Is Natsoc left or right?

Is Natsoc left or right?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Position
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

liberals are the real nazis?

Economically right, socially left

Wait no that not right. Nvm I'm a retard.

Economically it's a mix of privately and publicly owned businesses (so basically centrist) but socially speaking it's right as right can go.

>National SOCIALISM
m8 pls

Neither, it's a third way

spbp

Communism was also socially right.
They literally executed fags and had a deep nationalistic feeling.

It combines elements from both sides of the (((political))) spectrum to create something better and healthy without jewish interference.

True but the state was way more authoritarian in communism than in NatSoc.

B-but socialism.

Communism wants to replace culture with marxism and abolish nations. The USSR was only socially right because that's retarded and doesn't work.

It's up!

You are right, it is partially socialist.

There is nothing wrong with that so long as it doesn't go off the deep end into zio-communism.

Capitalism and greed is killing the west. it is our greatest vice/sin.

...

Is a meme for politically and economically illiterate neckbeards obsessed with identity politics. Avoid as much as possible.

reminder.

Natsoc isn't socialism, even though it has the word in it's name. The true socialists of the party were culled, and Hitler changed "socialism" to mean a kind of class unity under the state and nation spirit.

Really, it's economically centrist but still believes in private ownership of capital, thus capitalist, not socialist.

Op, ignore everyone but this Mexican intellectual.

/*(-1)

I'm getting more confused guys

Actually the Nazis helped employ and create jobs for millions of workers and redistributed some of the wealth from corrupt business men back to the people.

Yes but that's not necessarily Socialism.

You have it backwards.

Economically left, socially right. But overall pretty centrist/utilitarian in most categories.

Left/right is a completely broken system when it comes to labeling fascism, it's on both sides at the same time

That is socialist actually.

It's just not creepy and bat-shit insane communism where all property is owned by the state and everyone is held as equals.

Its necessarily LEFTIST YOU PIG

>left vs right
its retarded so you will find no logic here

This.

everyone has a dignified standard of living but there are no free rides
basically socialism + conservative work ethic

Retard, what type of fascism did hitler have?


S TATE CONTROL OF RESCURCES


its leftist, its socialist and still hitler and its definitely fascism

Shills arent shills they are stupid. Ignore the amount of government and just look into the control of the economy to find if its left or right

reminder that its not 'left' or 'right'
it's totalitarian vs libertarian

Communism is where there is literally no private property. Socialism is when capital is socially owned, usually by the state or some shitty utopian market of cooperatives.

There's huge misconception about what socialism means, basically it's become so broad to include anything a state does that is in anyway ((((progressive)))). The reason things have gotten so confusing because people don't understand socialism.

Those policies are left wing, yes, but as I said, Nat Soc is economically centrist. People still can own capital, start a business and keep their profits.

Social Justice is left wing, but isn't necessarily socialist.

>economic freedom = rightwing
user.. i...

Neither left, neither right, neither centrist. You guys think too much inside the box, NatSoc was basically common sense.

Okay, bear with me for a moment. Socialism, originally, in the pre 1990's sense of the word is purely the abolition of private property. NatSoc isn't socialism in the most purist "abolition of private property" sense, although it would be called socialism by today's standards because nowadays anything that is government regulation under the guise of "the greater good" is called as such.

It actually is fascism in the original meaning of the word (indirect government control of private sector through extensive regulation) but nowadays fascism is merely a buzzword for "autoritarian government" so it's pointless to refer to it as such.

If anything you should try to ignore all identity politics stuff, which is largely arbitrary and it comes in a million flavors and differentiate the different systems by their degree of economic freedom. If you do that you'll see things way more clearly than 99% of Sup Forums.

Thats what it is even your personal philosophy doesnt agree

Anything to the left of ancap is part leftist

Third position. NatSoc was fundamentally an ideology built around race, while Marxist socialism was entirely different: built around class. Hitler aimed to unite the right and left, including workers and their bosses, into a new German nation based on racial identity. Socialism, in contrast, was a class war between workers, bosses, and owners (Capitalists), aiming to build a workers state in which race and gender were insignificant. Socialists, especially Marxist socialists, were anti-religious atheists, whereas NatSoc went so far as to make Christianity the religion of the state.

