Was Hitler really right wing?

[plasticpig]

AshVX220 said:

Would we consider this to be the same model that China operates under now?

China is a funny one. My belief is that sometime in the next 50 years China will become a democracy. It spent 40 years as a Totalitarian regime (mainly under Mao) then it softened somewhat to become the authoritarian regime it is today. I am not sure the models are directly comparable as the conditions that created them are very different.

In Nazi Germany they were moving towards a totalitarian state. In China they are moving away from a totalitarian state (at a snails pace).

[jakesmith]

plasticpig said:

Sometime in the next 50 years China will become a democracy.

Like Hong Kong?

[Atomic12C]

plasticpig said:

China is a funny one. My belief is that sometime in the next 50 years China will become a democracy.

Different opinions on this one.
Xi Jinping recently changed their constitution so that he could reign for as long as he wished, instead of the standard term length period that he would have 'served'.
This seems to be a move to consolidate not only a single-party rule but a single-person rule - as long as he can keep his allies strong within the party itself.

[AshVX220]

plasticpig said:

AshVX220 said:

Would we consider this to be the same model that China operates under now?

China is a funny one. My belief is that sometime in the next 50 years China will become a democracy. It spent 40 years as a Totalitarian regime (mainly under Mao) then it softened somewhat to become the authoritarian regime it is today. I am not sure the models are directly comparable as the conditions that created them are very different.

In Nazi Germany they were moving towards a totalitarian state. In China they are moving away from a totalitarian state (at a snails pace).

Maybe they're "meeting in the middle", in that China are where Nazi Germany was on it's way to a totalitarian regime as they [China] move away from that regime.

Edited by AshVX220 on Monday 21st January 16:21

[Countdown]

s2art said:

Countdown said:

Is there a Far-Right Party which isn't racist?

How do you judge that? By its policies or by its membership?

Surely the two are inextricably linked?

i.e. You would only be the member of a party if you agreed with its policies and the views espoused by its leadership.

[Halb]

otolith said:

^^ not disagreeing with the analysis, but "they murdered communists" is not a good indicator of not being far left, given the fratricidal tendencies of Soviet communism.

Hitler killed all the lefties left in the party, he didn't like lefites. That's partly why it's so twisted for modern revisionists to try alter history and place Hitler as a lefty.

[Randy Winkman]

Would PHers like to tell me if they think that Hitler is primarily remembered for his parties economic policies or because of his fascism, racism, nationalism, war-mongering and persecution of minorities?

[AshVX220]

Randy Winkman said:

Would PHers like to tell me if they think that Hitler is primarily remembered for his parties economic policies or because of his fascism, racism, nationalism, war-mongering and persecution of minorities?

The latter obviously, I think the former probably went a long way to enabling the latter.

Edited by AshVX220 on Monday 21st January 16:31

[Smiler.]

I though Hitler was Right Whig:




Herman on the other hand was definitely Leftwaffe

[otolith]

Halb said:

otolith said:

^^ not disagreeing with the analysis, but "they murdered communists" is not a good indicator of not being far left, given the fratricidal tendencies of Soviet communism.

Hitler killed all the lefties left in the party, he didn't like lefites. That's partly why it's so twisted for modern revisionists to try alter history and place Hitler as a lefty.

Yeah, not disputing that, just pointing out that you can't always tell that someone's politics differ significantly from those of the people they are murdering because factions within a movement will often murder each other over the finer points of dogma or simple rivalry.

[Halb]

otolith said:

Halb said:

otolith said:

^^ not disagreeing with the analysis, but "they murdered communists" is not a good indicator of not being far left, given the fratricidal tendencies of Soviet communism.

Hitler killed all the lefties left in the party, he didn't like lefites. That's partly why it's so twisted for modern revisionists to try alter history and place Hitler as a lefty.

Yeah, not disputing that, just pointing out that you can't always tell that someone's politics differ significantly from those of the people they are murdering because factions within a movement will often murder each other over the finer points of dogma or simple rivalry.

Sure, I understand. The stuff that went on in the USSR was pure craziness. Stalin won out and so his backers became Stalinists. The divisions there were more personality or tiny details (in-fighting). Hitler got rid of his competing powerbases which were the trade unions, socialists. He had to get rid of the lefties (everyone left of a certain point), and some traditional conservatives as well, pus the SD.

Edited by Halb on Monday 21st January 16:38

[s2art]

Countdown said:

s2art said:

Countdown said:

Is there a Far-Right Party which isn't racist?

