News:

"Wings and a Prayer [L-E]"
Congratulations OfferedToEros & Random for completing your RP!

Main Menu

Hitler was left wing

Started by Schwarzepard, September 09, 2008, 01:49:44 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Schwarzepard

Quote from: kongming on September 09, 2008, 01:35:35 AM
Don't compare us to him, unless you want to be heaped in with such pillars of right-wing as Bush or (ooh! Ooh! I'm going to invoke Godwin here!) Hitler.


Hitler was left wing.

Vekseid


OldSchoolGamer

The left-right spectrum never has held up well at the ends.  One can argue the rest of it is losing relevance these days too.

Vekseid

Well, since I don't care for semantics games I would like to see Heritikat's or Methos's definitions of left and right wing, for sure.

ShrowdedPoet

I don't get the whole left and right wing thing myself.  To me it's childish. 
Kiss the hand that beats you.
Sexuality isn't a curse, it's a gift to embrace and explore!
Ons and Offs


Inkidu

That's futile. Hitler didn't care if he was left or right wing; it was merely a way for him to carry out his atrocities against mankind.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

ShrowdedPoet

Quote from: Inkidu on September 09, 2008, 10:40:43 AM
That's futile. Hitler didn't care if he was left or right wing; it was merely a way for him to carry out his atrocities against mankind.

. . .Hitler didn't think he was doing anything wrong.  He felt justified in what he was doing because that was what he believed.  Did he know that other people saw it as wrong. . .I'm sure he did.  But he didn't think it was wrong, therefore to him it was not a way to carry out his atrocities, it was a way for him to do what he thought was right.  People make plans and such to carry out what they think is right everyday even if it is in fact wrong.
Kiss the hand that beats you.
Sexuality isn't a curse, it's a gift to embrace and explore!
Ons and Offs


Mathim

The only thing that determines right and wrong is whoever's still alive after you fight over it.

To me, I don't understand the distinction between right and left politics. Some of it seems hypocritical, supporting one thing and not another, often based on trivial things. In the end, it's just the extremes that matter, the ones who take either side too far. On one end you've got Stalin's communism, look how that ended up. And on the other end you've got Hitler's Nazi Germany, look how that ended up. I don't even think it's possible for moderate to ever exist, since there's never a perfect balance.
Considering a permanent retirement from Elliquiy, but you can find me on Blue Moon (under the same username).

ShrowdedPoet

Quote from: Mathim on September 09, 2008, 11:00:44 AM
The only thing that determines right and wrong is whoever's still alive after you fight over it.

To me, I don't understand the distinction between right and left politics. Some of it seems hypocritical, supporting one thing and not another, often based on trivial things. In the end, it's just the extremes that matter, the ones who take either side too far. On one end you've got Stalin's communism, look how that ended up. And on the other end you've got Hitler's Nazi Germany, look how that ended up. I don't even think it's possible for moderate to ever exist, since there's never a perfect balance.

I think that this will work in here also.  This came from McCains Running Mate. . .

Quote from: ShrowdedPoet on September 09, 2008, 10:39:36 AM
I just did a summary of the first chapter in my U.S. History 2 book.  I think what Sherona is trying to say is very much like the way the book distinguished between views within ONE party.  Ultra Radical Republicans, Radical Republicans, Moderate Republicans.  I really love the way my history book is written!!!!  ;D
Kiss the hand that beats you.
Sexuality isn't a curse, it's a gift to embrace and explore!
Ons and Offs


Inkidu

Quote from: ShrowdedPoet on September 09, 2008, 10:43:16 AM
. . .Hitler didn't think he was doing anything wrong.  He felt justified in what he was doing because that was what he believed.  Did he know that other people saw it as wrong. . .I'm sure he did.  But he didn't think it was wrong, therefore to him it was not a way to carry out his atrocities, it was a way for him to do what he thought was right.  People make plans and such to carry out what they think is right everyday even if it is in fact wrong.
Just because he thought he was right it didn't give him the right to kill millions of people.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

ShrowdedPoet

Quote from: Inkidu on September 09, 2008, 11:05:57 AM
Just because he thought he was right it didn't give him the right to kill millions of people.

I didn't say it did.  You said that it didn't matter whether he was left or right because all that was was a tool to carry out his atrocities.  I was offering a different view on your statement.  I think he was wrong for what he did.
Kiss the hand that beats you.
Sexuality isn't a curse, it's a gift to embrace and explore!
Ons and Offs


Trieste

Quote from: Inkidu on September 09, 2008, 11:05:57 AM
Just because he thought he was right it didn't give him the right to kill millions of people.

That would be a wellduh, pointdexter.

