3 ms·

On the other hand, here is the Nazi's public face : http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/25points.htm http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseo

by waps 12y ago

On the other hand, here is the Nazi's public face : http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/25points.htm http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/25points.... Read it, then tell me if you still don't understand why these people might get classified as left-wing. They implemented quite a few of these points too, by the way. You can say whatever you want about Nazi's but they are by far the most successful leftist party in history, and quite a few "left-wing" rights today were first implemented by Nazi Germany. Big example : pensions. Scholarships (of the for-the-needy kind, not for-the-really-smart kind). There's many examples. That said, it is beyond obvious that they are not comparable to today's left wing. As hard as it is to understand today, the left-wing was very much anti-immigrant in the 1930's. But it's just one of many historical facts that have changed. What I still find hard to believe, is that it's the democrats were the pro-slavery anti-black side of the aisle. Some choice cuts : (the first parts are anti-versailles, and some anti-immigration) 7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich. (8-9 are anti-immigrant) 10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all. 11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished. 12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits. 13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts. 14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries. 15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions. ...

maxxxxx 12y ago
Sure, they had some left-wing traits. And they had some right wing traits too: The belief that Germany is a special country is pretty similar to today's conservatives belief that the US is exceptional and blessed by God. My point was that by figuring out whether the Nazis were left or right wing nothing is learned. There are left wing and right wing democracies and there are left and right wing dictatorships. Left wing governments have killed a lot of people and so have right wing governments.
- the_af 12y ago
  Don't forget center-wing (is that a word?) governments, which have also killed a lot of people.
mpyne 12y ago
You'll note, however, that many of those platform points were polar opposites to policies enacted in practice once the Nazis came to power. War profits continued (indeed, Nazis who tried to actually push for getting rid of the profit motive were quickly removed from their posts and marginalized). "Unearned" income continued. The Nazis even maintained the gold standard for international trade long after the other major economies had devalued their own currency, and much of the mobilization of their wartime economy came via inventive capitalist measures from the Reichsbank, Reich Economic Ministry, military-economic departments of the Oberkommandowehrmacht, and more. Likewise the trusts were not only not nationalized (at least, at any great scale), but businesses and industry were forced to join specified cartels based on their market sector. It was through these cartels that the Reich enforced economic policy. Most of the "left wing" economic policies that were enacted were emulated using good old standard "right wing" methods. Markets remained; instead of centrally planning economic output directly, the Reich simply regulated the market such as to achieve mostly the desired effect. Instead of banning refrigerators outright, the Reich simply failed to import enough iron ore to make civilian goods once the priority list for Wehrmacht and export needs had been filled. Chemical plants that were absolutely essential for the Reich's strategic needs were contracted to companies like IG Farben with profit guarantees and profit sharing agreements, methods that would be perfectly accept to almost any right-wing economist. There were state industries too (Junkers, a strategic industry expansion program, a steel/coal production cartel, etc.) so it's not as if Nazi Germany didn't have traditionally left-wing attributes to it. But nor was it lacking in traditionally right-wing attributes or methods. All of these methods were means to an end, as opposed to being taken from either a left-wing or right-wing palette of options because they were left- or right-wing.
- maxxxxx 12y ago
  You expressed my point much more eloquently than I could. Always watch people actually do. Not only what they say.
- waps 12y ago
  Your making the point that because they weren't outright communist, they must have been right-wing. I agree that they weren't communists, I disagree with the conclusion you draw from that. Most trusts were nationalized, just nazi style : their management was replaced or forced to obey party rule, mostly by threats. Yes that doesn't technically qualify as nationalization, but for all practical intents it boils down to the same thing. It is most definitely not a laissez-faire policy. > Most of the "left wing" economic policies that were enacted were emulated using good old standard "right wing" methods We're talking about the introduction of pensions, scholarships, unemployments payment increases, job guarantees, ... > Chemical plants that were absolutely essential for the Reich's strategic needs were contracted to companies like IG Farben with profit guarantees and profit sharing agreements, methods that would be perfectly accept to almost any right-wing economist. You left out the part where the party threatened to imprison (or worse) management if they did any orders that weren't for the government. Frankly, if a party with a thorough reputation for excessive use of violence that is in control of the government threatens prison if you don't sign a contract ... would you consider that free enterprise or laissez-faire ? I agree that the methods used were not full-blown communist. The state was in absolute control, that was the goal, the means and what happened on the ground. Calling this right-wing policy is lunacy. The way I see left, right, far left, and far right is this : left: communist-lite policies. Try to achieve the same aims as communists, trying to avoid the worst inefficiencies of that by having market-based policies, with judicious application of direct government intervention and regulation. Example: Obamacare. right: laissez-faire policies. Try to achieve (mostly) the same aims as communists, doing as little as possible to achieve those aims. If something needs to be done at all, don't let the government do it itself. far left: outright communist policy. Put the government in direct control of everything, and have a direct reporting chain into the government for everything that happens. Government intervention is the only thing allowed to exist. far right: don't try to achieve anything at all using the state. Anarchism. On this scale, Nazis fall under "far left". They never had the time to really get to full-blown communism but they made great progress in that direction.

