English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

because he formed the National socialist (German workers)party ? this in fact was a blending of the two prominent political; party names .. how very clever to take both names and use them together.. along with a common enemy that he could rally the citizenry against ?

See any connection with terms like Neo-Liberalism?
and the all feared terrorist threat..?

you know Hitler used to rail about "terrorism" oh yes and the "New World Order" as well.. Hitler was not left wing.. He was a fascist which is reactionary and an extreme right concept ..

Russian and Chinese Communism as many of you no doubt will want to post about ..also feigned being Left.
The communist manifesto has many humanist and what is called by our current right, leftist social constructs.. but is always coopted by the fascist element and as such is never fulfilled.. including Castro.

The fascist right always imitate the left because people will never accept their anti human philosophy willingly ..

2006-10-01 04:33:45 · 19 answers · asked by hardartsystems 3 in Politics & Government Politics

http://www.jadetower.org/muses/archives/000154.html

2006-10-01 04:34:10 · update #1

you're wrong Leogirl
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AsXZHo7LYSNZGpS8Hlx4Kyvzy6IX?qid=20061001080536AAU6ltt
they do care and they do remeber..incorrectly..

Neo-Con is the same thing. It is an attempt to label an otherwise anti human movement with an "easier" to digest name/moniker ...

2006-10-01 04:43:15 · update #2

19 answers

History lesson 101
I should get 20 points for this one!!

#1 Terrorist was a term first quoted by the British government in relation to the Boston Tea Party!
#2 the sons of liberty were considered liberals- conservatives were the tories that helped the crown!

#3 Adolph Hitler was
(1) Democratically elected
(2) a facist
(3) not liberal
(4) spoke often on how the terrorist threat was destorying the country
(5) linked to socialism only as far as it served his pupose (hitler youth and the guise of helping all germans)

#4 Communist nations were conservative, not liberal
#5 The media in the US is so far right that it could never be considered liberal
#6 liberals true name is progressive- liberal is a moniker hung by conservatives to downgrade progessives
#7 Progressive means future looking
#8 Conservative means clinging to the past
#9 time stands still for no man- you can not cling to the past!!

2006-10-01 05:19:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anarchy99 7 · 3 2

Fascism is a right wing party only if you are farther to the left. In Stalin's view Hitler was right wing. In the Communist view everyone who is not a communist is a reactionary right winger. To everyone else Hitler was left wing.

Fascism or Nationalist Socialism at its core believes in the supremacy of the state over the individual. The Rights of the group (state) over the rights of the each person. The demand that each person subordinate their wishes to the wishes of the group or suffer the consequences of the states power. The alledged reason for this is the greater good. Just the same as Communism and Socialism.

The greater good for the group that the humanist social constructs believe in will eventually lead to suppression of the individual. How is it that all of the left wing philosophies (communist, socialist, progressive etc) somehow get co-opted bt the fascist element? It is because they all have a fascist element within them. This facet just grows with the growth of power of the movement.

The philosophies of communism, socialism, progressivism and fascism are close and intermixed not separated by some huge gulf. Look at all the commonalities. Censorship, concentration camps, a need to have the populace belong to the "party", cults of personality, anti-smoking, belief in the occult, gun control etc

Yes the right censors and puts people in prisons, and has its own "heroes". But focus on the differences, the left censors political speech ( political correctness, speech codes, etc) the right censors pornography or ideas it finds obscene. The left puts entire groups of people in prison or to death (jews, kulaks, the bourgeois, tibetan monks, Branch Davidians) the right persecutes more individuals as opposed to groups. The left protests Ann Coulter (political speech), the right protests porno theatres or strip clubs. I would not go to either protest but I am more scared of those that would stop political speech than those that would stop strippers ( thats just annoying)

The left favors big government, the nameless faceless bureaucrat with power ovear us all. They promise a false freedom of being able let loose all our sexual urges and eat when we want, but the price is the cage of following the government rules and restrictions.

