Is Hitler's political views closer to conservatism or liberalism?
Side Score: 51
Side Score: 47
Well, it all depends on the country you are in. Conservatism means preserving the current state of the country. Liberalism is moving away from the current state.
Hitler opposed the ruling parties which tended to be Christian Socialists. National Socialism (shortened by political adversaries to Nazism) was Hitler's descent from the current ruling ideal; so in Germany Hitler was a Liberal.
If you look at it through America's stand point; Liberalism has more to do with Secular Humanist Socialism than it has to do with descent, while Conservatism has more to do with Moral Capitalism than it has to do with preserving ideals. With America being a short term Democratic Republic, the status of government is constantly changing. Since National Socialism encouraged strict government regulation over business and the Nationalization of Banks and health care, Hitler's views, in America, would still be considered closer to Liberalism.
The only Conservative part would be Hitler's encouragement of Patriotism and pride for your Nation. But if you look at Politicians, Democrats call themselves just as Patriotic as Republicans.
Hitler's views were very Liberal. He wanted big government and government control. He believed the German people could not think for themselves and needed the government to lead the way. This is true with the liberals in America. They believe Amercians are too dumb to do for themselves and that we need government help.
Hitler was not a democrat by any means but his ideas are liberal/socialist/communist all tied into 1.
Hitler was a collectivist who believed the state would ultimately solve societies' problems. This follows the progressive/liberal idea that the state, not individuals, is the ultimate authority from which society must conform in order for society to properly function.
It has also been pointed out that Hitler must have been conservative because of his Nationalist patriotic views. Keep in mind several points: Hitler's version of fascism differed from Mussolini's only in this sense of racial superiority. At one point he became convinced that Russia's communism was the product and experiment of super rich Jewish bankers. Jews were considered then as the best practitioners of capitalism. With the world shrinking around him, and the fears that German was slowly becoming incorporated into a much smaller world influenced more by "outsiders" than Germans, it is no wonder his paranoia unleashed racial slotting. Thus Jews, being ardent capitalists, in his mind were controlling the fate of the world. People with disabilities were a drain on the state's resources, so were labeled "inferior" and must be exterminated.
As for Hitler allowing private enterprise to exist, he stated time and again that it didn't matter if private businesses were not "socialized" because in the end, the German citizens who owned the businesses were "socialized" to the state of Germany, and at any time Germany could make resources decisions on those private businesses if the state needed them.
This type of thinking more closely resembles a progressive or liberal.
The liberal/conservative dichotomy is somewhat useless for labeling Individuals or groups of people. Generally a liberal is for revolution (abrupt change in the form of misgovernment), while the conservative is for maintaining an imaginary status quo. Sticking with the tried and true etc.. But think about this, wouldn't it require revolutionary change (from the way it is now) to restore constitutional government to the United States?
If we could get past labeling people with essentially meaningless terms we would have taken a step forward.
“All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach.”~ Adolph Hitler
1. Liberals are just wastoid,, lazy, stinky, hippies, and the message of the sixties was let's get loaded and party.
2. And conservatives are hypocritical, bigoted, holier than thou, stick up their ass authoritarians who just want to lord over people they consider degenerates.
Which BS propaganda is most appealing to you 1 or 2?
"What luck for the rulers that people are not fond of thinking."~ I think it was Hitler too
If you really believe that, you should watch the videos and educate yourelf. Really, why embarass yourself publicly?
Hitler was for nationalized heath care. Let's see.... who else is for nationalized health care? Oh yeah..., the democrats...., who happen to be liberal.
OK, your turn. Name one thing that Hitler promoted that is now being promoted by conservatives.
Don't hurt your brain ;)
Hitler was for nationalized heath care.
Bismark instituted nationalized healthcare in the late 19th century through three major pieces of legislation. Hitler attempted to revoke the health insurance bills of 1883, 84 and 89. However, the German people rebuffed him for it and he had to back down and keep the institution intact. And both Bismarck and Hitler were avid German conservatives.
Name one thing that Hitler promoted that is now being promoted by conservatives.
I could: Nationalism and criticism of sexual permissiveness, to name a few, but why would I? American conservatism isn't German conservatism and German conservatism wasn't American conservatism in the middle of the 20th century. Equally, Liberal policies don't, in any way mimic the policies of Hitler and the Nazi party--not in the middle 20th century and not now.
And clearly you didn't read what I wrote. Let me repeat myself, since you missed it. "Fascism in both Italy and Germany were right-wing in their respective countries, and bore little (superficial at best) resemblance to the liberalism of the day." Furthermore, in both Italy and Germany, Fascists ran on an anti-liberalism platform, and in Germany the Nazi party purposefully positioned itself to the right of the DNVP, the original right-wing party of Germany in the 20th century. A simple look at the political framework and the platforms the parties themselves drew and founded would tell you that.
