Since i can't get a clear answer, i will make a thread for it: Is National Socialism a right wing or left wing ideology?

Since i can't get a clear answer, i will make a thread for it: Is National Socialism a right wing or left wing ideology?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/kzIRG525l6s
youtu.be/MhGQrryQPfM
youtu.be/y-Yszp3SmxE
youtu.be/CE3urzdimJc
youtube.com/watch?v=-0olc3qJjLM
pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ph57319e8f5771f
youtube.com/watch?v=QVeCNI3gLUY
youtube.com/watch?v=DB9oUqIcX-c
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

right wing

>immigrant / racial scapegoatism
>anti-athiesm
>labor unions not allowed
>bourgeoisie have more rights than proletariats

neither, its both as stupid as calling someone a "cultural marxist" or "globalist"

Right wing in almost every respect other than economy, economy is centrist/left-leaning.

I'm guess the reason you didn't get a clear answer before is because the question is absurd. You can easily google and find out. Here take this red pill sir.

youtu.be/kzIRG525l6s

authoritarian and economically centrist
So... Basically right wing

Third position

Centre in economics and authoritarian,sooooo neither.

wrong

it is extreme right leaning because it favors landowners over laborers

radical centrism

economically centrist for you is left wing for americans.

youtu.be/MhGQrryQPfM

Fuck off.

Why do shills always comment in the first couple?

right wing. dont let the word socialist cuck you, hitler himself was completely clear he was against marxian socialism, he subsidized preferable behavior that achieved the overall aims of the state, he didnt subsidize degenerate welfare ghetto ass behavior. pick up a book OP

Still is starch opponent to capitalism and the free market, which is why i said it's centrist. It's neither socialist nor capitalist.

It has aspects of both really.

Ultimately though, it is a collectivist type ideology, it does not promote individualism like we see here in America.

Right or left who cares, damn sexy is what it is

youtu.be/y-Yszp3SmxE

kys jew

both

Both

left wing is total government, totalitarianism, so yes, nazism is far left.

Far right is anarchy.

yes

I get the feeling he was against the free market because of the free market of ideas, not because he actually despised wealthy factory owners.

That's not how that works

It's neither side of the jewish political bluepill coin.

and for them, left wing authoritarianism is communism
Yet there is a major difference between Natsoc and Communism

it's the gospel, bigots

You watched that stupid documentary and got confused,didn't you? Tell me, considering Left and Right originated in the French Revolution, who was more Left Wing- Robespierre or the King of France? They were both authoritarian factions (to different degrees and in different areas), but one is historically considered Right and the other Left.

It's left wing economically and right wing culturally/socially

Nationalism = Right
Socialism = Left

Answer is best of both. We help our own. Fuck the rest.

youtu.be/CE3urzdimJc

It's in the center. It has a lot of socialist practices, like worker's rights, maternity leave etc., but it also supports private ownership and relatively free economy.

It's state capitalism it which in nature is neither left or traditionally right, the state as whole was slightly more left leaning and the nazi party was originally the workers party. However fascism is typically anticapitalist and anticommunist, so it really is a third position.

american education: the post

Nationalism is on a completely different axis. A radical globalist capitalist would be on the far right, but he would certainly not be even slightly nationalistic.

NatSocs you are mislead

Strasserism is the true redpill

aesthetics youtube.com/watch?v=-0olc3qJjLM

...

That is actually an interesting way to put it

retard

this, stop p`laying the jewish game, both right and left wing were financed by bankers in all the countries

>right wing or left wing ideology

these are horribly simplified and unrealistic abstractions that im pretty sure were invented to foster a lower level of political discourse amongst the proles

the reason you cant classify it as either is because its neither, because politics are significantly more complicated than some 1 axis right-left nonsense

yeah, he needs to read horseshoe theory bro

it combines the stupidest parts of right wing ideology (fascism; dude to protect the country just give the government ultimate power they're infallible after all) and the stupidest parts of left wing ideology (socialism; dude you want more money lets just print more money then lmao) to form the stupidest ideology ever created

...

...

>bourgeoisie have more rights than proletariats
You're retarded, holy shit. The NatSoc were "leftists" on these types of view.