The differences go on and on: Marxist socialism was internationalist, NatSoc was nationalist. Marxist socialism was egalitarian, whereas NatSoc believed that nature was unequal and required competition. Marxist socialism wanted to nationalize all private industry, while NatSoc privatized every major industry except the railroads (it considered these a military asset. In fact, Hitler once joked "they didn't need to nationalize property because they nationalized people". NatSoc drew on a range of pan-German theories, which wanted to blend Aryan workers and Aryan magnates into a super Aryan state, which would involve the eradication of class-focused socialism as a non-German ideology.
1/2

Yes.

It's right this.

National "Socialist"

What do you think?

NatSoc redefined socialism as "Germanism/Volkism", which they saw as "producer-oriented capitalism", as opposed to "Jewish capitalism", aka, international finance, globalism, wall street, etc. In theory, NatSoc economics was a version of Keynesianism, tailored to the Völkisch nature of whichever people adopted it. Its not one dogmatic economic system,and Hitler often joked that the lack of a specific ideology was their strength. NatSoc could be more "free market" as Americans know it, or less. But NatSoc is always in favor of the Volk over economic identity, of "producer capitalism" over "finance capitalism".

Hitler tried to clarify the distinction in 1938:
>“’Socialist’ I define from the word ‘social’ meaning in the main ‘social equity’. A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency.
>Our adopted term ‘Socialist has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. ((((Marxism))) is anti-property; true socialism is not. ((((Marxism))) places no value on the individual, or individual effort, of efficiency; true Socialism values the individual and encourages him in individual efficiency, at the same time holding that his interests as an individual must be in consonance with those of the community. All great inventions, discoveries, achievements were first the product of an individual brain. It is charged against me that I am against property, that I am an atheist. Both charges are false.”
2/2

Nat SOCIALIST. Obviously left.

...

This is the correct answer. Hitler despised the right-left division and considered himself neither

Mind if I screencap and add your post to the picture in this post? I feel together they perfectly encapsulate the response to this constantly reposted question

Leftism is fundamentally about equality, while fascism is about individual merit

do it

low IQ subhuman

Center-totalitarian.

Economically left, socially national-conservative. Also hyper-authoritarian.

Rather than Capitalist/Communist solutions. the 3rd alternative implied partial government ownership of certain businesses/industries and national resources.
An interesting concept, if you ask me.

>haruhi
>loli

So it's true, all these nazi anime girl pictures are made by secondary ironic weebs.

>while fascism is about individual merit
And hierarchy which is the opposite of marxist equality

I'm not a weeb. I don't even know who is pictured in that. I haven't watched an animu since Death Note season 1. Want to give me a quick rundown?

Center right, full authoritarian

>Also hyper-authoritarian
If you were a normal german who wasn't a subversive communist you would hardly feel the authoritarian side.

>is a form of fascism left or right?
Have you ever had a poli sci class in your entire life?

Dead

...

Fascism and NatSoc at the level of ideology are obviously way left of center. In practice, one might say Hitler's Germany was quite centrist, but that's probably a function of the limited time and extreme circumstances he was operating under.

Fascism and NatSoc are, as they should be, anti-capitalist ideologies. The worst traitors come from the idiots who buy into free market kikery.

How am I wrong? Nazism died in 1945, nobody takes you seriously anymore. There won't be another legitimate nazi movement ever again.

It is right in the initial sense of right : conservatism.
And it is left is the "new" sense of left : socialism.

That's why this left-right stuff is stupid, this is too confusing.

Left? Right? Third position? Does it really matter?

Top post lad

It is done

>implying that a nation bombed into collapse during war is comparable to a system imploding politically during peace-time
The Soviet system failed, as did the Roman Empire, and every Chinese or Ottoman dynasty. Some of these examples of government lasted thousands of years, while some didn't last more than a generation. All forms of government inevitably fail. This has been true since ancient times. Polybius famously articulated this process of Anacyclosis: social organization paradigms rise, fail, and give way to further systems. This is the cycle of history.

>implying anybody takes communism seriously anymore

Alinbee best girl.

Sure seems to be big threat according to you
>MUH OBAMA IS ISLAMIC COMMUNIST MUH BERNIE MUH GLOBALISTS (which ironically are capitalists)

V Ö L K I S C H


National Socialism is orthogonal to both Capitalism (money worship) and Communism (marxist socialism). It really is something like a Third Way. It went were others (still) don't dare to go. You need to stop seeing things in a left-right dichotomy. There are many parts in a nation's organization that can be mixed to result in something very different from Capitalism and Communism.

National Socialism is an almost perfect combination of all parts, with an underlying goal: preserving the racial existence of your people and leading them to excellence.

Pretty obvious /leftypol/ shill.

Left.

From the looks of it, neither. They are in the middle.

First you would have to define one characteristic as what is the difference between left and right.

I would probably say center.

Between authoritarian and libertarian it is in the middle.
Between communism and unfettered capitalism, it is in the middle.
That said fascism has always been rather SJW extremism. So while it is the center, it is not really a fence sitting center, it is an extremism center.

But you also can define movements by who they demonize. The Left was created, and continues to be the movement that defines everyone not them as absolute evil. This extreme authoritarianism, this suppression of discourse, this dehumanization, simply is the exact opposite of natsoc, in this way also, I would not say it is Right, but it is well outside of the left. So if it were to be anything it would have to the the right.

But if natsoc is anything, if Nazism was anything, if the altright is anything, if Sup Forums is anything, it is a rejection of the two choice political system, it says "fuck you" and creates a third option.

I'm going to spare you the rant only because of Pinochet.

>which ironically are capitalists

You just proved it yourself. Communism is dead. Far-right populism on the other hand, is beating far-left movements in every white country in the world.

>hahaha your not winning every single election yet tho

As small as we may be, you'll always be smaller. Be afraid, turkroach scum.

He still believes in the (((left vs. right))) meme

>globalists are capitalists
It's the other way around. All Jews are globalists, and whether they call themselves "Socialists" or "Capitalists" doesn't matter. American Capitalism has enabled Jewish globalists to become better globalists than if they had been Bolshevik Communists.

Calling everyone who disagrees with you a shill makes that word worthless. It is already though so keep using it.

Look up The Third Position
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Position

Natsoc and Communism is where the right or left go so far around that the meet in the middle.

>calling everyone who disagrees with you a fascist makes that word worthless

...

it's neither
it's path of light

>*teleports in front of you*
>*sheathes rake*
it's something intimately personal, leaf

>tfw this poor babby became uncle joe's dinner

if you didn't know, this is called the horseshoe effect. it's a good check: are my actions identical to my opposition? if so, i must be retarded.

It's more like "tribal capitalism" than any kind of mainstream socialism. Opposed to conventional capitalism in the sense that the focus is shifted from satisfying the needs of the self to satisfying the needs of the tribe, realizing the tribe's survival is totally congruent to your own personal survival, and so to gratify the self one must also gratify the tribe.

Rather than rejecting race and family as Marxism suggests, Natsoc does a 180 and affirms that race and family ought to be the only true motivating factors in one's life, and that each member of each race and family must devote themselves utterly to the success of their race and family. This is incompatible also with (Jewish) finance capitalism as race and family is supposedly not relevant to the market and its influence just inhibits the free-flowing of capital.

Furthermore it is all strictly regulated by the state, which follows the same ideals as the people and belongs to the same race as the people, with goals totally in alignment with the people. There would be no Jew, nigger, or foreigner of any kind in a Natsoc government as it would introduce a sharp conflict of interest.

This also explains why racial purity is so important to the Natsoc state, without it the glue unifying the people together is eroded. The nation ceases to look like a family and begins to appear more like just some random hodge-podge of opposing cultures and ideas, it makes self-sacrifice totally unappealing and unrewarding, there is no reason to believe in the well-being of the nation when the nation is so inconsistent.

NatSoc combines elements of the two with its primary focus being on bettering the lives of the nations native people as best it possibly can. Private enterprise and property still exists however certain industry's that would be better for it are socialized.

Communists however were also incredibly anti-tradition and sought to remove and ultimately replace the cultures of the nations that they infested, NatSoc celebrates the nations history, traditions and culture.