ruling elite owned the land and productive wealth, and peasants and serfs had to obey their orders in return for their livelihood. The second is capitalism, which has disbanded the ruling elite and allows a much broader range of private individuals to own the means of production. However, this ownership is limited to those who can afford to buy productive wealth; nearly all workers are excluded. The third (and untried) approach is socialism, where everyone owns and controls the means of production, by means of the vote. As you can see, there is a spectrum here, ranging from a few people owning productive wealth at one end, to everyone owning it at the other.

Socialism has been proposed in many forms. The most common is social democracy, where workers vote for their supervisors, as well as their industry representatives to regional or national congresses. Another proposed form is anarcho-socialism, where workers own companies that would operate on a free market, without any central government at all. As you can see, a central planning committee is hardly a necessary feature of socialism. The primary feature is worker ownership of production.

The Soviet Union failed to qualify as socialist because it was a dictatorship over workers — that is, a type of aristocracy, with a ruling elite in Moscow calling all the shots. Workers cannot own or control anything under a totalitarian government. In variants of socialism that call for a central government, that government is always a strong or even direct democracy… never a dictatorship. It doesn’t matter if the dictator claims to be carrying out the will of the people, or calls himself a “socialist” or a “democrat.” If the people themselves are not in control, then the system is, by definition, non-democratic and non-socialist.

And what of Nazi Germany? The idea that workers controlled the means of production in Nazi Germany is a bitter joke. It was actually a combination of aristocracy and capitalism. Technically, private businessmen owned and controlled the means of production. The Nazi “Charter of Labor” gave employers complete power over their workers. It established the employer as the “leader of the enterprise,” and read: “The leader of the enterprise makes the decisions for the employees and laborers in all matters concerning the enterprise.”

Read more here.

, , , ,

  • juepucta

    People that think national socialism has anything to with marxist socialims cannot tell between a-capella and Acapulco. Dumbasses should know by now that fascism/corporativism was on the right side of the spectrum – by definition.

  • http://twitter.com/pocketofsoil Brent

    Who are these “many conservatives”? Just curious. Its not like I read/watch the news or anything.

  • http://twitter.com/AnthonyLMarin Anthony L. Marin

    I’m partial to a true and stateless socialism, more specifically: libertarian socialism. Where workers have full and true control over the means of production, with an emphasis on individual freedom, free associations, mutual aide, and a strong opposition to illegitimate authoritarian relations.

    • okay

      Aren’t you special!

  • Captain America

    Communism is the farthest extreme of the left and fascism is the farthest of the right. Both are horrible and while they are on the opposite ends of the spectrum, they are actually quite similar in how they operate which is that the power is in the hands of very few and the military rules. Hitler and the Nazi party were fascist.

    In a democracy, it’s our job to keep communism at bay with our right hand and fascism at bay with our left hand, and since Reaganomics kicked into gear in the early 80’s, all we’ve done in the US is keep communism at bay with our right hand, while dismantling our left hand to the point where we now have proto-fascist tea party members being elected.

    • BrianApocalypse

       I’ve always thought of the two sides of politics as being parts of a circle, and if you go far enough on one extreme or the other, you eventually meet the other side.

      • Calypso_1

        What of a sphere?  Better yet, what’s the escape velocity?

        • BrianApocalypse

          Ah well of course I’m sure there are many more directions that are possible. A sphere is an interesting abstract way to imagine it. So many more directions around which don’t necessarily meet up on the other side…

          Personally I think the formula for political escape velocity is something like ‘technological mastery + enlightenment’ !

          • Calypso_1

            x(u,v) = (R + r cos v) cos u
            y(u,v) = (R + r cos v) sin  u
            z(u,v) = r sin v

      • David Howe

         You’ve always thought?  I find that hard to believe.

        • Fred Lamb

          You have the ability to “believe” in todays world, I find that fascinating.

          • George Micheal

            Faith, muy boy.  Faith

        • Calypso_1

          I have always known.

      • Apathesis

        Glad I am not alone. I have thought this way about politics for years now.

    • Jin The Ninja

      lol- you should leave reductive history for comic books.

      ‘anarchism’ or ‘libertarian-socialism’ (stateless, non capitalist democracy) is the conclusive  ‘end’ of the left spectrum.

      • Captain America

        Since you won’t get this from shallow Fox News mind lock, socialism has no baring on right or left. The question is where is the inevitable socialism. For example in our current Corporatocracy, we have capitalism for the 99% and socialism for the 1%.  The most democractic solution is to have regulated capitalism for the private sector, and democratic socialism for the public sector. a 50/50 socialist/capitalist approach, like we had post WWII which built our superpower.

        • Jin The Ninja

          ‘fox news mind lock’? i’m an anarchist (left libertarian, libertarian-socialist, etc etc).

          and i’m not really in the mood to deconstruct the entirely convoluted mess of regulatory capitalism and nationalism you are advocating.

          • Calypso_1

            ‘fox news mind lock’

            It’s fun to see Koch Brother $ at work.

          • Jin The Ninja

            lol. maybe you can clarify- i can’t tell if that statement was directed at me.

          • Calypso_1

            it was directed to you, referring to them

          • Jin The Ninja

            lol ty.

      • Unthoughtdismay

        F U

  • nightman

    the definitions are too far gone to call anyone anything anymore. leftists today advocate eugenics through birth control, dirty vaccines and population reduction to save the world from carbon, flouridation of water, state control of children’s futures, not the parents, all similar policies that hitler advocated. conservatives, well,conservatives want the same thing but with religion thrown in the mix. the bottom line is they are all tyrranical, regardless of the cartoon ideology.

    • Jin The Ninja

       which ‘leftists’ are those? democrats? they’re really really really NOT left.

      • Thissitewillburn

        Yea duh no one that says or does anything bad could ever be on the left.

        • Jin The Ninja

          well the left is historically anti-racism, anti-nationalist, antifa, anti-oppression- while hitler was pro all of those things. draw your own conclusion.

    • David Howe

       spare us the false moral equivalencies, huh?  And give me a fucking break with the vaccine and flouridation stuff.  that just makes you look crazy.