Just because commies like it doesn't mean that le Nazis did the opposite. They called themselves "National-Socialist German Workers' Party" for a fucking reason you dumb cunt.

...

the american dream
pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ph57319e8f5771f

...

>"far" right
>literally denying any form of hierarchy

...

So from reading the post, i will assume that it's culturally right wing and economically centrist?

made me think

The National Socialists in Germany actually privatised a lot of their industry, they nationalised some things but it was predominantly privatisation. They also lowered taxes to the point where 10% was the highest amount a person would pay in income tax, which contributed to the economy growing rapidly. I would consider it right-wing in both situations, it is just that they also had a large left-leaning division that Hitler needed to pander to in order to maintain unity within the party.

Right wing on everything except for economics, where it takes more of a centralist stance

Third Position. Politically authoritarian and nationalist, economically capitalist and anti-free market, culturally traditionalist and anti-liberal that favoured both Rule of Nature and technological innovation.

it's for retarded cuck boys

Was this post a parody of Plato's theory of "relativity" by the way?
>totalitarianism (shadows,bad)
>anarchy (fire,neutral,(the false sensation of absolute "good" if all you know is the shadow))
>"right wing" way of governing (daylight, truthfully good)

It's an ideology that works when you have a homogeneous culture.

you need to stop thinking in two dimensions, left VS right, try thinking in three dimensions or four dimensions if you can.

You're an idiot and here's why:
Fascism is not the same as totalitarianism or autocracy. Fascism has a very broad definition and is changed everyday. But let's look at the original fascist state, Italy.
They build upon national unity, as well as individual and national strength.

Socialism however, is not about printing money all the time, so that money literally has no value what-so-ever. Keep in mind that before the formation of the German Reich, the Weimar Republic was plagued with an economic crisis, and their currency had no value at all. When everybody's favorite moustache model came along tho, he introduced a new currency, which would be more stable, as he at the same time had boosted the country's economy and production, by producing weapons and such alike.
Socialism is basically just
>have alot of spare money
>give money to those who need it


If i sound like an idiot and said something incorrect, please do say so however

Yes, Sup Forums is a far-left board.

Isn't free market a capitalist thing though?

right wing. too sensible to be leftist.

youtube.com/watch?v=QVeCNI3gLUY

A mix

You lolbertarians are just as bad as the commies. You both get the rope

>Checks flag

R A R E
A
R
E

People like you are the reason the rest of the world think Americans are stupid.

You are the ones printing money and with a ""totalitarian"" government right now cunt. Enjoy the freedom of being jailed for tweeting against muhammad the goatfucker.

I'm not a historian, I'm just basing this off of the attitude and vibe I've got from speeches and reading on the Reich's government. But it definitely seems like the National Socialist version of gimmedats was rather than directly just giving money to people with no jobs, using the money to create jobs. I assume people unable to work would have options(Mercy killing, welfare, live with family etc)rather than just being killed or being given welfare.

An example of what I mean being the autobahn.

>Far-right is anarchy
I usually hate the right-left terms but you mate are just retarded.

They have no morality. Their only concern is themselves, they are individualists just as SJWs are individualists. It is solipsism.

Depends on the type of capitalism. However the fundamental core of capitalism is private property, which NatSoc Germany was not against.

Right on cultural issues.
Left on economic issues.
>youtube.com/watch?v=DB9oUqIcX-c

Alain de Benoist is a good read. I liked his book on "Beyond Human Rights" where he argues that human rights cannot exist in any sense without belief in a higher power or structure, something which Leftists and communists obviously do not believe.

Classic left wing. You know, "Socialist" in the name of their party should have clued you in. Saying whatever the fuck rabble wants to hear while keeping their true goals secret? Check. Believers in all-powerful state, ruled by a party of chosen? Check. Economics boiling down to plunder by said state? Check (the only difference, Nazis planned to plunder other countries, but that hardly made things better for Germany, as war they've prepared for since 1933 was unwinnable). Thought policing and desire to form a new Man? Check. Anti-Christian? Check. Having a built-in group of scapegoats to blame for their fuckups and raining increasingly harsh repression on them? Check.