Below is the political spectrum of Germany in the time of Hitler.
Far left <---Communist Party (KPD)---><---Social Democrats (SPD)---><---Catholic Center party (Zentrum)---><---German Nationalist People's Party (DNVP)---><---Nationalist Socialist Party (NSDAP)---> Far Right
Furthermore, Nazi ideology was one of mythology: volk, one of anti-liberalism, anti-socialism and anti-communism, and lebensraum to name a few. Hitler was a German conservative, a radical European right-winger.
Glenn Beck has a similar argument that Hitler was a progressive liberal. All this debate is about is assuming by equating Hitler with Liberalism would mean all liberals are Hitlers. So the premise is false in the first place.
First of all, Hitler was a Nazi. The Nazi party had nothing to do with the contemporary political dynamic of today between liberalism and conservatism.
I would not equate Hitler as a liberal OR a conservative in these terms. There are a many people that are not fans of George W. Bush or Barack Obama but neither deserve to be compared to someone who would be capable and willing to murder 6 million Jews, Gays, and political prisoners.
Unfortunately, people like to pick and choose facts or pseudo facts to support their political arguments. I am a libertarian, right smack dab down the middle, so I won't be rooting for or arguing against either side.
Having said that, after reading massive volumes about the Weimar Republic, Germany during WW1, WW2, all the way back to the emperor, Hitler's history of staunch conservatism is pretty clear.
Hitler exemplified extreme far right policies over anything else. In fact, the only way he was elected chancellor and appealed to the public (which he lost the first time he ran because he ran as a conservative) was PRETENDING to be a liberal socialist. Once in power, his policies very quickly shifted to extreme right wing conservatism and fascism. And this is not to say that conservatism has anything to do with fascism, but the history has been clearly stated.
Words and labels are tricky. I think people confuse American conservatism and liberalism with German conservatism and liberalism in the times of the Weimar Republic (welfare state). The Weimar Republic was mainly supported by the Social Democrats (liberal-left). Hitler was a German Nationalist (conservative-right). In the end, he crushed both. If you want to read more on this issue, read “The Coming of the Third Reich” by the historian Richard Evans.
QUOTE: “Yet the depth of hatred and resentment which Nazi stormtroopers felt against the Social Democrats (liberal) as well as the Communist can only be understood in terms of their feeling that they were under constant attack not just from Social Democrats’ paramilitary affiliate, the Reichsbanner, but also in many areas from the police, who in Prussia at least were controlled by Social Democrats ministers such as Carl Severing and Albert Grzesinki. [P222]
Your belief that Facism is right-wing is misguided. Facisim, like Socialism are left-wing idealogically. The only difference is with Facism, private ownership of business is permitted, in socialism, it is not. In both cases they are controlled by the state. If you go right from conservatism you advocate anarchy, or no government at all.
Hitler was more of a conservative because he was a fascist, and don't give me the argument that fascism was originally a liberal ideology because in reality fascism was a conservative ideology made by liberals, just because Stalin and Roosevelt were involved doesn't make it truly progressive. Also Hitler was very obviously a nationalist what other reason would Hitler spend a fuck load of money on the military, he was Anti Semitic same way to how modern theocratic conservatives hate anybody who is not christian. He killed gay people in the holocaust (that argument is definitely significant), and was critical of sexual permissiveness and finally most obvious he hated anybody that was not white, need I say more?
Democrat vs. Republican. Left vs. Right. Progressive vs. Conservative. Sixty years ago a Southern Democrat was on the Right and a Conservative. So the premise of this debate is itself flawed, making for a good argument (thank you Voltaire). But for the moment I'm going to take the bate.
It was stated in several posts that conservative means maintaining the status quo. In that usage it is then not the dichotomy of a Progressive. A progressive tries something new, and then, if flawed the pendulum swings back to recovery what worked thereby conserving (recovering) success. After Obama, the pendulum swung to the Left. The "Left" was going to do some different, but the difference was to go back to what was working, NOT maintain the status quo. Example, Obamacare was not going to be fixed, it was going to be repealed. Don't forget "invent or die."
It is on the basis that I believe the Nazi's were conservative. Hitler sought to return to the purity of the Aryans (as he saw them). He was making big changes but these were to back to what worked, as he saw it. To cleanse Germany of all of the corrupt influences, Jewish International Bankers, Communistic socialism, etc. He had no regard for the "common man" much less the handicap, or religious "sheep." Able body Aryans comprised his state. Only of those supermen were included in his idea "one for all, and all for one."
Hitler's views were neither conservative nor liberal- but due to the hate disguised as love and so-called "peace" (let's just
have tea and crumpets with the terrorist views of most liberals, everyone is confused. I have found that most liberals
want to murder their babies rather than take responsibility for well..anything. They play the blame game more than they solve issues. Liberals are usually classless, uneducated, more rude, the "marajuana-smoking-irresponsible-I-care-