What is the point of this thread, anyhow? 'Cause it seems like comparing 'left' or 'right' to Hitler is often a roundabout way of demonizing that side.

Edit: Never mind, just saw Vekseid's post.

Quote from: Vekseid on September 09, 2008, 02:37:32 AM
Well, since I don't care for semantics games I would like to see Heritikat's or Methos's definitions of left and right wing, for sure.

*points, then waits patiently, as she'd like to see definitions, too*

ShrowdedPoet

Quote from: Trieste on September 09, 2008, 11:08:13 AM
*points, then waits patiently, as she'd like to see definitions, too*

*nodsies*  I agree!
Kiss the hand that beats you.
Sexuality isn't a curse, it's a gift to embrace and explore!
Ons and Offs


Inkidu

Quote from: ShrowdedPoet on September 09, 2008, 11:07:24 AM
I didn't say it did.  You said that it didn't matter whether he was left or right because all that was was a tool to carry out his atrocities.  I was offering a different view on your statement.  I think he was wrong for what he did.
I was saying it didn't matter left or right if it got him closer to achieving his goals he wouldn't care. Deep down he probably himself knew what he was doing was heinous. I call it atrocities because that's what they were regardless, of other points of view or what Hitler thought.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

ShrowdedPoet

Quote from: Inkidu on September 09, 2008, 11:10:42 AM
I was saying it didn't matter left or right if it got him closer to achieving his goals he wouldn't care. Deep down he probably himself knew what he was doing was heinous. I call it atrocities because that's what they were regardless, of other points of view or what Hitler thought.

Whatever. . .
Kiss the hand that beats you.
Sexuality isn't a curse, it's a gift to embrace and explore!
Ons and Offs


Methos

As I pointed out in the thread this was split from Hitler's party was the Nationalsozialismus National Socialist Party Nazi just happens to be an abbreviation. It was originally a worker's party before Hitler started to steer it into towards racism and world domination. However, their economic platform remained socialist.

I personally happen to view blood lust as sociopathic as opposed to unique to any particular ideology. Mao and Stalin were even more prolific and less descriminatory than Hitler is committing mass murder.

Hence your rather left looking at what Hitler did to the German economy. He engaged in massive government spending. This is conventionally considered left wing. He nationalized industry and were he didn't nationalize he issued directives as to how companies were to operate. He also seized all the property of a subset of the population after having assailed them for hording the nation's wealth. Sure he thought all those evil rich people were Jewish but his language was still the same as a Communist. Demonizing the rich, and nationalizing private firms are again all left wing actions.

If you want a definition of 'right wing' modern usage of the term is simply a follower of one of the following idealogies conservatism, libertarianism or classical liberalism.
"Till shade is gone, till water is gone, into the Shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath, to spit in Sightblinder’s eye on the last Day."

Ons and offs https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=13590

Krule

*sighs* Labling one side or the other of an arguement as Nazi's is a tiresome ploy, and has been done by both sides of the left and right, and in this case, I'm afraid it doesn't quite work.. what's more, some of what Hitler was doing at that time period, every goverment has done... so that's not a good arguement

The real issue with Hitler was that power corrupts, and using fear and hatred to shape a nation, is a path that ultimately leads to disaster... and that evil is evil, no matter who is responsible for it. 

Inkidu

Yeah that's the Machiavellian component to it.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

OldSchoolGamer

Generally left-wing regimes couch their rhetoric in economic terms, singling out the rich or some other group as traitors or the source of everyone's problems for reasons rooted in economics.  Left-wing regimes focus on transferring wealth directly from individuals to the State, dissolving large corporations or nationalizing them.

The extreme Right, on the other hand, tends to focus on rabid nationalism and cultural and/or racial purity.  The Right is more willing to see individuals and corporations with high levels of wealth...as long as they toe the party line.  Right-wing regimes let corporations remain in existence, but pull their strings from behind the scenes.

I don't tout this as a foolproof or exhaustive definition; as I said earlier, the Left-Right political spectrum gets rather fuzzy and tattered at the ends.  Both far Left and far Right emphasize authoritarianism and centralization of power in State hands at the expense of individual liberty.  But I have found this definition (well, rubric is probably a more accurate term) to be adequate, a notch better than "I know it when I see it."

The Great Triangle

Muffins!

Hitler was a nasty waffle eater!


Therefore, don't stack your waffles or pancakes more than two to a plate, or you'll slide to the right or left and cause a breakfast disaster.

Especially if the syrup gets involved!
Meow!  I'm a kitty; made of fire.