The most clear difference is does the philosophy place more value on individual freedom and responsibility or on the more value on the needs of the group. The philosophies of the left always subordinate the individual to the group. The philosophies of the right subordinate the group to the individual. There is room on the right for this to become out of control. The Robber Barons of the 19th Century for example. But the left has a greater capacity for causing misery than the right. Just look at the body count.

You seem to be idolizing the theoretical promises of the left but making excuses for the failing of the left when their systems are placed into practice. The biggest failing of the left wing theorist is the leaving out of the human nature factor. Power corrupts. Groups tend to favor their own and get nasty towards those percieved as outsiders. Man without morality imposed tends to become immoral. The right recognizes this a tries to have forms of control over the baser human instincts.

As for Neo Cons they are just Democrats hiding in the Republican Party. The share most of the traditional ideals of he Democratic Party ( interventionism, free trade, world political bodies, large governments, etc)

2006-10-01 05:47:08 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I've seen that to here that people say Hitler was left wing but I really don't know why.They are in serious need of a history lesson.
I can only agree with your additional details and would like to point out especially that Hitler did use the term terrorists on the resistance against his regime.

2006-10-01 04:41:38 · answer #3 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 1 2

I tend to think of politics as a circle. Those who are extreme left wing and extreme right wing tend to be very similar to each other in their tactics. Briefly comparing Hitler and Stalin both sent many soldiers to their death (especially Stalin), both had tight control over their economy, and both had control over the press. It is odd that they are both considered Socialist and it makes me think that there are both right wigh and left wing versions of Socialism. The rich Germans in Germany supported Hitler because they thought they could control him and he would not take away their money unlike the communists who most certainly would. To be perfectly honest it is hard to find incredibly distinct differences between Fascism and Communism...at least for me.

2006-10-01 04:50:58 · answer #4 · answered by bumpocooper 5 · 4 0

There are many reasons why and explanations how Hitler got to power, including a public that had little experience in democracy and civil disobedience and wanted a strong leader to protect against perceived outside and inside enemies.

It is important to keep in mind that the a great many landowners-nobility and industrialists . corporate interests, who were disenchanted with the so-called 'Weimar-Republic', collaborated with and encouraged the Nazi party.

2006-10-01 04:53:17 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 1 0

Sorry. Hopelessly incorrect on all counts. you may desire to ensure lots of books. and you are the only foolishly attempting to re-write history. He killed liberals, socialists, unionists, and gays in droves, and did see you later earlier shifting against his laundry checklist of ethnic minorities. He became a real winger from the get-bypass. Even infants understand this, or would desire to. He did not help any of those issues. examine his e book. Or examine Shirer. Or anybody else who is conscious the concern remember.

2016-10-18 07:27:10 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0 1

I was going to answer but I believe leogirl got 100% right. When will you Neo Libs learn to debate issues instead of ranting and raving and spewing slogans gleaned from bumpers stickers and debate the issues?

On second thought by constantly comparing everything you dislike to Hitler you keep sounding more and more insane. Keep up the good work, keep the the meltdown going. Us Neocons will run things while you are "away"

2006-10-01 04:43:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

Haven't there been correlations drawn between the writings of Hitler and Goebbels to Ann Coulter's vitriolic remarks? If the passages match, it would suggest more of a right wing/fascist slant to der Fuhrer. Aggressive attempts at world expansion/domination and big government, plus institutionalized discrimination against foreigners, homosexuals, and generic "undesirables" pack their own irony.......

2006-10-01 04:49:12 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 3

Maybe they see so many similarities between hitler and present-day LIBERALS the world over. I know I sure do. Both wanted people to DO and BELIEVE exactly as they did, and would not TOLERATE those who didn't. Don't believe me? Try to rationally debate a liberal in cyberspace. The vermin will only resort to name-calling and lies. Liberals are, in many respects, even more disgusting than Hitler was.

2006-10-01 04:46:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

No but the term Neo-con which is the real term being bandied about does. I have yet to see a neo-liberal spoken of. Nice troll tho.

2006-10-01 04:36:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers