Is Nazism right or left wing?

>Is Nazism right or left wing?
It is most definitely right.

Nice Ad hominem m8

No economic freedom=no right wing.

Right winged socially, left winged economically

Reactionary is not conservative.

Nice retarded definition of right/left wing that doesn't even apply to the situation for which the concept was created. This is exactly what i meant by austrians being particularly retarded when it comes to history.

>that doesn't even apply to the situation for which the concept was created
Yeah, if we're talking about the French Revolution, indeed, but the concept has changed since that time. It is impossible for a Right wing government to centrilize the Economy now.

> This is exactly what i meant by austrians being particularly retarded when it comes to history.

I'm no Austrian Fedora. I just posted that text because I like it.

reactionary can be literally anything

that's kind of the whole point

Yeah, but Hitler wasn't really that conservative.

I'm not saying he was a progressist, but Nazists were sort of the PC faggots of that time.

Conservatives are pc faggots, user.

singling out various minority groups isn't exactly progressive

if you mean conservative like american conservatives, then he obviously wasn't, but that's such a pillarised thing it's not comparable to anything

>singling out various minority groups isn't exactly progressive
No, as I said, he wasn't a progressive. But is is conservative? I don't think so. It's reactionary.

This. The alt-right likes to claim it is just using the SJW's tool's against them, but the SJWs got it from the Christian conservatives who tried to use political correctness in the form of what was considered decent, Christian and family friendly in order to moderate the MSM and control the dialogue.

Fascist here, we're third position, not right or left

Economically they were undeniably leftist. Fascism is a form of socialism which is why nearly half of Germany's economy was public enterprise while the rest was very tightly regulated.

The Nazis and the modern left share common at least on eugenics or abortion. They'll rarely admit it in public but in anonymous online forums the only pro-choice argument they have is that it kills niggers and other "undesirables" which was the goal of the founder of Planned Parenthood.

Right wing ideology
Left wing economically

In what respect were they "right wing?"

>And (2) to show why socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production

Well congratulations, this retarded article destroys itself in the first paragraph.

>its an americans think state capitalism is leftist episode
>americans would probably think if all of a nations industry was owned by the king it would be leftists too

Whatever they needed to be at the moment.

facile

an alternative

Hitler never said that btw, it was Strasser :)

fascism does not apply left or right

fascism dictates that the law of the people, the culture, and the land go above all else. its morals on what is degenerate or otherwise negative to society (anything done out of inherent selfishness that benefits yourself at the expense of others in your nation) are that all of this is punishable by execution or less, depending on how ultimate the ruling is
there is no god, because a god can be malleable and corrupted to mean different things from what it meant a hundred years prior, thus the populous can willfully neglect the original teachings without feeling shame. it can be a slow process that converts everyone from the true faith; however if the law is the god, it cannot ever be changed without it being very obvious, it can only degenerate the populous through willfull and deliberate rebellion against the creed of yore.

fascism allows for private enterprise, while having socialistic tendencies; the currency is backed by the state and the state decides all, conscription is mandatory to enforce proper customs on the younger members of society, and several things may be government funded, not least of all the army. private enterprise may however be withdrawn at will if the state considers the corporation or its owner a negative influence on the state, and instead of being given free things as rights such as in commmunism and socialism, everything you are handed is something you've earned, not a right. the difference may be indistinguishable by many, but it is a very important one; if you earned something it means you went through hard work with a goal in mine, you don't take it as a given, you truly care about whatever it is that you gained because you earned it with your very own efforts. in communism however all rights are a given and it is all soulless, you do not care for whatever it is you've been handed for nothing because you did not struggle in the least.
1/2

fascism is built on nationalism, the idea that the nation state is beyond all else and that everyone outside is not directly the enemy but at the very least worth less than your fellow nationbrothers, in a stark contrast to this communism is built on globalism, the idea that everyone should get along and that enemies are a thing of the past. communism says competition is bad, fascism says it is directly necessary, to the point of war. has innovation ever happened as fast as when there is war at stake at every corner, when every man considers their very undoing imminent and thus work and fight for their dear lives and beyond, for the sake of their family and their nation's future, not for themselves in the least? in communism everything you do is for yourself and to provide for yourself, sometimes it is pretended to be for your family but it is really for yourself to have a family, not for your family to endure.
another thing worth noting, fascism has never been destroyed from he inside, for so long as fascism is in power all enemies will be on the outside. any internal resistance will be met by swift punishment as fascism is very different from all other ruling systems, as it can only ever get into power through the revolution of the common man, thus putting common men with their interests included in positions of power, particularly military positions. it's impossible to destroy something from the inside if the common man will take up arms to protect it. if you look at communism however it is constantly met by civil unrest and armed resistance against the government and not for the government.