      • http://twitter.com/jfqbsh jason quackenbush

        word,

      • Burningringoffire

        Spares us the stuff we will never look at, it is scary…. fingers in ears lalalalala

        • Unthoughtdismay

          Look up the unbelievable it may amaze you.

      • http://www.dynamicbalancenutrition.com/ Laurel

        I can cite scientific studies that demonstrate that fluoridation lowers IQ.  Guess that’s just crazy, though, according to you.

    • TRIVIUM68

      WTF?
      Again, you are mislabling everything.
      I guess this just proves that labels are EVIL.  One should be able to state clearly what they believe and why instead of personally labeling themselves.

      However, such terms as LIBERAL have been so muddied and yet, the word LIBERAL means FREEDOM.  Conservative does not. Nowhere in the word CONSERVATIVE is Freedom implied!.

      You are dumping a lot of policies and beliefs and painting with a broad brush. 

      For instance,
      I consider myself a “liberal” (true meaning of the word) but I will spell out what I believe.

      YES, I am FOR birthcontrol.  WHY? No, NOT because I am an “evil Nazi eugenicist” NO , it is because I don’t have hang ups over sex and believe that TRUE freedom comes from being able to engage in consensual sexual acts and furthermore have the ability to control my MY offspring.  It is taking AWAY my freedom to restrict my access to birth control thus restricting my personal sexual decisions of who and when I have sexual relations.

      As for Vaccines.. what do you MEAN by “dirty vaccines”???..   # 1 Vaccines HAVE done a lot of good for humanity. HOWEVER, yes, there IS evidence that modern vaccines may be contributing to some problems. (in how they are created,etc)  The Pharmacuetical industry is driven by profit and so just follow the money there.  Yet, vaccines historically have done more good than bad and while yes, there may have been historically some people who have died or have been injured, the overall reductaion and eradication of some diseases has been good.  But as with anything you DO need to be cautious.  Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater!.

      Flouridation of water. YES this is BAD.

      and what do you mean by “state control of children’s futures” ?

      You are really throwing some sloppy fallacies out there. I think you need to provide more evidence and clarification of your statements.

      • Mreeves_3666

        well, about the evidence thing, if you cant research the evidence, or you just havnt done it yet, there is too much to list on a forum. i assumed any person on disinfo would already know the truth. if one vaccine kills one person ever, then its wrong regardless. birth control is fine as we all know, and pulling out the the prefered method, but brainwashing and/or using force by the government to enforce birth control is a leftist policy. state control of childrens future…federally mandated testing, education, child protective services run by people with no SF 86 background checks? the total dehumanizing prussian model? you are living in a bubble, but its hard to be on my level when i have the personality of an indian brahman with the cleverness of a norman/anglo swashbuckler of the 16th century. sorry its been a long day and im buzzed. thanks for the response.

  • DeepCough

    Of course Hitler wasn’t a Leftist anymore than Lenin or Stalin were Leftists, I mean, fucking duh!

  • Pb Staples14

    trash

  • charlieprimero

    It’s not left vs. right kiddies.

    It’s collectivism versus individualism.

    Go learn some 19th century history.

    • Jin The Ninja

      so there are no anarchist writers who advocated both? actually most.

    • Trivium68

      more labels.
      what is implied by Collectivism? What is implied by individualism?

      the masses know not what these things mean other than what the politicans and pundit SAY they are and imply that they are.  Just like Rush Limbaugh IMPLIES that Liberalism is bad, when the original meaning of the word meant freedom. 

      People are ignorant.

      People are scared and are kept in a fear based state by the misuse of words.   If you can show a person doing horrible things and then LABEL them in a certain way, then people get it in their heads that that word means something totally different.  This has happened time and time and time again.

      For instance

      Anarchy means without rulers. Yet, in common vernacular it implies “chaos and disorder, often of the violent type”.

      Occult means hidden (knowledge) yet the common masses feel this word means EVIL or “satanic”.

      Apocalypse means “lifting of the veil” yet most folks BELIEVE and use this term to mean destruction, the end times, devastation. 

      People need to study history and find out what they truly believe, not merely adopting a party or a group.

      I don’t mind labeling myself something if I know what the true meaning is and I believe it and can defend my beliefs and why I believe certain things.

    • Trivium68

      Lets break down the terms

      Individualism is the moral stance, political philosophy, ideology, or social outlook that stresses “the moral worth of the individual”.[1] Individualists promote the exercise of one’s goals and desires and so value independence and self-reliance[2] while opposing external interference upon one’s own interests by society or institutions such as the government.[2]
      Individualism makes the individual its focus[1] and so starts “with the fundamental premise that the human individual is of primary importance in the struggle for liberation.” Liberalism, existentialism and anarchism are examples of movements that take the human individual as a central unit of analysis.[3] WIKI

       Collectivism is any philosophic, political, religious, economic, or social outlook that emphasizes the interdependence of every human being. Collectivism is a basic cultural element that exists as the reverse of individualism in human nature (in the same way high context culture exists as the reverse of low context culture), and stresses the priority of group goals over individual goals and the importance of cohesion within social groups (such as an “in-group”, in what specific context it is defined). Collectivists usually focus on community, society, or nation. It is used and has been used as an element in many different and diverse types of government and political, economic and educational philosophies throughout history including democracy, totalitarian nationalism, monarchy, socialism, and communism.

      Collectivism can be divided into horizontal collectivism and vertical collectivism. Horizontal collectivism stresses collective decision-making among relatively equal individuals, and is thus usually based on decentralization. Vertical collectivism is based on hierarchical structures of power and moral and cultural conformity, and is therefore based on centralization. Monarchy is an example of a system that makes use of vertical collectivism. [1] WIKI

       
      As you can see, there IS value in BOTH ideologies.  Obviously, the individual IS important, our freedoms as INDIVIDUALS and our ability to think and exist as an individual IS important. YET, all these INDIVIDUALS LIVE and EXIST in a society and ones individualism ends where anothers begins.   It is also important to note that WE ARE INTERDEPENDANT!.  Humanity has always been interdependent .  We just happen to rely on each other in order to survive.  I know the myth is of the “rugged individualist” building the log cabin out in the woods by themselves without the pesky interference of anyone else.  Yet, each of us has benefitted in some way shape or another by community!.  You cannot merely think of the self and not think or be concerned about the health and well being of another.  “If one suffers, ALL suffer”.  We live on a finite planet, with boundaries and what I do as an individual DOES effect someone else!.  If I pollute, that effects my neighbor or stranger 10 miles 100 miles, 10,000 miles away!. 

