National Socialism was a Left Wing Socialist Political Movement

[Yagoda]

20 minutes ago, EveryG said:

You seem to be under the impression that I am interested in your response- let me assure you I am not. My previous post was for people who may have mistakenly thought you wrote something serious- I demonstrated clearly that what you wrote was incoherent nonsense, superficial, and the pointless ramblings of a political sycophant. You can't handle my point, which is that by the logic of your OP, the entire foundation of the US was also equivalent to socialism. I'm not making that argument, but it shows how flawed what you originally wrote is. None of your points add up to the conclusion- not even close. 

The irony of you asking for clear definition of common terms when you seek to distort commonly known terms in your op is hysterical. I do not have time to explain logic to those who have demonstrated already they do not comprehend it....try using Google. 

 

I find it comical that anyone would think your original post has anything close to a substantial argument. Take any statement you made, but just as an example saying "Revolution is a tool of the left" when the country you claim to be so proud of was born of revolution. The OP is completely ridiculous on its face, worthy of nothing but mockery. 

Translation: I cant argue against any of your points either.

 

PS: the American Revolution was a Left wing revolution. You didnt know that? The left stood for Liberal Thought and the thRights of Man until the term "left" was coopted by the Socialists.

[EveryG]

2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Translation: I cant argue against any of your points either.

I have literally argued against every one of  your points. You are the only one incapable of response. 

  

2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

PS: the American Revolution was a Left wing revolution. You didnt know that? The left stood for Liberal Thought and the thRights of Man until the term "left" was coopted by the Socialists.

More nonsense. You think that in your world if everything can be neatly put into left and right boxes the world makes sense. My point is that this is a childish view of the world, not worthy of serious debate, and completely illogical. Again, I feel like this is coming from a 12 year old. 

[Yagoda]

20 minutes ago, EveryG said:

I have literally argued against every one of  your points. You are the only one incapable of response. 

  

More nonsense. You think that in your world if everything can be neatly put into left and right boxes the world makes sense. My point is that this is a childish view of the world, not worthy of serious debate, and completely illogical. Again, I feel like this is coming from a 12 year old. 

Still cant win can you lol. You have refuted nothing. So you are disputing the whole concept of Left and Right now btw?

 

Are you disputing the National Socialist party program?

[EveryG]

6 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Still cant win can you lol. You have refuted nothing. So you are disputing the whole concept of Left and Right now btw?

 

Are you disputing the National Socialist party program?

Line by line, here you go:

Quote

All of the Precepts of Socialism are based on community. Hasty Generalization, "ALL" is hardly true and you have not listed a single precept. 

 

The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, indeed all the Socialist partys, believed in the dictatorship of the "workers and peasants" where all would live in peace and harmony, from each, according to their ability, to each, according to their need. Hasty Generalization, plus it's just a dumb statement that they ALL "believed in" dictatorship, as if it's a religion  This is a completely nonsensical line of thought that has no basis in reality.

 

In order to achieve this utopia, the "class enemy" must be fought and defeated and the instruments of oppression (bourgoiuse captialist government) overthrown in a revolutionary mass movement. In Bolshevik terms, that revolution is to be led by the "vanguard", the elightened activists. This only applies to the Bolsheviks even though you will try to make apply to a Boogeyman later. 

 

The National Socialists beleived in the racial community of all Germans, an Aryan volksgemeineshaft. They were opposed to and fought the existing bourgeouise government, which was viewed as a tool of the racial enemy,  and as such the National Socialists were revolutionary. Here is where you are redefining terms to suit your needs so you can later draw a false conclusion...the idea  that the Germans racism is "community" based and equivalent to the Socialist community sharing of the means of production is, quite frankly, beyond just a stretch...it's just dumb. 

 

Both philosophies were revolutionary. Revolution is a tool of the left. Historians of the American Revolution might disagree with you. 

Both philosphies had enemies. The Bolsheviks, for example, had the bourgeoise and capitalists. The National Socialists, had the Jews.

Both philosophies were similar economicaly. Socialism entails the State the owning the means of production. National Socialism was hybrid, private ownership under the direction of the state for the benefit of the state was permitted, and the government owned other economic concerns (viz, the SS economic empire).  A series of False Equivalences

Both philosophies were "mass movements". Everything was to be a benefit to either the "people" or the "volk" The US Constitution starts with "We the People...".... do you yet begin to see how logically incoherent your post is?

 

The very fact of their revolutionary nature demonstrates that National Socialism is left wing. That left wing American Revolution, seeking to benefit the people... 

 

The fact that National Socialists are also Socialists is amply demonstrated by the foregoing. Yes, because words always mean the same thing  in every context all the time without exception, also known as the Definist Fallacy

 

Socialism in all its forms mandates mass murder because of its disregard of human nature. According to your "foregoing" logic, this would include the left wing American founders who engaged in revolution in order to benefit the people, who are definitely socialists because they also had an enemy (chose one: the British, the native populations, etc)

All of your many misspellings in red, my responses in green. 

[Yagoda]

1 minute ago, EveryG said:

Line by line, here you go:

All of your many misspellings in red, my responses in green. 

Sorry, I dont read improperly formatted stuff since it may be removed and then my responses will be lost.

 

Was National Socialism a collective ideology?

[EveryG]

4 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Sorry, I dont read improperly formatted stuff since it may be removed and then my responses will be lost.

Your first post proves you are incapable of response anyway. And the fact that you could format a response however you want shows that you are making excuses. Rather pathetic, much like your original 6th grade book report  

[Yagoda]

4 minutes ago, EveryG said:

Your first post proves you are incapable of response anyway. And the fact that you could format a response however you want shows that you are making excuses. Rather pathetic, much like your original 6th grade book report  

Was National Socialism a collective ideology? Tell us about the party program, did it espouse Socialism? Tell us why Otto Strasser broke with Hitler. Do you understand the concept of factionalism? Is there such a thing as Left Socialism and Right Socialism ?

 

 

 

 

[EveryG]

9 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Was National Socialism a collective ideology? Tell us about the party program, did it espouse Socialism? Tell us why Otto Strasser broke with Hitler. Do you understand the concept of factionalism? Is there such a thing as Left Socialism and Right Socialism ?

 You claimed "National Socialism was a Left Wing Socialist Political Movement" and you failed to prove that in your OP. Period. You refuse to address your logical fallacies directly because they are so incoherent, therefore you pose a new series of questions to deflect.

 

Find me one serious historian who agrees with this premise. Anyone who makes this claim is a political sycophant engaging in revisionist history.

 

And let's all be logically cohesive. The fact, and it is a fact, that the Nazi party was a right-wing branded party does not mean all right-wing parties are like Nazis. Even even it was a left wing party, it doesn't mean left-wing parties are Nazi parties. This is a fallacy looking for an illogical argument. Thus, total nonsense. 

 

 

[Yagoda]

19 minutes ago, EveryG said:

 You claimed "National Socialism was a Left Wing Socialist Political Movement" and you failed to prove that in your OP. Period. You refuse to address your logical fallacies directly because they are so incoherent, therefore you pose a new series of questions to deflect.

 

Find me one serious historian who agrees with this premise. Anyone who makes this claim is a political sycophant engaging in revisionist history.

 

And let's all be logically cohesive. The fact, and it is a fact, that the Nazi party was a right-wing branded party does not mean all right-wing parties are like Nazis. Even even it was a left wing party, it doesn't mean left-wing parties are Nazi parties. This is a fallacy looking for an illogical argument. Thus, total nonsense. 

 

 

You havent disproved ANYTHING  in my OP.  All, you have done is screech and mark up what I wrote to the point that you are incoherent.

 

Socialism mandates murder. That drives you Socialist apologists nuts. 

 

I dare you to take my argument point by point. You cant.

 

Is Socialism an ideology mandating a collective over the individual?

[EveryG]

22 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

You havent disproved ANYTHING  in my OP.  All, you have done is screech and mark up what I wrote to the point that you are incoherent.

 

Socialism mandates murder. That drives you Socialist apologists nuts. 

 

I dare you to take my argument point by point. You cant.

 

Is Socialism an ideology mandating a collective over the individual?

I am of the OPINION that socialism and communism will always result in totalitarianism. I don't need to rewrite history as you have attempted to do to have that opinion. 

 

Your post is an attempt to make a simple point super complicated for what appears to be no reason at all. Let me prove you wrong in a more simple way:

Quote

When I take charge of Germany, I shall end tribute abroad and Bolshevism at home. Bolshevism is our greatest menace. Kill Bolshevism in Germany and you restore 70 million people to power. 

-Adolf Hitler himself contradicting your OP

AND

Quote

Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists. Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality and, unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.

-Adolf Hitler himself defining his party in a way that contradicts your OP

https://alphahistory.com/nazigermany/hitler-nazi-form-of-socialism-1932/

 

So above you can see Hitler himself refutes your equivocation of nazis with bolshevism and/or socialism. He later made good on his promise:

Quote

Hitler and the Nazis outlawed socialism, and executed socialists and communists en masse, even before they started rounding up Jews.  In 1933, the Dachau concentration camp held socialists and leftists exclusively. The Nazis arrested more than 11,000 Germans for "illegal socialist activity" in 1936.
https://www.csun.edu/~vcmth00m/NazismSocialism.html#:~:text=Hitler and the Nazis outlawed,illegal socialist activity" in 1936.

So...again I say that your op is total nonsense. 

[Yagoda]

30 minutes ago, EveryG said:

Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists. Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality and, unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.

So that takes care of you, anyone else want to try.

 

As aforesaid by me many times, National Socialism is just another form of Socialism, like Menshivism, Bolshevism, Maoism, Titoism.....

 

It amazes me that someone could hold out an orange and say its an apple.

 

You still have not refuted anyhting I have said, but Ill give you points for trying, all the other Socialists here are cowards.

 

You are almost right tho

38 minutes ago, EveryG said:

I am of the OPINION that socialism and communism will always result in totalitarianism

History shows that

[EveryG]

12 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

So that takes care of you, anyone else want to try.

 

As aforesaid by me many times, National Socialism is just another form of Socialism, like Menshivism, Bolshevism, Maoism, Titoism.....

 

It amazes me that someone could hold out an orange and say its an apple.

 

You still have not refuted anyhting I have said, but Ill give you points for trying, all the other Socialists here are cowards.

It appears you lack reading comprehension skills as well. Hitler was LITERALLY saying we are not socialists, we are stealing the term and separating it from Marxism. He then went on to imprison and kill people who fall under the common definition of socialists. He literally told you this is an orange, not an apple. Your inability to comprehend this shows how much you are blinded by ideology and allergic to facts.  

 

Nazism was not socialism and it was not left-wing. You have not proven your claim at all. 

[PremiumLane]

On 12/31/2024 at 11:55 AM, Yagoda said:

All of the Precepts of Socialism are based on community.

 

The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, indeed all the Socialist partys, believed in the dictatorship of the "workers and peasants" where all would live in peace and harmony, from each, according to their ability, to each, according to their need.

 

In order to achieve this utopia, the "class enemy" must be fought and defeated and the instruments of oppression (bourgoiuse captialist government) overthrown in a revolutionary mass movement. In Bolshevik terms, that revolution is to be led by the "vanguard", the elightened activists.

 

The National Socialists beleived in the racial community of all Germans, an Aryan volksgemeineshaft. They were opposed to and fought the existing bourgeouise government, which was viewed as a tool of the racial enemy,  and as such the National Socialists were revolutionary. 

 

Both philosophies were revolutionary. Revolution is a tool of the left.

Both philosphies had enemies. The Bolsheviks, for example, had the bourgeoise and capitalists. The National Socialists, had the Jews.

Both philosophies were similar economicaly. Socialism entails the State the owning the means of production. National Socialism was hybrid, private ownership under the direction of the state for the benefit of the state was permitted, and the government owned other economic concerns (viz, the SS economic empire).

Both philosophies were "mass movements". Everything was to be a benefit to either the "people" or the "volk"

 

The very fact of their revolutionary nature demonstrates that National Socialism is left wing.

 

The fact that National Socialists are also Socialists is amply demonstrated by the foregoing.

 

Socialism in all its forms mandates mass murder because of its disregard of human nature.

 

Buffalo wings must really confuse you. 

[Yagoda]

12 hours ago, PremiumLane said:

 

Buffalo wings must really confuse you. 

Translation (again): the topic is too hard for me, so I will insult instead.

[Yagoda]

12 hours ago, EveryG said:

It appears you lack reading comprehension skills as well. Hitler was LITERALLY saying we are not socialists, we are stealing the term and separating it from Marxism. He then went on to imprison and kill people who fall under the common definition of socialists. He literally told you this is an orange, not an apple. Your inability to comprehend this shows how much you are blinded by ideology and allergic to facts.  

 

Nazism was not socialism and it was not left-wing. You have not proven your claim at all. 

Ah. Got it. YOU define what Socialism is, plus you are a mind reader.  So, what did Hitler mean when he said:

 

"We chose to call ourselves National Socialists. We are not Internationalists. Our Socialism is national. We demand the fulfillment of the just demands of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one."

https://famous-trials.com/hitler/2529-1923-interview-with-adolf-hitler

[PremiumLane]

12 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Translation (again): the topic is too hard for me, so I will insult instead.

 

No, your ideas are so low IQ that you deserve to be mocked 

[Yagoda]

6 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

 

No, your ideas are so low IQ that you deserve to be mocked 

Well you havent shown ANY ideas, where does that leave you?

 

General Note: Look at how many folks are avoiding this subject. Look at how the level of vituperation being spewed is increasing. Nothing like painful truths LOL. 

 

 

 

 

[transam]

30 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Translation (again): the topic is too hard for me, so I will insult instead.

That is your normal trait.............

[Yagoda]

4 minutes ago, transam said:

That is your normal trait.............

O look. Its Guppy the Puppy. yap yap yap.

[transam]

3 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

O look. Its Guppy the Puppy. yap yap yap.

See what I mean.........🤔

[Yagoda]

9 minutes ago, transam said:

See what I mean.........🤔

You are not much else, you add nothing, know nothing and say nothing.

 

Here is your chance to shine

46 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

"We chose to call ourselves National Socialists. We are not Internationalists. Our Socialism is national. We demand the fulfillment of the just demands of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one."

https://famous-trials.com/hitler/2529-1923-interview-with-adolf-hitler

Tell us what the philosophical difference is between the foregoing and the concept of  Socialism in One Country?