The Nazi Party was not Right-Wing

You cannot have equality of outcome without less autonomy and more tyranny. Agree?

I still await my specific differences in practice between Stalin and hitler. I will wait, but keep reminding you.

- - - Updated - - -

Wage maximums are left or right wing?

 

Yes it does. To be a leftist means you want to regate all human activity and trade but are Ok with gays. That is not freedom.

 

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Democratic-Republican+Party

"The Jeffersonian Republican party, better known as the Democratic-Republican Party, is an ancestor of the modern Democratic Party"

Eat it.

 

Nazi Germany was run on a Fascist ideology. The whole point was to promote the state. Hitler was a maniac, and he took all the power he wanted, but fundamentally he did what he did because he was so self-centered and crazy he though only he knew best how to run things. He was not entirely serving himself - he had grand aspirations to achieve for his country. Along Fascist lines, Nazi Germany became a very hierarchial society - the more useful you were to the state, the more authority and prestige you had. Himmler and Goering had immense power - entire sectors of German society were run by them with no influence from Hitler, because Hitler didn't care to size all power himself - he was in charge, but if his cronies served well he was content to let them do as they please. Businesses still existed, commerce still existed, it was just all for the benefit of the state. And as part of his "cause", Hitler committed mass genocide and institutionalized racism and eugenics, not for any practical reason (it was utterly impractical), but because he believed in his messed up ideology himself. Nazism wasn't just a ploy to gain power, as communism was for Stalin - Hitler believed everything he said to everyone else.

Stalin took a country with virtually no commerce and no business (Lenin's doing), and then made it all about himself. Stalinist Russia was ALL about STALIN. There would be no sharing of power, as little hierarchy as possible, and complete servitude to Stalin himself. Virtually all the common people were reduced to the same state of abject poverty. The Military had more power than the commoners but only insofar as they had the guns - they still had no power or authority relegated to them other than what Stalin decreed. The military was subject to the whims of the Party, and the Party was entirely a rubber-stamp organization for Stalin, as anyone who dissented was executed. Whereas in Nazi Germany it's ethos was all about "Germany" and the destiny of "Germany" and Hitler was there to 'show them the way', so to speak, in the USSR it was all about "Comrade Stalin" and how 'amazingly awesome' he was and how he personally was the be all and end all of everything; much as they do in North Korea (the only remaining example of a Stalinist regime) now, Stalin himself was supposed to be worshiped in lieu of religion, the only real difference being that the people under Stalin knew what had come before and didn't buy it so much, whereas North Korea has been like that so long they are all brainwashed.

 

no difference.

 

of course not. Anyone powerful enough to pull off the takeover, keeps the spoils for himself. The people never get anything other than the leftover scraps from the fruits of their labor.

 

Eat what? Sure Andrew Jackson was a Democrat-Republican and then he split from the Democrat Republicans and formed his own party the Democrat Party. Exactly. He was not at that point a Democrat Republican. In that election he ran against the Democrat Republican candidate John Quincy Adams. Since Quincy Adams was a Democrat Republican how do you figure that the Democrat party (being started by Jackson) was the Democrat Republican party? It wasn't The reality is the Democrat party was a new party started by Jackson.

 

there is no left or right. Just the ruling elite, and the rest of us. Their job is to extract as much of our wealth as possible, while convincing us it is for our own good, keeping 50% of the citizens continually arguing with the other 50%.

 

It's just something we have to deal with.

 

I think the real issue in a thread like this is more fundamental. It's reflected in my signature. The issue is at least as old as Plato's Republic.

Justice is the will of the majority (collectivism)
vs.
Justice is the interest of the stronger (indivialism)

Plato demonstrated that neither is true.

Let's entertain the idea that Hitler was an individualist. In my opinion, he could then be labeled a right-winger. However, at the Hitlerian stage of individualism, the individual seeks domination over the collective.

The opposite might be the case with Stalin. Stalin could have been a collectivist, but at the Stalinist stage of collectivism, the collective seeks domination over the individual.

The results are the same: Injustice.

 

your self enamoring antics are entertaining if nothing else.

 

You make the mistake of thinking the hierarchy was that clear. Both men had support from the military. That is key to these type is "single man tyrannies" is that they are roundly supported by tend of thousand party loyalists with positions of power and military men who are also loyal. The figurehead can fall and the operation continues. That is why you know it isn't a one man show.