      Just remember all that.

    • Andrew

      Both extreme collectivism and extreme individualism are unhealthy and unrealistic.

  • Simiantongue

    Fun test and an interesting read.

    Four points on a political spectrum, check out this political compass. Taking the test is well worth the three minutes. I suggest reading carefully and answering honestly so you get the best result. No it’s not some advertising gimmick.

    Comparing my score with the political leaders of the nation was very revealing. Polar opposites.

    http://www.politicalcompass.org/index

    • Andrew

      What do you think of Millman’s 3-D political taxonomy?

      • Simiantongue

         Never read it. Should I, is it interesting?

  • Tchoutoye

    It’s mostly Americans who try to pass Nazism as left wing. They (a few intelligent ones notwithstanding) are notorious for not knowing what socialism really means. They just use the term for anything or anyone they don’t like: “Obama is a socialist”, and so on.

    • rtb61

       Americans try to pass off every thing as left wing, including all non-christian religions, people who actually behave in the manner promoted by the bible, people who are actually conservative  in their approach to use of the environment and it’s resources and of course the US democrats.
      Clearly Americans keep using the word conservative for propaganda purposes but obviously ave no idea what it actually means. For once and for all conserve does not mean exploit.
      You can see the problem, conservationists, are called radical pinko socialists leftists and that’s because they want to conserve the environment, so you can see readily understand the problem they have with socialists when they can’t even understand conservative.
      They wallow in bullshit and then point their collective fingers at every one else and claim they are lying.

      • Michael

        Here is what hitler said… “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” –Adolf Hitler… If that is not a leftist statement I do not know what is. Hitler was also a vegetarian…

        • rtb61

          Seriously stop and think a bit about what you are writing. You are quoting Hitler as a font of truth, seriously are you joking, totally stupid and just as much of a liar as Hitler.
          Hitler said anything and everything to gain power to feed his ego, that he continually lied is a self evident truth, that you are dumb enough to quote his lies, well I guess it suits your lies.

          • disqus_Kp3XYS3Wm0

            @rtb61:disqus . You are obviously the smartest person on the planet. You know what people are thinking. You know the definition of conservatism and socialism and I’m sure every ism. God I wish I could meet the all knowing rtb61. Where is your parents basement?

          • creox

            Ha…you are pathetic. Sometimes one has to call BS and Michael was full of it. Hitler was no leftist as evidenced by his actions, not his words.

          • dockilldare

            so it is more intelligent to belief another person on the political ideology of Adolf Hitler rather than the words of Adolf Hitler? and this is what you pass of as intelligence? if you take the time to actually read Mein Kampf you will also see more on this topic. Hitler was a socialist and left wing. get over it!

  • Maxde

    I feel that all the terms are messy, but i sometimes wonder if people are confusing Leftism with Populism?

  • JJ

    National Socialist
    Whether left or right is only a label.
    The German form of national socialism was the advancement of the Germanic peoples, as a collective, that being more important than the rights of the individual.
    The state provides free education, affordable housing and medical (Socialist Idea’s), corporations are nationalised so as to ensure the flow of profits are diverted into the governments coffers to be used for the Germanic peoples government, not some overtly rick family’s out side of Germany.
    Today, we have the illusion of democracy, unconsciously enslaved to the banks and multinationals, to whom only see citizens as a commodity.
    Fascism, communism, socialism or democracy have there strengths and weakness’s, the real problem, are the psychopaths within the government and their puppet masters, not the form of government, whether it be left or right wing.

    • Trivium68

      Like CHINA which SCREAMS of irony. 
      China, which still considers itself “Communist” which may be true but then flips what was Chinese Communism (where everyone wore Mao suits, there was state owned everything) to this quazi hyper consumeristic materialistic faux individualistic state where there is the ILLUSION of freedom yet the citizens dare not THINK a word against the state or they would be killed or imprisoned forever!.

  • http://egregores.blogspot.com Apuleius Platonicus

    This “true socialist” argument is just a variation on the “true Scotsman” fallacy.

    • Jin The Ninja

      it’s not ‘true scotsman’ it’s simply historical fact.

    • Aoi W.

      That claim applies to those making comparisons between Hitler and Leftists as well, perhaps more so, its just an inverted conclusion they’re trying to draw. Especially in the case of media personalities like Glenn Beck, who present the most general details in their argument, like “both were collectivists, thus, Stalin was a Nazi” — well, both lived on Earth and both breathed oxygen, so maybe every person on Earth is a Nazi and a Marxist while being a Monarchist and a Phlebotomist. Maybe up is also down because both are “directions”. Or maybe, the fallacy is committed by an inappropriate genralization based on the vaguest similarities, like “they both used the word ‘socialist'” — what kind of childish mind takes that kind of idiotic comparison seriously, while ignoring the majority of differences? Seriously?

  • Trivium68

    thank you for this wonderful clarification. It is much needed.

  • Burningringoffire

    The Programme of the German Workers’ Party is designed to be of limited
    duration. The leaders have no intention, once the aims announced in it have been
    achieved, of establishing fresh ones, merely in order to increase, artificially,
    the discontent of the masses and so ensure the continued existence of the Party.

    1. We demand the union of all Germany in a Greater Germany on the basis of
    the right of national self-determination.
    2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in its dealings with
    other nations, and the revocation of the peace treaties of Versailles and
    Saint-Germain.
    3. We demand land and territory (colonies) to feed our people and to settle
    our surplus population.
    4. Only members of the nation may be citizens of the State. Only those of
    German blood, whatever be their creed, may be members of the nation.
    Accordingly, no Jew may be a member of the nation.
    5. Non-citizens may live in Germany only as guests and must be subject to
    laws for aliens.
    6. The right to vote on the State’s government and legislation shall be
    enjoyed by the citizens of the State alone. We demand therefore that all
    official appointments, of whatever kind, whether in the Reich, in the states or
    in the smaller localities, shall be held by none but citizens.
    We oppose the corrupting parliamentary custom of filling posts merely in
    accordance with party considerations, and without reference to character or
    abilities.
    7. We demand that the State shall make it its primary duty to provide a
    livelihood for its citizens. If it should prove impossible to feed the entire
    population, foreign nationals (non-citizens) must be deported from the Reich.

    8. All non-German immigration must be prevented. We demand that all
    non-Germans who entered Germany after 2 August 1914 shall be required to leave
    the Reich forthwith.
    9. All citizens shall have equal rights and duties.
    10. It must be the first duty of every citizen to perform physical or mental
    work. The activities of the individual must not clash with the general interest,
    but must proceed within the framework of the community and be for the general
    good.

    We demand therefore:

    11. The abolition of incomes unearned by work.

    The breaking of the slavery of interest

    12. In view of the enormous sacrifices of life and property demanded of a
    nation by any war, personal enrichment from war must be regarded as a crime
    against the nation. We demand therefore the ruthless confiscation of all war
    profits.
    13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed
    into corporations (trusts).
    14. We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.
    15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.
    16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the
    immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a cheap
    rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all
    small traders in the placing of State and municiple orders.
    17. We demand a land reform suitable to our national requirements, the
    passing of a law for the expropriation of land for communal purposes without
    compensation; the abolition of ground rent, and the prohibition of all
    speculation in land. *
    18. We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are
    injurious to the common interest. Common criminals, usurers, profiteers, etc.,
    must be punished with death, whatever their creed or race.
    19. We demand that Roman Law, which serves a materialistic world order, be
    replaced by a German common law.
    20. The State must consider a thorough reconstruction of our national system
    of education (with the aim of opening up to every able and hard-working German
    the possibility of higher education and of thus obtaining advancement). The
    curricula of all educational establishments must be brought into line with the
    requirements of practical life. The aim of the school must be to give the pupil,
    beginning with the first sign of intelligence, a grasp of the nation of the
    State (through the study of civic affairs). We demand the education of gifted
    children of poor parents, whatever their class or occupation, at the expense of
    the State.
    21. The State must ensure that the nation’s health standards are raised by
    protecting mothers and infants, by prohibiting child labor, by promoting
    physical strength through legislation providing for compulsory gymnastics and
    sports, and by the extensive support of clubs engaged in the physical training
    of youth.
    22. We demand the abolition of the mercenary army and the foundation of a
    people’s army.
    23. We demand legal warfare on deliberate political mendacity and its
    dissemination in the press. To facilitate the creation of a German national
    press we demand:

    (a) that all editors of, and contributors to newspapers appearing in the
    German language must be members of the nation; (b) that no non-German
    newspapers may appear without the express permission of the State. They must not
    be printed in the German language; (c) that non-Germans shall be prohibited
    by law from participating financially in or influencing German newspapers, and
    that the penalty for contravening such a law shall be the suppression of any
    such newspaper, and the immediate deportation of the non-Germans involved.

    The publishing of papers which are not conducive to the national welfare must
    be forbidden. We demand the legal prosecution of all those tendencies in art and
    literature which corrupt our national life, and the suppression of cultural
    events which violate this demand.
    24. We demand freedom for all religious denominations in the State, provided
    they do not threaten its existence not offend the moral feelings of the German
    race.
    The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not commit
    itself to any particular denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic
    spirit within and without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve
    permanent health only from within on the basis of the principle: The common
    interest before self-interest.
    25. To put the whole of this programme into effect, we demand the creation of
    a strong central state power for the Reich; the unconditional authority of the
    political central Parliament over the entire Reich and its organizations; and
    the formation of Corporations based on estate and occupation for the purpose of
    carrying out the general legislation passed by the Reich in the various German
    states.
    The leaders of the Party promise to work ruthlessly — if need be to
    sacrifice their very lives — to translate this programme into action.

    • Burningringoffire

      I am in the bubble bursting business

      • Andrew

        Aren’t you special!

    • Burningringoffire

      Just because it did not fall into your perfect ideological communist state don’t mean it was not left wing.

      • Andrew

        You might want to read the article.  There are six or seven reasons why Nazism wasn’t left wing, including some economic ones.

    • Andrew

      > 11. The abolition of incomes unearned by work.

      Welfare reform!

      • Lock

        I think they dont like usurers! Or people earning money from just having money I am sure they were perfectly happy with scroungers. SO you are wrong.  :)

        • Andrew

          I’m not too fond of usury myself, but the Nazis exterminated the sick and infirm and had forced labor camps, so I’d need to see some hard evidence they were “happy” with “scroungers.”

          • Maxde

            Me too about the scroungers – i was jsut messin’ about that.

  • http://egregores.blogspot.com Apuleius Platonicus

    The elephant in the room is that those who argue “Hitler was a leftist” have an agenda, and those who argue “Hitler was a rightist” have a different agenda. More importantly, though, is the fact that both arguments end up being circular because they depend on the definition of “left” and “right” being employed, and those definitions turn out to be arbitrarily constructed in order to come to the desired conclusion.

    But a different situation pertains to the claim “Hitler was a Christian”. That is because Hitler himself loudly proclaimed his adherence to Christianity, and explicitly rejected and disowned those who called for the rejection of Christianity. Not only did Hitler “identify” as a Christian, but the vast majority of all Nazi Party members were Christians, as were the vast majority of Germans throughout the period of the Third Reich and the Final Solution.

    The Nazis explicitly promoted a particular type of Christianity called “Positive Christianity” (see point 24 of the Nazi Party program). Far from being some strange, twisted perversion, Positive Christianity embraced the Higher Criticism and the Social Gospel, and while it was strongly influenced by modern Protestantism (and was very liberal theologically speaking), the Nazis strongly condemned anti-Catholic sectarianism.

  • Harold Jones

    I love it how the daily Hitler Propaganda is still being used to control and manipulate people (especially here in Germany). Today of course, it`s used to silence critical voices regarding uncontrolled mass immigration and islamization – every one who objects to these is called Rascist or Nazi.The crooked ‘Logic here is : the NS Regime was against a Race/Faith/People – The Jews. So, today, if you are against Islamisation, you are no better. Stupid, but it works for most of these brainwashed citizens. So, yes Hitler still has his use for those in Power- even today.

  • Hokieguy

    When we say Hitler was a “leftist”.  What we mean is that Hitler was just another “Collectivist”.  That puts him in right along with any Socialist or Communist or any other who shuns individualism and lack of central control. 

    • Calypso_1

      So the ‘individualist’ eschews the collective definition of words and applies their own meanings for the purpose of obfuscating well codified fields of knowledge.  Thus appearing, to those unfortunate enough to derive their own sense of meaning from persons more ‘individual’ then themselves, as wise buggers – allowing these individuals to sally forth upon the great fields of human endeavor.  Capital idea!  
       

      • Andrew

        Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.  Orange water gibbon bucket and plastic.

        • Calypso_1

          Indeed, though goldish-green I usually see when the waxing gibbous jumps the gyrus and finds grammar carnivals dancing within the shadowy hobgoblins that whorl around the rabbit hole.

    • Jin The Ninja

      “when  we say…”

      when you (plural) say nearly anything you’re full of sh*t.

    • Aoi W.

      Hokieguy, you’re forgetting that all human beings subscribe
      to individualism and collectivism. If you believe that you are
      personally responsible for taking care of yourself, you are an
      individualist. If you freely belong and contribute to any group
      — say, an employing business, church, club, family, nation, or
      cause — then you are a collectivist as well. Neither of these
      traits makes a person inherently “liberal” or “conservative,”
      and to claim that you are an “evil socialist” because
      you champion a particular group is not a serious argument.

      Political scientists therefore do not label people “liberal”
      or “conservative” on the basis of their individualism
      or collectivism. Much more important is how they approach their
      individualism and collectivism. What groups does a person belong
      to? How is power distributed in the group? Does it practice one-person
      rule, minority rule, majority rule, or self-rule? Liberals believe
      in majority rule. Hitler practiced one-person rule. Thus, there
      is no comparison.

      And on that score, conservatives might feel that they are off
      the hook, too, because they claim to prefer self-rule to one-person
      rule. But their actions say otherwise. Many of the institutions
      that conservatives favor are really quite dictatorial: the military,
      the church, the patriarchal family, the business firm.

  • Aoi W.

    There is no one who has actually read and studied (not just “read about”) the writings of Marx himself, let alone, anyone who has read (not just “read about”) ‘Mein Kampf’, who would seriously argue that Hitler and his Nazi party were anything but DEVOUT anti-leftists, anti-communists, and (economically) anti-Liberal — just like Franco and Mussolini. Before Hitler sent Jews and Gypsies to die in the concentration camps, do you know who he sent? Communists, socialists, anarchists and any other Leftist! These were his political enemies and the first victims of the death camps!!

    Look, I’ll even give you guys the links and quotes for the original writings by Hitler and the Nazi party, it’ll take 10 minutes of your time. Reading won’t kill you, please. That’s really all anyone’s asking you guys with your fingers in your ears singing “Nah nah nah nah, Hitler was a Leftist! Hitler was a Leftist!” to do.  Just take ten goddamn minutes. Read some original material by the people you’re arguing were Leftists to see what they had to say about the Left:

    From ‘Mein Kampf” in Hitler’s own words. In Hitler’s mind, communism is the primary enemy of Germany:

    “In the years 1913 and 1914 I expressed my opinion for the first time in various circles, some of which are now members of the National Socialist Movement, that the problem of how the future of the German nation can be secured is the problem of how Marxism can be exterminated. ”
       
    “In this way the struggle against the present State was placed on a higher plane than that of petty revenge and small conspiracies. It was elevated to the level of a spiritual struggle on behalf of a Weltanschauung, for the destruction of Marxism in all its shapes and forms. ”
       
    “In view of the complete subordination of the present State to Marxism, the National Socialist Movement feels all the more bound not only to prepare the way for the triumph of its idea by appealing to the reason and understanding of the public but also to take upon itself the responsibility of organizing its own defence against the terror of the International, which is intoxicated with its own victory.”

    According to Hitler, Marxism is a Jewish strategy to subjugate Germany and the world:

    “For this purpose French armies would first have to invade and overcome the territory of the German Reich until a state of international chaos would set in, and then the country would have to succumb to Bolshevik storm troops in the service of Jewish international finance.

    Hence it is that at the present time the Jew is the great agitator for the complete destruction of Germany. Whenever we read of attacks against Germany taking place in any part of the world the Jew is always the instigator. In peace-time, as well as during the War, the Jewish-Marxist stock-exchange Press systematically stirred up hatred against Germany, until one State after another abandoned its neutrality and placed itself at the service of the world coalition, even against the real interests of its own people.

    The Jewish way of reasoning thus becomes quite clear. The Bolshevization of Germany, that is to say, the extermination of the patriotic and national German intellectuals, thus making it possible to force German Labour to bear the yoke of international Jewish finance–that is only the overture to the movement for expanding Jewish power on a wider scale and finally subjugating the world to its rule.”