by waps 12y ago

maxxxxx 12y ago

Sure, they had some left-wing traits. And they had some right wing traits too: The belief that Germany is a special country is pretty similar to today's conservatives belief that the US is exceptional and blessed by God. My point was that by figuring out whether the Nazis were left or right wing nothing is learned. There are left wing and right wing democracies and there are left and right wing dictatorships. Left wing governments have killed a lot of people and so have right wing governments.

the_af 12y ago
Don't forget center-wing (is that a word?) governments, which have also killed a lot of people.

mpyne 12y ago

You'll note, however, that many of those platform points were polar opposites to policies enacted in practice once the Nazis came to power. War profits continued (indeed, Nazis who tried to actually push for getting rid of the profit motive were quickly removed from their posts and marginalized). "Unearned" income continued. The Nazis even maintained the gold standard for international trade long after the other major economies had devalued their own currency, and much of the mobilization of their wartime economy came via inventive capitalist measures from the Reichsbank, Reich Economic Ministry, military-economic departments of the Oberkommandowehrmacht, and more. Likewise the trusts were not only not nationalized (at least, at any great scale), but businesses and industry were forced to join specified cartels based on their market sector. It was through these cartels that the Reich enforced economic policy. Most of the "left wing" economic policies that were enacted were emulated using good old standard "right wing" methods. Markets remained; instead of centrally planning economic output directly, the Reich simply regulated the market such as to achieve mostly the desired effect. Instead of banning refrigerators outright, the Reich simply failed to import enough iron ore to make civilian goods once the priority list for Wehrmacht and export needs had been filled. Chemical plants that were absolutely essential for the Reich's strategic needs were contracted to companies like IG Farben with profit guarantees and profit sharing agreements, methods that would be perfectly accept to almost any right-wing economist. There were state industries too (Junkers, a strategic industry expansion program, a steel/coal production cartel, etc.) so it's not as if Nazi Germany didn't have traditionally left-wing attributes to it. But nor was it lacking in traditionally right-wing attributes or methods. All of these methods were means to an end, as opposed to being taken from either a left-wing or right-wing palette of options because they were left- or right-wing.

maxxxxx 12y ago
You expressed my point much more eloquently than I could. Always watch people actually do. Not only what they say.
waps 12y ago
Your making the point that because they weren't outright communist, they must have been right-wing. I agree that they weren't communists, I disagree with the conclusion you draw from that. Most trusts were nationalized, just nazi style : their management was replaced or forced to obey party rule, mostly by threats. Yes that doesn't technically qualify as nationalization, but for all practical intents it boils down to the same thing. It is most definitely not a laissez-faire policy. > Most of the "left wing" economic policies that were enacted were emulated using good old standard "right wing" methods We're talking about the introduction of pensions, scholarships, unemployments payment increases, job guarantees, ... > Chemical plants that were absolutely essential for the Reich's strategic needs were contracted to companies like IG Farben with profit guarantees and profit sharing agreements, methods that would be perfectly accept to almost any right-wing economist. You left out the part where the party threatened to imprison (or worse) management if they did any orders that weren't for the government. Frankly, if a party with a thorough reputation for excessive use of violence that is in control of the government threatens prison if you don't sign a contract ... would you consider that free enterprise or laissez-faire ? I agree that the methods used were not full-blown communist. The state was in absolute control, that was the goal, the means and what happened on the ground. Calling this right-wing policy is lunacy. The way I see left, right, far left, and far right is this : left: communist-lite policies. Try to achieve the same aims as communists, trying to avoid the worst inefficiencies of that by having market-based policies, with judicious application of direct government intervention and regulation. Example: Obamacare. right: laissez-faire policies. Try to achieve (mostly) the same aims as communists, doing as little as possible to achieve those aims. If something needs to be done at all, don't let the government do it itself. far left: outright communist policy. Put the government in direct control of everything, and have a direct reporting chain into the government for everything that happens. Government intervention is the only thing allowed to exist. far right: don't try to achieve anything at all using the state. Anarchism. On this scale, Nazis fall under "far left". They never had the time to really get to full-blown communism but they made great progress in that direction.