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

The Nazis were officially a Socialist party, which is an extreme left philosophy (they were anti-capitalism and Hilter did disarm the civilians). But they also had extreme right-wing (facist) beliefs. So why are they associated more with right-wing than the left? They had beliefs from both sides.

2007-08-22 14:07:20 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

Thanks netjr. I was taught in college Hitler and the Nazis disarmed the civilians. I appreciate you setting things straight for me. Very good answer.

2007-08-22 14:22:29 · update #1

Adam, yes, todays KKK is very right-wing. But wasn't the KKK originally started by Democratic Aristocricy? I am not positive on this, but I think I did hear that somewhere. (History channel maybe?)

If anyone knows for sure, please say so.

2007-08-22 14:27:49 · update #2

absolut, then why is facist used to describe extreme right-wingers? I'm confused now. please elaborate if you see this. thanks for the klan info btw.

2007-08-22 14:52:41 · update #3

8 answers

The terms "left" and "right" are misleading.

Authoritarianism is considered right-wing, but Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, and any socialist nationalist government contains marxist-leninist ideology which is completely authoritarian. However, marxist and socialist views are considered left-wing.

But these terms are meaningless because left and right are context-defined. In certain contexts, authoritarianism is left wing and in some contexts anarchism is left wing.

This is because political ideology has more than two "dimensions", there's centralization on power versus decentralization, suffrage (right to vote) versus succession of power, social authoritarianism and social anarchy, economic authoritarianism and economic barbarism.

Its just too wide a range of issues to define in black and white winner-take-all left V right terms.

However, I've noted that many posters in the politics and government forum believe there are only two ideologies, red versus blue, Republican versus Democrat, good guys versus bad guys, and that politics is really that simple.

This is why the public school system is a failure. We've dumbed ourselves down. I've learned much more since I've graduated than I did in all of high school. And much more since I attended a college.

2007-08-22 14:26:06 · answer #1 · answered by askthepizzaguy 4 · 2 0

The whole concept of left wing versus right wing is outmoded so it is hard to use that to categorize the Nazis. Left wing refers to Marxist ideals and right wing to monarchist ideals. Because many monarchies had absolute power, the mistaken notion that right wing means totalitarian was born. Both left and right espouse totalitarian governments. That it why a better categorization would be the liberty scale where one end is complete individual liberty (think anarchists) and the other end is totalitarian. The Nazis were in all respects a left wing group.

Golden: I believe the concept you are talking about concerning neo-conservatives is based on the fact that they are an off shoot of the liberal movement. When the liberals turned Marxist in the 1960s, the neo-conservatives broke away saying the liberal movement lost its way. By the 1980s, they no longer believed themselves to be liberal but even today, neo-conservatives are best identified with moderate Republicans. The term as it is now being used is a nonsense term that is used to describe anyone who supports president Bush (probably because neo-conservatives have always been interventionalists) in the same way the N-word is used about black Americans.

2007-08-22 15:00:08 · answer #2 · answered by Caninelegion 7 · 0 0

please look up 'Fascism' as a political movement. It is most definitely not right-wing.

The only thing people point to as proof the nazis were 'right-wing' is the hatred of other groups, 'such as the kkk'...but I'll submit that is not a right or left 'thing' but universal to those who would establish a totalitarian state over others....ie, pick a group, dehumanize them and blame them for all problems, and then gradually take control under the guise of saving the people from the other group. Somebody once said that in politics the public intention of 'saving' the public, is usually only a masked intention of ruling over the public....(or something like that...pardon me if I didn't get the exact words, you get the point.)

I prefer to think of the political spectrum as it pertains to government involvement in our lives...extreme left being the authoritarian style, and extreme right being anarchy. American political parties are both somewhat left of center, the democrats being farther left than the republicans.

If you look at the National Socialists and the Fascists you'll see that their method of gaining power and consolidating government power over private industry, businesses, and eventually personal lives are more left than anything else.

As I said, American politics is kind of a mix, you have the social conservatives, which actually want goverment control over certain aspects of society, you have social liberals which want personal freedoms to do anything they want. Then to confuse things even more, you have fiscal conservatives which think government should back out of business and let 'the market' decide...and you have 'progressives' which think the government should control everything from healthcare to the price of gas and should punish or tax 'bad' behavior such as eating mcdonald's or smoking or driving an SUV..or now you even have the group calling themselves 'true liberals' which are opposite of the progressives mostly and more like the libertarians.

Somewhere in the middle of all those labels is a philosophy that you might decipher and subscribe to, but don't expect it to be cleared up by the mainstream media who tends to reclassify the labels as they see fit...such as ascribing racial hatred as a 'right wing' philosophy...which it's not. (the KKK was started by democrats, BTW) One of the main differences between Hitler's Germany and Stalin's USSR was that the Nazis were 'National' socialists and Stalin was more of an 'international' socialist (a communist)...both subscribing to more and more government control over private citizen's lives.

2007-08-22 14:43:46 · answer #3 · answered by VodkaTonic 5 · 1 1

one of the biggest problems hitler had when first developing the nazi party was shedding the socialist aspect of the party that he started in. yes, they were socialists to the degree that they were a workers party. some of those early members died. one or two are suspected of having been killed by hitler himself. end result was that hitler was in no way leftist.

another great monster of the 20th centry was joseph stalin who might be considered socialist and more specifically communist. but stalin was no socialist, nor a communist; he was an authoritarian dictator who siezed power under the guise of communism.

there are those that insist that geo bush is not a neoconservative, that indeed his policies reflect a kind of liberalist agenda. of course bush is not a liberal. possibly he is not a conservative in the traditional sense. labels do not a man make. they're just labels.

2007-08-22 14:22:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

First lets clarify they did not disarm the civilians that was done before the Nazis' came into power over the idea of "safety" for their citizens. The nazi's merely benefited from that policy.

Their left wing views (socialist as you properly note) are not the one's that cost millions of people their lives; their fascist far right wing views of hatred towards other races are what cost lives of millions. However going beyond that look who is in charge of the media today and the story they want to tell. They want to tell the story of the "bad right" not the "bad left." Its clear the left leanings of the radical nazi party of the 30's and 40's are pretty well hidden in modern teachings.

2007-08-22 14:16:22 · answer #5 · answered by netjr 6 · 4 2

socialists was in their name,but think about their opposition. Communists who were supported partly by the Jews. There are more reasons behind the holocaust than being Jewish. There is more to history than is taught. As for the klan,no political party started it. It started as a social club for Confederate war vets, like an American Legion or VFW post.

2007-08-22 14:36:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

They were about as far right as you can be. Any radical group, too far left or right, can be dangerous.
Examples:
Left Wing: Latin American terrorist groups such as FARC and Shining Path
Right Wing: hate groups such as the Nazis and the KKK

Political ideologies are like alcohol, best in moderation

2007-08-22 14:22:32 · answer #7 · answered by Adam Mac 3 · 1 1

ov Curz Im the two cnt' u tll wait do u tink i annonoyed alot ov ppl via doi'n dis???? enable's see what Y!A thinks? "Oops! It looks such as you have 9 misspelling(s). Open Spell Checker" And "it variety of feels you have an excellent variety of punctuation"

2016-11-13 05:12:53 · answer #8 · answered by olli 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers