re: Dan Carlin Hardcore History Addendum - History on Fire

quote:

---

shows someone's for sure 

---

You'll grow out of it.

You dont even have a clue what I meant by free markets and you're already using socialist talking points

quote:

---

You dont even have a clue what I meant by free markets and you're already using socialist talking points

---

Sort of like when you dont have a clue about mine and called me a leftist until that didnt fit and then started calling me a progressive?


Feel free to expand upon your views. In fairness, I agree with everything else you said.

quote:

---

The Nazi party and Hitler particularly also had many more right-leaning beliefs and were classically considered far-right, even in this country.

---

At least you admitted being wrong about the economics.


Was roosevelt a right winger?

quote:

---

Why do you insist on clinging to that label so dearly?

---

Exactly what you've done

Didnt you say this board was right wing?
Hitler was right wing?
That the country has gone further right?

Why is this label so important to you?

quote:

---

Because it pisses people like you off.  

---

So this is your " I'm Really not retarded, just trolling" moment?

You're the one that cant resist calling people leftists. Is that you trolling or being retarded?

What truth? You wouldn't know the truth if it hit you in the face.


I'm still waiting on you to expound upon your free market ideas.

So prove me wrong. What do you believe? Or do you really not understand it outside of what you've been told to believe?

quote:

---

Or do you really not understand it outside of what you've been told to believe?

---

Recites shitty leftist talking points, accuses others of sheepish behavior

I'm a conservative who does think it is aggravating that so many conservatives push the simplistic notion that National Socialism was fundamentally left wing. It wasn't though it is understandable how conservatives in the American political context would think so. Nazism existed outside the context of the American political structure and this is where both the left and right oversimplify their characterizations.

That being said, OP appears to fail to be able to articulate any ideas. Just listen to the podcast, read my article, etc. That's not how intellectual discourse works. I like Carlin too but he is not some infallible god of political or historical discourse. He's just a well read, great storyteller who I believe is exceptionally keen to TRY and be as objective as possible, and I think he does succeed in this much more than most. That being said, you can't just initiate dialogue and then instead of laying out a clear position say "listen to the podcast." You have to reference your source AND present the specifics of an argument you wish to support. That's how coherent discussion and debate works. Appeal to authority, of course, is a logical fallacy.

There are themes and concepts of National Socialism that more closely reflect policies of the contemporary left and themes and ideas that more closely reflect the contemporary right (these have been argued ad nauseum everywhere so I will spare the unnecessary examples). National Socialism was not a rigid ideological movement per se, but one entirely subject to the general worldview of Hitler and his pragmatic determinations regarding policy due to his unique position as founder of the movement and authoritarian leader of the state all in one. And unlike Marxism and capitalism, Hitler's party and worldview were not tied to an intellectual theory and manifesto on economics. Unlike Western republican forms of government, it was not wedded to a philosophy that championed individual liberty and market freedom. There were differing views within the movement itself on a number of issues because these issues were not considered to be foundational in National Socialist doctrine. They were subordinate to an overarching worldview and subject to discretion. It was not a system with a wide array of rigid, dogmatic parameters outside of a few essential, defining guidelines. The most important aspects of National Socialism were 1) supremacy of national interests (that means over individual interests and economic theories, meaning it was neither classically liberal, capitalistic, nor Marxian) and 2) the state exists to safeguard the existence and prosperity of a people based on blood kinship ie race. Therefore an economic system could be centrally controlled or less centrally controlled and equally be acceptable given the circumstances. Arguing whether Nazism was left or right based on analysis of their economic system relative to the contrast between classical liberal and contemporary Marxist philosophies is a fool's errand and fundamentally erroneous. It will lead to a stalemate debate every time as is evidenced in almost every one of these discussions I've seen on internet forums.

Nazism was openly anti-capitalist and anti-Marxist. It was both of these things simultaneously. If you can't evaluate it outside of a dichotomy you will fall short every time in your understanding of it as a political phenomena and you will misapply it when you attempt to draw comparisons and correlations with contemporary politics.