Was national socialism a left wing ideology?

No, it was an alliance of rightwing groups under a radical nationalist (rightist) party.
>bu bu bu they wuz called nashnul SOCIALISTS kekekeke
And the People's Democratic Republic of Korea is a liberal democracy.

>implying it isn't
Stop drinking the kool aid

Right, which is why it isn't a useful definition
Nazis were right because they, while not liberals, would tend towards liberal economic measures over truly leftist (anti-capitalist and based in class solidarity over racial) economic measures

NATIONAL SOCIALISM IS BEYOND THE SPURIOUS DICHOTOMY BETWEEN POLITICAL "RIGHT", AND "LEFT", BUT IF IT WERE FORCED INTO THAT SPURIOUS DICHOTOMY, IT WOULD BE MORE AKIN TO "LEFTIST" NOTIONS, THAN TO "RIGHTIST" NOTIONS.

Stop thinking that "left" and "right" have any meaning.
Stop trying to find reasons to group everything you don't like under the wing you're opposed to.
Stop making this thread.

Ok?

OP's question is born from an untrained mind. He does not understand that what he is actually asking for is a definition of "left wing" and "right wing". There are several. Once the definition is clarified, it is trivial to sort national socialism into one of them.

Yet I've seen countless threads filled with retards shitflinging, yelling about where it belongs, never properly clarifying heir definition, and in the rare case someone doesgive his definition, he if attacked by the imbeciles because his definition is "wrong", because they think there is only one correct definition of these terms.

In the end the autists will crawl out of the woodwork and claim that nothing that wasn't present in the National Assembly of 1789 can be either.

Germany has always been a bit of a welfare state, even under Bismarck

Slightly right wing. Closer to left than far right. Very, very authoritarian.

...

Anti-bolshevism was one of their core tenets.

It's obviously right-wing. Right-wingers both traditionally and currently, have no problems with hierarchies as long as they can be justified by some kind of reasoning, either it being good for society, or it being just.

Left-wing politics on the other hand has traditionally been against hierarchies in all shapes, precisely because they cannot be justified in any legitimate way.

National Socialism is an extreme hierarchy, because there is only one person at the top, and he has all power, hence it is right-wing.

Now, with that said, National Socialism also had elements of what we now call welfare capitalism, or social democracy, but neither of those things are actually leftist, they are in reality just capitalist compromises and concessions.

hehe

Left-wing politics just seem to be having an extreme hierarchy but clouded by rhetoric pretending that it isn't an absolute totalitarian dictatorship.

Neither. They were third position, borrowing concepts and ideas from both left and right.

>just seem
>clouded by rhetoric
Ok but try reading a book rather then eyeballing it

Yes they were authoritarian collectivists (i.e. leftists)

>that image
terrible
when will the liberals be stopped

>On being shown his bullshit, he retorts a "read a book"
Lol, you leftycucks are so predictable.

Point is what the idea represents. It's obvious now that left-wing ideology can also produce totalitarianism, but it wasn't obvious at some point in history, because the tenets are mostly about equality and helping the downtrodden.

So within traditional left and right, National Socialism is right-wing. You can quibble with the details like I said, but it's predominately right-wing nonetheless.

first time posting in this thread friend
if you're that poster, it's just that your statement comes across like you don't know what you're talking about. and there are books you can read (or even movies you can watch!) that can give you a better idea of what leftist rhetoric means and why some leftists seem to advocate authoritarian measures even if they're supposed to oppose hierarchy.

Is a command economy where the government fixes prices and allocates resources capitalist? Because that's what the Nazis did.

>leftists say they oppose hierarchy
>always form the most brutal and extreme hierarchies
Makes one ponder if the bullshit they spew is just rhetoric to cloud their power grab.

Yes.

Only if you use the modern Chinese definition "Socialism" and "Left wing" then yes they were very left wing indeed.

People who post these dumb jpgs should get banned. Who even makes those? If they think Nazis were free market capitalist they clearly never read the book they stole graphs from.

>Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Getränk
I lost

>free market capitalism is the only alternative to socialist economy
Go to sleep Schlomo

it was 3rd way it was neither

>Left-wing politics on the other hand has traditionally been against hierarchies in all shapes, precisely because they cannot be justified in any legitimate way.

National Socialism was really more of a political than economic ideology. There were members all over the economic spectrum. The only thing they had in common was a hatred of Jews and a wish to restore Germany to a pre-war Prussian ideal.

daily reminder that the SS arrested Lord Rothschild, who "impressed" Himmler and was then released for a ransom of a few million marks

shut up

it wasnt third position

My brainlet feel is that it was like social democracy without the democratic part

As much as globalization is a left wing project
>muh internationalism!