I keep running across people who are strangely under the impression that the Nazis were socialists.
It's always the same, they say "look at the name- The National Socialist German Workers' Party, the Nazis called themselves socialist, check mate."
For anyone gullible enough to to fall for this obvious semantic ruse, please try to think a little deeper.
It is my thought that the NAZI's mentioned Socialism because there was a tradition in thought at least that Socialism was for the people. National socialism became a bastard term which was supposed to help take the sting out of the Nationalist movement. There always has to be a scapegoat and the Communists were that until it became the Jews, homosexuals, and insane who were seen as taking money away from the people. It as really the leaders who were taking any thing of value and selling it to pay for the war effort. Germany was basically bankrupt at the start of WWII. That is why they had to invade other countries for their resources.
Socialism is employed by different positions on the economic & political spectrum. It is a check on capitalism which we tried during the 1800;'s with the railroad monopolies etc. Carnegie, JP morgan, Rockefeller gained all of the wealth with little regard for the working folks. Union representation, Medicare, SSI are socialistic concepts which is embraced by most in the USA currently. However a I fear all of the strides for equality under many banners will soon be undone by 7 Catholics on the Supreme Court. Atheists are 26% of the population. Where is our representation on the court? Oh never mind.
If we go towards religious law we might as well become Muslim and have Sharia Law, which I have read most of the fundamentalists want as it is out of the bible.
Shallow thinking is the hallmark of conservative politics.
I could call myself a Hobbit....would ot make it true? Even if I went to a Comcon dressed as one?
Really good Video link. I really enjoyed it. Something that stood out for me was the identification of Financial enrichment and Ideology in Nazi Germany as being the driving force that resulted in economic failure and war. Sounds like a manifesto for the Republican Party.
That's a good point, an economy based around conquest and theft is bound to lead to destruction. The republics do have a similar model.
I'm glad you enjoyed it. It's a fantastic series. They cover the great war to the second world War and everything in-between.
People have been so programed by the Political Right to respond negatively and instinctively like Pavlov's dogs to the word Socialism, they are unable distinguish between socialism, communist socialism, democratic socialism, and social democracy, and national socialism, the latter of course meaning Nazism. It's what the Right do: spread ignorance and benefit from it.
Similarly, the Chinese may call themselves communists, but are about as communist as the Ferengi!
As far as I know, a communist state has never existed.
@RoboGraham Indeed. The closest examples appear to be on smaller scales, such as some collectives, tribes, settlements and Kibbutzim.
They lied...the NAZIS were facists.
Exactly, but socialism was massively more popular than fascism at the time so Hitler knew he had to try and appeal to those people in some way. It worked, unfortunately.
What's in a name.
By the same logic, these people believe that North Korea is a democracy.
North Korea's official name: Democratic People's Republic of Korea. It's right there in the name! Check and Mate!
Right.
It's like how the democratic party attempts to pass itself off as democratic by putting that word, "Democratic" in their title. Attempting to give the impression that their leaders are selected democratically.
@RoboGraham Wrong
@RoboGraham I think you are taking my point a bit further than what it actually conveyed. I simply meant that one should not be judged by the name, but by what one does. I can change my name to "Handsome" but that won't actually make me handsome.
What motivated someone or something to give itself a particular name, is beside the point.
The Democratic Party, while retaining the same name, went through a radical change of its compositional members and what it aspires to be, even since the inception of the party. I don't think my example of DPRK means that the entity is exactly the opposite of its name. It simply means that one should not judge something by its cover.
I get you.
I was trying to think of an example similar to yours and that of the democratic party popped into mind. I don't consider super delegates to be a very democratic practice.
"Socialism is a populist economic and political system based on public ownership (also known as collective or common ownership) of the means of production. Those means include the machinery, tools, and factories used to produce goods that aim to directly satisfy human needs."
Fascism is the diametrical opposite, with the gov't in total charge: "Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy."
Well said
The Soviet Union, officially the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), was a federal socialist state in Northern Eurasia that existed from 1922 to 1991.
They called themselves a Democracy believe it or not.
This is like Trump saying he's for Democracy where he's clearly NOT.
What did you expect, that the Nazis would be truthful instead and call themselves fascists?
They should have called it the- Run Germany into the ground with super overly ambitious wars of aggression, crimes against humanity, and extermination of inferiors soldiers party.
But that may not have been a good marketing strategy.
Given that the vast majority of those people don't understand the actual definitions of the words they use, it's small wonder that they misuse them, constantly.
Their ignorance is very unfortunate, for everyone.