I’m not going to get too deep into this but I think of the political spectrum as something of a horseshoe.
The farther you get from the center the more the two sides begin to bend toward each other. Hitler was right wing in the sense that he demonized the left, even though he led a party of “National Socialists.”
Extremist anything is liable to turn out quite similiar to Hitler, specifics aside.
Just a thought, but I don’t know if we can have this conversation unless we’re first able to define what “left” and “right” means.
Mussolini’s fascism was really just a form of nationalism, with a bit of intellectual salad dressing, like fundamentalist capitalists like to think of Ayn Rand as a philosopher. Mussolini rather romanticly suggested that class distinctions were irrelevent. What counted was the unity of all classes, the binding of many breakable sticks into one unbreakable fasce, the nation.
As political philosophy, it is mostly nonsense, as most political philosophy tends to be. Rather than the transcendent magic of class warfare, a la Marx, its substitutes the magic of the State. Both are pixie dust.
About the only thing, though perhaps the central thing, Nazism shares with Fascism is the display, the black shirts, the drums and marching, the abject adoration of all things military. The “socialism” of National Socialism was a crude re-definition, a kind of co-opting: Nazism purports to share the socialist concern with “the people”, but defines the interests of the people as being identical with its own.
“Fascist” is a much overused pejorative, I prefer something in a classical mode, like “running dog jackal of Wall Steet”. Has more of the old-fashioned Trotskyist tang to it.
On the contrary, he appealed to Germany’s sense of nationalism, and its past military glory.
Extreme nationalism, coupled with paranoia (i.e. the McCarthy strain of conservatism), carries the risk of a descent into fascism in my view.
Are you sure you don’t mean economic policy? The KKK always seemed fond of his social policy, especially that part about killing Jews.
OTOH, Hitler had a highly interventionist economic policy, which I would imagine most KKK members would oppose, since they now ally themselves with the extreme conservative wing of the Republican Party (or even parties more conservative than that).
Yes, I do mean economic policy.
Also, I have a question somewhat related to this thread. Mussolini said something about fascism that goes roughly:
“Fascism is ______________ of the blood.” I can’t remember what the “blank” is and I’ve been trying to remember for years now, ever since my very English history professor in college said that quote followed by his own remark, “Now what the bloddy 'ell does that even mean??” 
My searches for this quote on the Net have proved futile.
Needless to say, he didn’t think much of fascism as a coherent political philosophy.
Thanks, MC, just checking. Sorry if I came across as too sarcastic there. I’m a bit antsy to get out of work.
Scylla, I would except for one thing – traditional socialism is international. It considers national differences to be unimportant compared to class differences. Fascism’s singular emphasis on nationalism cuts against that.
I mean, suppose you had a religious sect that sprung from Christianity followed all the moral teachings of and the rituals of Xianity, but didn’t believe that Jesus ever existed. Christian?
Sua
I like what Huey Long had to say on this subject:
This debate seems to be an uniquely American one. Here in Germany it’s not an issue - even conservatives don’t deny the Nazis were on the extreme right.
I’d like to add the following aspects:
What the hell does that mean?
Your not going to talk about being Indian again, are you?
**
Ooooo. Good point. On the other side of the coin even though the private sector prospered under fascism, that may have been an unintentional side effect rather than a matter of doctrine.
Don’t be silly. That would be Jews for Jesus, of course.
—This debate seems to be an uniquely American one. Here in Germany it’s not an issue - even conservatives don’t deny the Nazis were on the extreme right.—
Yes, but you’re a European. What matters to us Americans is not the reality of the thing, but whether or not Nazism is being associated via some guilt-by-association handwaving with our personal pet political philosophies here in America.
Haven’t any of you played Hearts of Iron? It’s all a triangle, Democracy is on the right, Communism is on the left, and Fascism is at the top.
Well, lets see…
Hitler increased taxes and government spending, and greatly increased the size of the governments share in the German economy.
He regulated businesses and told them what they could produce, although, he allowed them to continue make profits.
He, along with Porche, personally invented/designed a cheap, reliable, peoples car, that any citizen could afford- the Volkswagan(the most popular car ever in the world, over 50 million sold for over 60 years).
He did massive public projects like inventing freeways(Autobahn).
He invented social security and day care centers, he allowed women to enter the work force.
He was a self made man, rising from poverty, prison, and illigitamcy, to become a world ruler.
He was a best selling author, getting personal wealth from the sale of his books.
The women loved him, at least 4 girlfriends killed themselves on his behalf or because of him, including his cousin.
He ended unemployment in Germany, in the middle of a world wide depression and changed an inflation ravaged poor country into one of the most prosperous and powerful countries in the world.
He greatly improved the national defense.
He was for gun control, and was anti-tobacco, starting the first laws in the western world against smoking in public places, and never allowed smoking in his presence.
He provided government housing, gave free jobs and houses, and businesses to German citizens .
He tried to end racial and ethnic problems in his country. He tried to deport non-Germans to other lands(but no country would take very many of them)
He never nationalized private industry.
He hated war, and tried to end all war with other nations as quickly as possible, getting other countries to surrender before too many people got killed(Russia did not cooperate), and established allowed local native leaders to rule in conquered lands(Denmark, Vichey FRance, etc.)
He was elected, though not a true German citizen and could not legally even vote.
He got massive cooperation from the Soviets, and from American industry and american banks, including loans from George Bush’s father.
He copied the American invention of: “Indian Reservations” and our “Indian policy” of the 1800’s and called them concentration camps.
He started the worlds first “youth program”.
He never invaded Switzerland, he went along with the advice of his generals in leaving Switzerland alone in peace.
What kind of people would vote for someone like that?
(No one, including myself, who firmly believes in the American Bill of Rights, would give this guy the time of day, regardless of that impressive list above )
The answer is, he was both right and left, and people from both the right and left would be attracted and like what he did, and would vote for him.
Well he’s got my vote and I’m a Green party member!
Once again I hit the wrong button! I was also going to say this:
There were plans for the invasion of Switzerland (Operation Tannenbaum) but Germany had its hands too full with Russia to implement it at the time. I’m sure that if Soviet resistance had vanished then Switzerland would have been eventually invaded.
Another reason, of course, is Switzerland’s policy of appeasement towards Nazi Germany. (short article on the subject)
Hey Daoloth, if that site is not a joke, then you would think that everyone would join that party. They’ve got it all!