How do you judge that? By its policies or by its membership?

Surely the two are inextricably linked?

i.e. You would only be the member of a party if you agreed with its policies and the views espoused by its leadership.

Disagree. I'll bet there are racist people in all parties, even if they would not admit it.

[TTwiggy]

Putting aside for one moment the PH revisionists' attempts to rework Hitler as a dyed-in-the-wool leftie, is this perhaps the first instance of a thread achieving Godwin at the OP?

[Balmoral]

andy_s said:

OP got his answer on page 1.

Not left, not right, a bit right of centre.

[otolith]

Countdown said:

otolith said:

Countdown said:

Is there a Far-Right Party which isn't racist?

Depends, does you definition of "a Far-Right Party" include "racist"?

It always has done because I've never read about one which isn't...however I'm happy to be corrected.

That's how it's used, but it is used as a label when the way that it is formulated suggests that it indicates a place on a continuum.

Would you describe as "far right" a party which was scrupulously fair on issues of ethnicity, sexuality, gender, etc, but which advocated privatising every function of the state other than defence and law and order and implementing a very low, flat tax rate?

[ape x]

So if we say Hitler was a 'Leftie'..... does that somehow validate being a Neo Nazi?

I don't understand.

The point is Hitler killed loads of Jews and was pro master race.
Whether he was left or right means nothing in the current world..... what matters is that if you are pro Hitler you are ascribing to the symbolic culture of hating people who are not 'white' or Master race......
Clearly in this age we would call that Far Right..... I honestly don't think Neo Nazi's are wanting to be called Leftie snowflakes.......

Go onto stormfront and call them lefties and see how far it gets you....

[JuanCarlosFandango]

Lord Marylebone said:

Just to add:

This is how it happens again. This sort of thing right here.

Everyone involved in the Second World War eventually dies. Their first person accounts of the utter horror of that time die with them.

People begin blaming their problems on other people. On other races. On other religions.

Trump gets voted in. Says staggeringly vile things. People cheer.

Brexit gets voted for. Many voters mutter things about immigration.

People start feeling free to spout in public at ‘hearing foreign languages on the bus’ and ‘seeing too many brown faces in the street’.

Daily news articles on social media begin to fill with comments from thousands of people saying things about other humans that I do not want to repeat. Many other stand on the sidelines nodding in agreement.

Threads get started where people will probably end up saying things that paint Hitler in a slightly more favourable light.

Then eventually, an extremely charismatic, forceful and vocal politician will come along and tell the whole country that that all their problems are caused by immigrants, brown people, gypsies, Muslims, Jews, the disabled.

They will say that things can be ‘better’.

The people will roar their approval.

Edited by Lord Marylebone on Monday 21st January 07:39

Assuming all tyranny is the result of angry men shouting things about certain groups and getting widespread support is looking at it through a very particular lense.

It pretty well did happen again in the Soviet Union and China where calling someone a fascist or reactionary or counbter revolutionary was licence to send them for re-education, many never to return. The banner of internationalism was all the excuse needed to invade foreign countries, and secular humanism drove churches, mosques and synagogues underground.


Whether or not Hitler was right wing will only ever depend on your definition of the term. There's no universal definition that will decide the matter. If you associate it with racism then he was right wing. If you associate it with a love of tradition and limited state power then he was certainly not.

What Hitler definitely was was a tyrant who concentrated the power of an already powerful state and then abused that power for his own twisted ends. I don't think the evil of the man can be reduced to any specific ideology or prejudice, they were just the ones that were expedient at the time to enable him to get to the position he did. I think the best defence against that is not to look for small angry men with a knack for oratory and a dislike of the Jews, but look for concentrations of unchecked power and intolerance of alternative views.

[ape x]

Balmoral said:

Countdown said:

Is there a Far-Right Party which isn't racist?

A far right party is automatically labelled racist, even if it isn't.

A racist party is automatically labelled far right, even if it isn't.

Thems the rules.

Doesn't help does it?



That's not to say that there aren't parties who are both far right and racist in actuality rather than labelling, but it wouldn't be many of the usual suspects.

Edited by Balmoral on Monday 21st January 18:20

Name a far right party that isn't racist then.... genuine question...
Biggest issue is that some PHers think being 'racist' means simply sticking dog st through Mr Patels letter box...

[ape x]

Lefties...

[otolith]

ape x said:

Lefties...

I suspect that the bottom group would consider the top one to be pinko commie bds if they knew their economic politics.