Ons and Offs

Inkidu

Quote from: TyTheDnDGuy on September 09, 2008, 05:04:09 PM
Generally left-wing regimes couch their rhetoric in economic terms, singling out the rich or some other group as traitors or the source of everyone's problems for reasons rooted in economics.  Left-wing regimes focus on transferring wealth directly from individuals to the State, dissolving large corporations or nationalizing them.

The extreme Right, on the other hand, tends to focus on rabid nationalism and cultural and/or racial purity.  The Right is more willing to see individuals and corporations with high levels of wealth...as long as they toe the party line.  Right-wing regimes let corporations remain in existence, but pull their strings from behind the scenes.

I don't tout this as a foolproof or exhaustive definition; as I said earlier, the Left-Right political spectrum gets rather fuzzy and tattered at the ends.  Both far Left and far Right emphasize authoritarianism and centralization of power in State hands at the expense of individual liberty.  But I have found this definition (well, rubric is probably a more accurate term) to be adequate, a notch better than "I know it when I see it."
The funny thing is Hitler did both. He singled out the rich Jews and preached about the Superior Race. So maybe both sides are two parts of the same Hitler? Makes sense.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

Vekseid

So, now that I have some time (not really but I can act like it), I'm going to weigh in here, but only a bit as I spent too much time debating last night.

I personally find blanket statements like "Hitler was x" to usually be rather simplistic. Even saying Hitler was a nutjob is not telling the proper story. He was a nutjob who rose to power by playing on the fear and suffering of his people.

I need to squash something here:

Quote from: Methos on September 09, 2008, 11:17:44 AM
As I pointed out in the thread this was split from Hitler's party was the Nationalsozialismus National Socialist Party Nazi just happens to be an abbreviation. It was originally a worker's party before Hitler started to steer it into towards racism and world domination. However, their economic platform remained socialist.

This is a bit like calling the DPRK Democratic because democratic is in the name. And as you point out, their economic platform has nothing in the remotest sense to do with their social platform. It is popular to call them right-wing extremists because people tend not to think of economic issues as right or left any longer - the Democratic party now has a better history of being fiscally conservative than the Republicans, and yet we call them left and right wing, respectively.

Besides, Hitler became the dominant force in his party rather early on, and well:

To quote

QuoteHitler had always been hostile to socialist ideas, especially those that involved racial or sexual equality. However, socialism was a popular political philosophy in Germany after the First World War. This was reflected in the growth in the German Social Democrat Party (SDP), the largest political party in Germany.

Hitler, therefore redefined socialism by placing the word 'National' before it. He claimed he was only in favour of equality for those who had "German blood". Jews and other "aliens" would lose their rights of citizenship, and immigration of non-Germans should be brought to an end.

Socialism was merely a gimmick for him to gain power, nothing more.

OldSchoolGamer

As a corollary to that, it would be interesting to see an alternate universe where the Nazi Party had simply focused on German nationalism rather than racial purity, ethnic and other pogroms, and anti-Semitism.  Still fascism, just no death camps for Jews, communists, homosexuals, Gypsies, etc.

Celestial Goblin

Quote from: TyTheDnDGuy on September 10, 2008, 01:34:18 AM
As a corollary to that, it would be interesting to see an alternate universe where the Nazi Party had simply focused on German nationalism rather than racial purity, ethnic and other pogroms, and anti-Semitism.  Still fascism, just no death camps for Jews, communists, homosexuals, Gypsies, etc.

That could be the alternate history when Germany didn't become nazi but Italy remained fascist with Mussolini in power. Though finding some 'other' to opress would become necessary sooner or later. Each of the above groups would make a good target.

As for Hitler being left or right wing, it's a ridiculous discussion.

By modern definitions of left and right wing, he's completely not left wing and probably everything modern left wing opposes. He might or might not be right wing depending if we go with right wing = libertarian or right wing = militaristic, nationalistic, 'strong are good' view.

By definitions of his own time, he started out courting the center and moved rightwards as time progressed. I also recall that he shown more enmity to the more moderate, non-soviet socialists than to hardline communists, probably because he knew that pro-USSR extremists will be less of a political threat.

Caehlim

Hmmm, I would have thought he was about as typical right-wing conservative as you could get when he wasn't busy performing genocide. Believer in family values, attempting to rebuild the glory of his country's lost past, more interested in reforming the economy than providing charity to the people.

This isn't said to insult the right wing community, just what I consider to be true. The immorality of his genocidal actions didn't necessarily affect everything he did and transform it into pure evil.

He loved his dog Blondi and was very keen on animal rights. That doesn't mean that dog-lovers are evil, they just happen to have that trait in common with Hitler because who could resist a cute animal.
My home is not a place, it is people.
View my Ons and Offs page.

View my (new)Apologies and Absences thread or my Ideas thread.