but really i'm just rambling. forgive me his but i truly believe in the idea of virtue, fellowship, and fighting for something beyond yourself while not even considering your own mortality beyond the very fact that if you die you cannot go on fighting for your cause.
2/2

It's on the Y axis

>nationalism, the idea that the nation state is beyond all else and that everyone outside is not directly the enemy but at the very least worth less than your fellow nationbrothers
kys

Can mods please perma ban /pol/ shitposters. You faggots have a containment board for a reason. Use it.

it's implied. of course there will be alliances and nations who consider each other more than friends, and those alliances may never be broken until both nation states collapse, but if you do everything to benefit your nation state and the people within, while respecting other nation states doing the same, there will be conflicts eventually when interests don't align thus cementing the position of a nationalist putting his own country first against even a century old ally when utterly necessary
there is a reason hitler really liked japan, because they are nationalists and that is respectable in a world without them

>Posters answer to OP and explain it in extent

Someone get's somehow so buttblasted that thinks this is bannable offense. Please /pol/ and /leftypol/ what you definetly seem to be can just suck off each other and then happily take the cyanide pills.

This
FPBP

tru

fpbp

This is great

>Hitler
>fascist

Only true answer.

far right

It's literally pure centrism.

Right. Horseshoe theory, but right.

I mean, is north Korea democratic, run by the people, or a republic?

Hitler threw corporativism out the window after he came to power. THere's a reason he purged the SA and those who advocated socialist elements of the party

Nobody in the 1930s had any doubts that National Socialism was a right-wing ideology.

Right wing, undoubtedly. The right wing is in favor of hierarchy, while the left wing is in favor of equality. It's that simple. But American retards think leftism = big gubmint and rightism = my liberty.

>The right wing is in favor of hierarchy, while the left wing is in favor of equalit
Wrong. So, Cuba, North Korea and every Socialist country id far right?

Right wing wants equallity, left wing wants equity.

Is this what commies mean by fascism is capitalism in decay? It's just a dialectical synthesis that attempts to keep the remnants of capitalism?

>democratic
Probably not

>run by the people
Who do you think it's being run by? Robots?

>a republic
Absolutely is.

Feel free to correct me, but don't republics have representatives elected by the populace?

A council is enough.

Damn even Hitler misspelled "its"?

>right or left wing
Jesus OP, you nearly spooked me out of my chair!

>implying /pol/ isn't spooked as fuck

They fall for the left-right meme all the time.

But they're wrong.

>To Mussolini, the capitalism of his time had degenerated from original capitalism, which he called dynamic or heroic capitalism (1830–1870) to static capitalism (1870–1914) and then finally to decadent capitalism or supercapitalism, which began in 1914.[3] In 1933, Benito Mussolini declared Italian Fascism's opposition to supercapitalism.

>Mussolini argued that although Italian Fascism did not support dynamic and heroic capitalism, he appreciated it for its contribution to industrialism and technical developments but claimed that he did not support or appreciate supercapitalism, which he claimed was incompatible with Italy's agricultural sector.

It's centrist, but it leans more to the right than it does to the left.

>Wrong. So, Cuba, North Korea and every Socialist country id far right?

Yes

North Korea is literally the Asian version of Nazism, even more so than 30's Nippon

Since right/left is historically a French cultural meme,

I would call them Vichy right?

Seriously though, then intended to do away with competition and dissent in politics because 'muh final victory'. That makes their intentions a singularity in politics for beyond them no distinctions apply.

In their failure they likewise have no 'wing' distinction, they are simply 'discredited'.

Again, Vichy works best; it stings with just the right flavor of failure.

This.

>Wrong. So, Cuba, North Korea and every Socialist country id far right?
No, because they try to use centralized power to create equality.
>Right wing wants equallity, left wing wants equity.
Again, this is just Muritarded thinking based on the Republican and Democrat parties.

The only consistent thing in fascism is the lust for power really. It's stupid trying to associate it with the left or right just because the only reason to do that would be to guilt trip people. Modern fascists are also just opportunists too really. Everyone carries on about how the KKK supported Trump, but the CPUSA also supported Hillary. In both cases it's not because Trump is a fascist or Hillary is a communist but because both the CPUSA and the KKK are very opportunistic and don't have much in the way of real principles.