The only big difference from your standard commies was allying with industry magnates and elements of military brass against workers, rather than suppressing and enslaving everyone by themselves.

National Socialists consider classical liberals (the intellectual and philosophical predecesors of modern lolbertarianism) the one side of the same jewish coin. Communism is on the other side

Neither. Its its own thing.

Neither

It is neither. National Socialism is, like Fascism, called the Third Position as it, in theory, offers an alternative to what was at the time the other two major political movements. One was parliamentary in nature and democratic at its core and included a wide variation of traditional right-wing and left-wing parties in Germany. The other was communism and was revolutionary at its core. The Strasserist and SA faction within the NSDAP was until 1931 the revolutionary element within the party but was subsequently purged from it after the assassination of Strasser himself during the Night of the long knives. While the party had left and right wing factions as exemplified by Goebbels and Himmler, National Socialism remained constantly opposed to both parliamentary democracy as well as communism. Some elements of the "conservative revolution" from 1919 as well as certain parts of the early german labor movement were initially integrated within the party, but they were never naturally synthesized from an ideological basis. Instead the "fuhrerpirnzip" became the dominant arbiter of conflicts within the party organization.

please don't laugh at me

Does any of you autists on Sup Forums even studied the weimar republics history and the campaign of the national socialists? They are right wing fighting against the social democrats and communists. Holy fuck are you extremly in denial. You look up definitions, but ignore history.

Left wing = collectivism
Right Wing = individualism

I know they don't teach you big words that make you think for yourself in Europe.

Authoritarian centrist, leaning barely to the right.
The correct answer however, is that fascism destroys the left/right paradigm altogether and eliminates the multiparty system.

Yes fascism is a reaction to commufaggotry, but...

>Tell me, considering Left and Right originated in the French Revolution, who was more Left Wing- Robespierre or the King of France? They were both authoritarian factions (to different degrees and in different areas),

No, they weren't. The Ancient Regime was, in fact, so liberal that the degree of its liberalism is inconceivable for most people of today. The very idea of the state not being able to arbitrarily tax people, revoke their rights (even to impose uniform laws), or draft them into compulsory service in generally faced with flat incomprehension and attempt to use some sort of misharacterization, not unlike yours.

It's both. It's authoritarian middle.
It's basically the opposite of Libertarianism, it's socially conservative and fiscally liberal.

Based on that National Socialism would be centrist then.

>it's a quote of one of the most hated man of the world on the internet vs. the actual name of the party
gee, not sure which one to trust

Right-wing, it is White racial socialism. Socialism for Whites only. Hitler considered Marxism as a bastard version of what true Socialism should be.

>Right Wing = individualism

Toppest kek

Then what's with right wingers boner for conformity, religion (we are the lord's sheep or some shit like that), uniforms and traditionalism?

Are you trying to
>imply
that people on the internet would....
LIE?

wtf

It's because Humans as a species aren't individualist.
You have anti-social outliers and people that aren't super collectivist, but as a whole on average we're not an individualist species.

An individualist system(Like complete anarchy)will not function because we naturally form collectives and stomp all individualists into the dirt.

>Right Wing = individualism

Last time I checked SJWs are the ones obsessed with beign special individual unique snowflakes defining themselves through capitalist consumerism (facebook, tindr, nike, starbucks, apple etc)

No. I'm putting my fucking politicies hat on now you uneducated bastards.

Read:

The Nazis called themselves "socialist" but were fascists.

The names can be misleading for marketing purposes. For example North Korea is technically the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" by name.

It's none of those things.

It's the opposite, liberalism is individualistic, right wing is more collectivist, NatSoc is collectivist and tribalist as well.

>ignoring all the social programs and job programs
>labor unions not allowed because there's government control over the businesses and the state negotiates for you instead
Hitler cared about the happiness of workers and forced businesses to have high benefits. Labor unions were banned because all workers were forced to join the German Labor Front union.

Hitler forced large factories to provide cafeterias, rest areas, swimming pools and more. He also funded programs sent workers to concerts and international trips to keep them happy. And he limited the work week to 5 days. Among other things. Doesn't sound too right wing to me.