Did they both seek to control their economies? Or free them up for trade?

 

All of these issues seem irrelevant...simply because none of these Parties bear even the slightest resemblance to what we have now.....these guys lived in a completely different time and country. It is all good and fine to imagine the thoughts of our founders, but changes nothing in our reality.

I do like the Democrat-Republican thingy though....it is almost a dream.

 

How is a minority of the individual stronger then the collective allied against him? What is just about lobbying a powerful person for permission to earn a living? What is just about being told what to do and how much you can charge by a ruler behind a desk unwilling to get their hands dirty?

 

A 100,000 members of the communist party took part in the war. The Royalists received aid from the Soviet Union plus a number of communist organisations around the world such as France and the US. 40,000 communists from around the world came to join the international brigade. But none of that really matters because I am simply spewing fascist propaganda[/QUOTE]

Sure, the U.S. and British Governments refused to back anyone in the war with aid, though they both supported the Loyalists at least officially. The Soviets paid for the foreign communists to go to Spain and fight against the Fascists. Spain was the training ground for the German, Italian and Russian air force pilots who manned those air forces at the beginning of WWII. It was also the testing ground for many of the weapons and munitions used during WWII. The west's refusal to involve itself in Spain was one of the primary reasons that neither the U.S. or Great Britain were able to develop first rate tanks during WWII while the Russians and the Germans were.

I do get ticked when the loyalists are referred to as communists because the Soviet Union aided them when none of the Democracies would. Spain was a somewhat liberal democracy when Franco and his henchmen began their revolt, it was anything but communist.

 

Oh for god's sake....

NO IT DOES NOT.

The LEFT refers to ideologies promoting the removal of social hierarchy and equality for everyone. From least to most extreme, this includes the following: social liberalism, social democracy, democratic socialism, socialism, syndicalism, anarcho-syndicalism, communism. Ok? We clear?

The RIGHT refers to ideologies promoting traditional social values and societal hierarchy. From least (order debatable before fascism) to most extreme, this includes: conservative liberalism, traditionalism, nationalism, fascism, feudalism, theocracy, monarchy.

 

Hitler's cronies had quite a lot of power and leeway. Stalin's cronies got benefits that Stalin agreed to give them, but they still couldn't really do anything other than administrate Stalin's orders. Virtually everything regarding the running of the USSR was decreed by Stalin himself - in Nazi Germany, so long as they did nothing that blatantly defied the Nazi cause or Hitler, Hitler's cronies did their own thing. Himmler orchestrated the Holocaust almost by himself. Hitler approved of course, but wasn't involved so much - he just let Himmler do his thing because Hitler trusted Himmler to do what was in the interest of the Nazi Party. That's not to say Hitler wasn't complicit in ordering the Holocaust, he just didn't bother managing it himself. In all likelihood he just said "We should kill all the Jews" and Himmler was like "I can do that" and Hitler was like "Ok let's do it".

 

That and various branches of the government had a part in how the years before WWII suggest it was incredibly disorganized.

 

his actions are the reality. His reasons are speculative.

- - - Updated - - -

very nice. You should get an A on your term paper.
GOVERNMENT simply leads to statism. The rest is crap college boys study.

 

What is justice?

 

You not caring about the different ways government can be used does not mean this distinction does not exist or is not relevant.

 

Who the hell cares what the liberals who write wikipedia say.

Its bull(*)(*)(*)(*). There was only 1 major party at the time. You could just as easily say that they evolved into the wigs, even more so as Clay was a way more prominent democratic republican than the new comer Jackson. Jackson showed up straight form the Seminole Wars and essentially disintegrated the party in 1824.

The argument that the democratic party "evolved" out of the Democratic Republicans is pure double speak put forward by revisionist (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s!!!

 

Hitler hated Communists, and argued that they were a Jewish conspiracy to Bolshevize the world.

 

Oh shut it!!!!

- - - Updated - - -

And Stalin killed Trotsky and Tortskites. What is your point?

Fascism makes no room for other leftist ideologies and neither does communism.

 

Stalin didn't kill Trotsky and his followers, because they were left-wing.