    Also from Nazi anti-marxist propaganda:

    “In opposing Marxism, we
    oppose a deeply-rooted worldview that is based on over sixty years of
    intensive work. It is in turn founded on the still older liberal
    worldview and economic order. It enjoys not only the protection of
    tradition, but the strength a younger
    movement can bring to bear against an older one. Liberalism was not able
    to resist Marxism. The liberal parties and ideologies could only fight
    defensively against a worldview with greater strength and clarity of
    purpose. Even the Marxist worker who long doubted and sought for
    something better eventually had to conclude that Marxism is the only
    worldview that can bring a new and better society and economic order.
    Who can hold it against him that he rejected the forces that denied him
    equality and a share in the results of his labor? The German worker
    absorbed Marxism in his parents’ home, and was surrounded by people who
    thought the same in the workplace. In what remained of his sound
    understanding, he knew that there was a flaw somewhere in the worldview.
    He realized that there was a catch somewhere to the lovely teachings of
    “expropriating the expropriators,” of “the equality of everyone with a
    human face,” of “international brotherhood,” of “international
    solidarity,” but he did not know where, and there was no one to show him
    the contradictions, the weak points, in the thinking of Karl Marx and
    his followers.” — Fritz Oerter, “Unsere Redner im
    antimarxistischen Kampf. Die Bilanz eines Wahljahrs,” (Our Speakers in
    the Anti-Marxist Battle) Unser Wille und Weg, 2 (1932), pp. 350-356. http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/wilweg03.htmAlso see ‘Blackshirts & Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism’ by Michael Parenti, pg. 29:http://www.scribd.com/doc/101690012/Blackshirts-and-Reds-by-Michael-Parenti#page=29

    • http://egregores.blogspot.com Apuleius Platonicus

      “Marxist” does not equal “leftist”. Duh.

      Marx and Engels coined the phrase ‘DICTATORSHIP of the Proletariat”, and Engels once wrote, “there is nothing more authoritarian than a revolution.”

      As for the Nazis, it is an undisputed fact that there were genuinely proletarian and pro-socialist elements in the NDSP, and that there is a strong anti-capitalist theme in much of Nazi and Fascist ideology.

      Of course, what Nazis and Communists actually do once they have POWER, has little to do with left versus right, and it has everything to do with staying in power! Leftists who oppose Communist dictatorships find themselves in prison or dead, and the same goes for rightists who oppose Fascist dictatorships.

      • Jin The Ninja

         duh. marxist critique is one of the foundations of all left economic theory. so yes, marx was left.

        • http://egregores.blogspot.com Apuleius Platonicus

          While it is certainly true that “Marx was left”, there is a great deal to “the left” that is either not found in Marx, or that is in opposition to Marxism.

          The left includes Marx and Bakunin. And it also includes (if only just barely) Tony Blair and Francois Mitterand.

          The left also includes Geroge Bernard Shaw, who was an outspoken admirer of Houston Stewart Chamberlain, who was the ideological grandfather of National Socialism.

  • Guest

    Reading the comments gave me a reliable gauge of how effective the ‘brain washing’ of US citizens into the right/left paradigm has been, enlightening (sad but enlightening).  All the while the illusion is occupying our perceptions of reality we are being enslaved by an oppressive centralized government, keep watching this hand and pay no attention to the other. 

  • Sarcasmo

    Hitler was a statist/fascist which defines both parties in America today. nuff said.

  • Idapilot

    Nice re write of history. You could not be more wrong about everything you think you know. Do the world a favor and blow your brains out

    • Andrew

      Got anything to back that up?

  • Bll2

    Hitler was NOT an Atheist!
    Although he stopped taking the sacraments as an adult, he was a Christian.  In his public speeches, and in Mein Kampf he affirms his Christian beliefs, and even advocates a form of “positive Christianity”.”  Here’s a wee quote from a speech, “National Socialism neither opposes the Church nor is it anti-religious, but on the contrary, it stands on the ground of a real Christianity. The Church’s interests cannot fail to coincide with ours alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of today, in our fight against the Bolshevist culture, against an atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for the consciousness of a community in our national life, for the conquest of hatred and disunion between the classes, for the conquest of civil war and unrest, of strife and discord. These are not anti-Christian, these are Christian principles.”Hitler detested Atheists because he associated it with Bolshevists, Communists, and Jews, three groups he was rather dedicated to exterminating (you may have heard about this somewhere.)

  • Will

    It’s kind of scarey that Americans now use ‘Socialist’ the same (uneducated) way they used ‘Communist’ in the past, though some still use that too but it’s the verbal equivalent of wearing a Klan hood these days.

    America has gone so far to the right that the Democrats are merely only a little right of centre instead of being to the left of it. Decades of propaganda (& I don’t use the word lightly) have embedded it as part of the American Dream, a fantasy in itself. Yet people talk of society & community as ideals yet their politics of the right are in stark contrast to that, rather like Christians that espouse the rants of Ayn Rand.

    I’m not sure which group is the furthest to the left but, to quote Alan Bleasdale, “The further Left you go, the more Right-wing you become,”

  • http://twitter.com/3lectric33l Ahmed Rizk

    It’s not anarcho-socialism. It’s just anarchism.

  • Smeatoaj

    If one bothers to read Mein Kampf, Hitler himself explains the choice of the party name National Social Democratic Workers Party the NSDAP, or Nazi Party as we know it, because it sounded enough like Social Democratic to fool ignorant voters into voting for them. This was an explicitly misinforming choice. Secondly, it is hard to today’s political reactionaries to understand that in the Great Depression Era capitalism and western democracy looked like they were weak, decadent and dying. The fascist movement itself saw the future of political struggle in terms of “National Socialism” versus “International Socialism”. The Nazis in their ideology explicitly blame all Jews for inventing “Communism” to destroy Germany. They were delusional and informed by nineteenth century American eugenics hogwash. Hitler wasn’t an atheist, he wasn’t Catholic or Protestant. The Nazis official “Church” was the Reichkirche, today known as the Evangelical Church of Germany, or as they are known in the US–Lutherans. Religion is a political tool of the powerful who will profess any god or lack thereof if it is convenient to their power. Note how many US politicians start going to Church as soon as their political careers take off. The origins of German fascism begin with the mass-murder of workers in Berlin in 1919. The Social Democratic led government created the “Freikorps” out of the most patriotic and right-wing military officers they could find. This group marched into Berlin with Swastikas painted on their helmets to put down the German Revolution 1918-1919. The regime in Germany did this because the only military personnel that they could trust to murder workers at that point were the nutty gun-ho patriotic types. The nationalist nut-jobs then formed the backbone of the Nazi Party and their Brownshirts–the SA.