THIS THIS THIS

The whole thing is just a social construct to tear humans apart from each other.

>The only consistent thing in fascism is the lust for power really.
Unlike every other ideology, right?

>Modern fascists
All fascism is modern.

> the KKK
The KKK predated fascism by more than 50 years.

>inb4 "they're fascist because they're racist"
Then you don't know anything about fascism.

And K-On is shit.

Neither. Though you could argue the form of Nazism proposed by Ernst Rohm and Gregor Strasser is far left.

People who say this don't understand right and left wing.

Go easy on him, it's not his native language.

Not surprising to see anime faggotry attached to such a high-school-tier retarded post

>he disagreed with me
>now he has to get out of my safe space

It's pretty fucking funny to see Veeky Forums talk about shit they don't know.

Left: the individual can't be trusted to spend his own money responsibly, so the state will spend some (or most) of it for him.

Right: the individual is entitled to spending all his money on drugs and begging for food when he is older and can't work.

In this sense, it is left wing, because taxes were high and most resources were used for public projects. The state spent people's money for them.

So every thread everywhere, ever?

But he never abolished private property as an idea, right? Like he did let some corporations have their way.

Left wing isn't an on-off switch having to do with private property. Every left wing regime had private property.
The USSR also didn't abolish private property. Thats why the "hasn't been tried" meme is still relevant, because communism insist there is no private property, no money, no trade, and shared ownership, and no country ever did that.

Overall the more taxes (government spending your money for you), the further left you sit. The less taxes (you spend your own money), the further right you sit.
Communism seems outside this, as pure communism is both anarchy (full right) and collectivism (full left). It completes the circle between these two.
Also its shit and we shouldn't do it until we get to hivemind mode after full globalization and complete race and gender equality.

Right wing revolutionaries

Authoritarian. Centrist fiscally?

FPBP, close the fucking thread.

"fpbp" should just autoban, we can clean up the board from /pol/ trash that way

Jesus Christ. This whole thread makes me vomit so hard. Burgers really need to neck themselves.

This pretty much describes how retarded it is to differentiate left and right solely by the degree of economic freedom. With the retarded criteria some you people use everything except libertarianism is right wing.

Newsflash:
The factors that determine if a party/movement is left or right change over time. According to your defintion monarchists/conservatives in the 19th century were left wing while the liberal opposition was right wing.

Also it is always more than one factor that decides political alignment.

Bismarck was no left winger just because he created a social state.

The Nazis just used some socialist inspired policies (far less then burgers think- newsflash rearming a state to such a massive extent in less than 10 years requires state control) they weren't left wing. Look at the intent and effect of their policies. The strict regulations for example allowed a small group of entrepeneurs to get filthy rich.

Oh and also i forgot to ask:

Why the fuck no one (except for retarded gommies) makes the much more compelling case that the stalinist SU was right wing.
-abandoned international revolution by disbanding the Internationale
>le socialism in one country
>allied with the church
>pursued the same panslavist policies tsarist russia did
>great PATRIOTIC war
>reinstalled a sort of nationalism
>militarism and a cult around past heroism
>actually pretty deep rooted social conservatism

I am not trying to say all evil totalitarian dictators were right wing. The Khmer Rouge and Mao were also evil and totalitarian but they were actually distinct left wingers.

I mean in the end the stalinist SU was just a different branch of orthodox bureaucratic militarist left wing but thinking about it as right wing makes more sense than thinking about the third reich as right wing.

Do you know the difference between socialism and communism, cock gobbler

Clearly someone has never seen the graph.

Fascism and communism both appeal to the same crowd.

>national socialism and international socialism appear to the same people

No, one appeals to nationalists who like socialism, the other to globalists who like socialism.

Mussolini was literally a commmunist, he was disavowed by other communists and went fascist, but he was still a communist.

Fascism is a commumist Heresy.

So, retards.
The switch between globalism and nationalism is as easy as taking the right dick in your rectum.

Make an argument any moment now.

But dialectics, thesis/anti-thesis synthesis. Fascism is the false dialectical synthesis based on a capitalist socialist dichotomy.

>socialism
WORKER'S (not state) ownership of the means od production
>communism
STATELESS,classless society where the WORKERS own the means of production,and the abolition of PRIVATE (NOT personal) property.
There you go you faggot.

That graph still has a left side and a right side, you tard.