    Ironically, by the time the USSR started being officially called the USSR there wasn’t a single functioning Soviet in the entire country. A Soviet is an organization, a government, a parliament of workers who make their own order, control their own political life to the exclusion of capitalists and friends of capitalism. A Soviet is democratic and functions democratically. The trouble is that workers don’t have their own armies. Every time workers have historically chosen to assert their own right to rule an army shows up to repress and massacre them. This was how the Berlin Soviet was crushed in 1919 by the founders of the Nazi Party.

    Now it was the western “democracies” that bankrolled Hitler and then made an alliance with Stalin when Hitler turned against them. Today’s Republicans were Nazi sympathizing “isolationists” back in the 1930s. Prescott Bush did business with Krupp-Thyssen bankrolling the Nazi war machine even as they slaughtered allied soldiers. The Bush clan wasn’t alone in this. The leaders of Ford Motor Company and General Motors were all pro-fascist.

    In Italy where fascism was founded, the Italian fascists had as their explicit goal the slaughter of all communist, socialist and anarchist workers. Mussolini’s blackshirts literally beat to death the parliamentary opposition MP Matteotti who was a Socialist. The sad irony of western “democracy” was that it intentionally rolled over and allowed the fascists to take power. In Italy a few hundred “Blackshirts” marched on Rome and the entire regime capitulated to them. For the lovers of Democratic Capitalism fascism was a way for them to slaughter rebellious workers without getting their hands dirty. One could easily say it was mainstream centrist democracy lovers who gave birth to this mass-murder and fascism if one were to advance such an argument.

    In the post-war period the British government installed the fascist collaborating Greek Monarch as the head of the Greek state and had them slaughter our former allies in the Greek Communist Party. At one point the CIA actually had a $30 bounty on the head of every Greek Communist over the age of 12. That’s the capitalist democracy I know.

    The trouble with the entire form of government called a “Republic” is that the most rights go to those who have the most wealth. The right to keep and bear arms goes to those who can afford their own private armies like Eric Prince. The right to free speech goes to those who can buy up TV time. The right to private property goes to those who own the most property. This is no accident. The democratic revolutions against European feudalism were led by those who were constrained by birth to bend their knee to aristocrats who siphoned away the capital of the early burghers and did nothing in return except act as tyrants. In those days workers, farmers and capitalists were united in one struggle against this rule. As soon as those revolutions were done, the capitalists took over and the workers and farmers became the subjects of a new ruling class. Every state that isn’t a monarchy calls itself a republic and rightfully so, it doesn’t matter how rotten that republic is or how tyrannical it is. Think about it, there are four types of republic basically: Fascist, Stalinist, Islamic and western “capitalist”. All of them are mostly completely rotten.

    Consider as well that nobody really knows what capitalism is. Capitalism has never been about “free markets”, free markets were another utopian idea of British and French economic philosophers. British economists could speak of “free markets” because they owned the largest naval and merchant fleets in the world. If the US and France hadn’t grown their economies under a heavy iron wall of trade protectionism and tariffs the British capitalists would’ve eaten their economies alive and we would be today third world labor colonies. Free markets are only “free” when you have the biggest military machine.

    Communism is a political form that existed in hunter gatherer societies and appeared only in a few rare events like the Paris Commune, or the St Petersburg Soviet, or the Berlin Soviet. “Socialism” is a word that applies specifically to the Social Democratic political movement and its various parts. Consider that Anarchists aren’t right-wingers, and they aren’t statist. Whereas a right-winger is a statist who doesn’t like wasting money on a labor force.

    These are some of my thoughts. Hopefully this can stimulate some discussion.here.

  • Michael

    “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” –Adolf Hitler… If that is not a leftist statement I do not know what is. Hitler was also a vegetarian…

  • Larry Parsons

    Hitler was a leftist in fact his entire agenda will line up with the American left, from strict gun control to national health care, to state control of industry, state control of religion , state control of education…the list goes on and on and on :

    “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” –Adolf Hitler

    (Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)

    [Below is the 25 of the NSDAP Program – This is basically the National Socialist German Workers Party Platform. It included measures that in effect would redistribute income and war profits, profit-sharing with large industries, nationalization of trusts, extensive development of old-age pension (just like FDRs Social Security Program), and free education. Clearly this demonstrates Hitler was indeed a left winger and here is startling proof.]

    The 25 points of the NSDAP Program were composed by Adolf Hitler and Anton Drexler. They were publically presented on 24 February 1920 “to a crowd of almost two thousand and every single point was accepted amid jubilant approval.” (Mein Kampf, Volume II, Chapter I) Hitler explained their purpose in the fifth chapter of the second volume of Mein Kampf:

    [T]he program of the new movement was summed up in a few guiding principles, twenty-five in all. They were devised to give, primarily to the man of the people, a rough picture of the movement’s aims. They are in a sense a political creed, which on the one hand recruits for the movement and on the other is suited to unite and weld together by a commonly recognized obligation those who have been recruited.

    Hitler was intent on having a community of mutual interest that desired mutual success instead of one that was divided over the control of money or differing values.

    THE COMMON INTEREST BEFORE SELF-INTEREST –
    THAT IS THE SPIRIT OF THE PROGRAM. BREAKING OF THE THRALDOM OF INTEREST – THAT IS THE KERNEL OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM.

    In these straightforward statements of intent, Hitler translated his ideology into a plan of action which would prove its popularity with the German people throughout the coming years. For many, the abruptness of its departure from the tradition of politics as practiced in the western world was as much of a shock as its liberal nature and foresight of the emerging problems of western democracy.

    The Programme of the German Workers’ Party is designed to be of limited duration. The leaders have no intention, once the aims announced in it have been achieved, of establishing fresh ones, merely in order to increase, artificially, the discontent of the masses and so ensure the continued existence of the Party.

    1. We demand the union of all Germany in a Greater Germany on the basis of the right of national self-determination.

    2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in its dealings with other nations, and the revocation of the peace treaties of Versailles and Saint-Germain.

    3. We demand land and territory (colonies) to feed our people and to settle our surplus population.

    4. Only members of the nation may be citizens of the State. Only those of German blood, whatever be their creed, may be members of the nation. Accordingly, no Jew may be a member of the nation.

    5. Non-citizens may live in Germany only as guests and must be subject to laws for aliens.

    6. The right to vote on the State’s government and legislation shall be enjoyed by the citizens of the State alone. We demand therefore that all official appointments, of whatever kind, whether in the Reich, in the states or in the smaller localities, shall be held by none but citizens.

    We oppose the corrupting parliamentary custom of filling posts merely in accordance with party considerations, and without reference to character or abilities.

    7. We demand that the State shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens. If it should prove impossible to feed the entire population, foreign nationals (non-citizens) must be deported from the Reich.

    8. All non-German immigration must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who entered Germany after 2 August 1914 shall be required to leave the Reich forthwith.

    9. All citizens shall have equal rights and duties.

    10. It must be the first duty of every citizen to perform physical or mental work. The activities of the individual must not clash with the general interest, but must proceed within the framework of the community and be for the general good.

    We demand therefore:

    11. The abolition of incomes unearned by work.

    The breaking of the slavery of interest

    12. In view of the enormous sacrifices of life and property demanded of a nation by any war, personal enrichment from war must be regarded as a crime against the nation. We demand therefore the ruthless confiscation of all war profits.

    13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).

    14. We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.

    15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.

    16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municiple orders.

    17. We demand a land reform suitable to our national requirements, the passing of a law for the expropriation of land for communal purposes without compensation; the abolition of ground rent, and the prohibition of all speculation in land. *

    18. We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Common criminals, usurers, profiteers, etc., must be punished with death, whatever their creed or race.

    19. We demand that Roman Law, which serves a materialistic world order, be replaced by a German common law.

    20. The State must consider a thorough reconstruction of our national system of education (with the aim of opening up to every able and hard-working German the possibility of higher education and of thus obtaining advancement). The curricula of all educational establishments must be brought into line with the requirements of practical life. The aim of the school must be to give the pupil, beginning with the first sign of intelligence, a grasp of the nation of the State (through the study of civic affairs). We demand the education of gifted children of poor parents, whatever their class or occupation, at the expense of the State.

    21. The State must ensure that the nation’s health standards are raised by protecting mothers and infants, by prohibiting child labor, by promoting physical strength through legislation providing for compulsory gymnastics and sports, and by the extensive support of clubs engaged in the physical training of youth.

    22. We demand the abolition of the mercenary army and the foundation of a people’s army.

    23. We demand legal warfare on deliberate political mendacity and its dissemination in the press. To facilitate the creation of a German national press we demand:

    (a) that all editors of, and contributors to newspapers appearing in the German language must be members of the nation;
    (b) that no non-German newspapers may appear without the express permission of the State. They must not be printed in the German language;
    (c) that non-Germans shall be prohibited by law from participating financially in or influencing German newspapers, and that the penalty for contravening such a law shall be the suppression of any such newspaper, and the immediate deportation of the non-Germans involved.

    The publishing of papers which are not conducive to the national welfare must be forbidden. We demand the legal prosecution of all those tendencies in art and literature which corrupt our national life, and the suppression of cultural events which violate this demand.

    24. We demand freedom for all religious denominations in the State, provided they do not threaten its existence not offend the moral feelings of the German race.

    The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not commit itself to any particular denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health only from within on the basis of the principle: The common interest before self-interest.

    25. To put the whole of this program into effect, we demand the creation of a strong central state power for the Reich; the unconditional authority of the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and its organizations; and the formation of Corporations based on estate and occupation for the purpose of carrying out the general legislation passed by the Reich in the various German states.

    The leaders of the Party promise to work ruthlessly — if need be to sacrifice their very lives — to translate this program into action.

  • Bob P

    Son..You need to watch this to get your politics straight.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7M-7LkvcVw

  • dockilldare

    i think the author may want to go back to whatever school he learned history from and demand a refund! you are wrong Hitler was a socialist, he was a totalitarian both of these aspects equal left wing government.

    “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s
    capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically
    weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human
    being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and
    performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all
    conditions.” –Adolf Hitler

    (Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)

    one can also look to his inner circle. here is a quote from Joseph Goebbels.

    “There would be no come-back, for capitalists, nor priests nor
    Tsars. Rather, in the place of debased, Jewish Bolshevism, the Wehrmacht
    would deliver real socialism.”

    if you want to continue this take a look at Hitler’s 25 point plan that he published during his run for the presidency. it included such left wing socialist programs like;

    1; Free education, because “it takes the state to raise children.” Baldur Von Schirach first leader of the Hitler youth.

    2; free single payer health care

    3; a free car for all true German citizens so they can get to work.

    4; more jobs created by government. love how he hides his intent to start a world war with this one.

    5; improving the economy through the use and control of central government.

    6; increasing security and reducing violent crime in Germany, through extreme measures such as total gun control for all non Germans. (to be a German meant not only to be able to prove your Aryan heritage but you had to be a member of the party prior to 1933)

    but hey these are only historical facts that Hitler and
    the National Socialists made public, so after all this stuff cant be
    true because that would mean that all of our loving and caring modern
    left wing progressives, are of the same mind as Adolf Hitler. Hense this hit piece of revisionist history i had to suffer through.

    The schools i have graduated from for my political science degree all taught the political spectrum defines one thing and one thing only, the amount of control a government has over its population. with extreme right wing being the absence of government control or anarchy, extreme left wing government being that of total government control or totalitarianism. maybe that is why people like Michael Bloomberg feel the need to stop, question and frisk knowing it is a violation of the 4th amendment. Maybe that is why Diane Fienstien has now come out and said “the first amendment is a privilege not a right, and government has the authority to decide who has the freedom of speech.” And maybe its is why both of our last two president’s have decided that they can rule by decree from the white house without the congress doing the legislation.

21