Nazi party’s official name: NSDAP- Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei- National Socialist German Workers’ Party (They weren’t actually socialist, it’s just the name they chose)
AfD: Alternative für Deutschland- Alternative for Germany
In March 2020, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (German: Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz) classified AfD’s far-right nationalistic faction known as Der Flügel as “a right-wing extremist endeavor against the free democratic basic order” and as “not compatible with the Basic Law”, placing it under intelligence surveillance.
Basically, they meet the requirements (or so I’ve heard, but correct me if I’m wrong) to be banned as an extremist party, like how the Nazi party was banned.
Yeah, to claim that people like Ernst Roehm weren’t socialist is revisionist, to put it mildly. Dude was anticapitalist and wanted to nationalize most industries.
There is nationalization, and there is nationalization.
Mussolini/Gentile stated that the goal of fascism was the merger of the state with the corporation, eg their economic theory of corporatism.
Or, to put it another way, “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.”
The Soviet Union’s obsession with nationalization as the means of socialism was one of the many reasons other leftist thinkers coined the term “red fascism” to describe them.
What, after all, is the functional difference between a state taking 70% of your productivity and a capitalist splitting that 70% with a statist?
(Well, hopefully it’s infrastructure and social benefits, including a army strong enough to defend yourself from all the real fascists, but power and weak oversight corrupts)
Fascists aren’t socialists. Jesus Christ. Rohm wanted social safety nets, he didn’t want the workers to control the means of production, he wanted a corporate state - because he was a fascist, not a socialist.
You’re confusing the left wing of a fascist party with the left wing.
On what planet does “socialism” refer exclusively to worker-owned means of production? That’s communism. Nobody uses socialism that way unless they’re manipulating wording to fit an agenda.
Socialism is a political philosophy and movement encompassing a wide range of economic and social systems which are characterised by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership.
I have to break it to you, but that just as well describes state-owned companies. It has nothing at all to do with worker ownership. Your own definition makes Roehm a socialist lmao
moron. learn what private property means. fascism is not state ownership of corporations, it’s corporate ownership of the state, a very different dialectic.
Name-calling now? Keep eating those muffins buddy. It’s OK to admit you’re wrong once in a while.
Edit: directly from the horse’s mouth!
Erich Koch, who would eventually become the Gauleiter of East Prussia, maintained in an a 1931 article “Sind wir Faschisten?” that the key difference between Mussolini’s Fascist party and the NSDAP was that the former was capitalistic, while the later was socialist.
It’s not revisionist. Most people see the atrocities committed by the Nazis, and then say “yeah that shit isn’t socialist”. It’s a historical blind spot most people have about post-Weimar Germany.
It also helps that the socialist wing of the party was wiped out (literally) before the party became, er, internationally famous. If nobody had heard of the USSR until Stalin’s purges, they might have said they weren’t socialist either.
Is there a book I can read? I’ve fallen for this oversimplification, yet knowing about the night of the long knives, and incorrectly underatood this bit of history.
Sorry, it’s been ages since I read up on WWII in general, and I don’t have a specific recommendation for you. Roehm wrote a memoir but I think it’s Mein Kampf-esque) rambling and incoherent). Mind you, from the mid 30s onward the Nazis were not especially socialist, so people aren’t necessarily wrong when they point out the “socialist” is a misnomer.
The full name of the party was Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (English: National Socialist German Workers’ Party) and they officially used the acronym NSDAP. The term “nazi” had been in use, before the rise of the NSDAP, as a colloquial and derogatory word for a backwards farmer or peasant. It characterised an awkward and clumsy person, a yokel. In this sense, the word Nazi was a hypocorism of the German male name Igna(t)z (itself a variation of the name Ignatius)—Igna(t)z being a common name at the time in Bavaria, the area from which the NSDAP emerged.[17][18]
In the 1920s, political opponents of the NSDAP in the German labour movement seized on this. Using the earlier abbreviated term “Sozi” for Sozialist (English: Socialist) as an example,[19] they shortened the NSDAP’s name, Nationalsozialistische, to the dismissive “Nazi”, in order to associate them with the derogatory use of the aforementioned term.[20][18][21][22][23][24] The first use of the term “Nazi” by the National Socialists occurred in 1926 in a publication by Joseph Goebbels called Der Nazi-Sozi [“The Nazi-Sozi”]. In Goebbels’ pamphlet, the word “Nazi” only appears when linked with the word “Sozi” as an abbreviation of “National Socialism”.[25]
After the NSDAP’s rise to power in the 1930s, the use of the term “Nazi” by itself or in terms such as “Nazi Germany”, “Nazi regime”, and so on was popularised by German exiles outside the country, but not in Germany. From them, the term spread into other languages and it was eventually brought back into Germany after World War II.[21] The NSDAP briefly adopted the designation “Nazi” in an attempt to reappropriate the term, but it soon gave up this effort and generally avoided using the term while it was in power.[21][22] In each case, the authors typically referred to themselves as “National Socialists” and their movement as “National Socialism”, but never as “Nazis”. A compendium of Hitler’s conversations from 1941 through 1944 entitled Hitler’s Table Talk does not contain the word “Nazi” either.[26] In speeches by Hermann Göring, he never uses the term “Nazi”.[27] Hitler Youth leader Melita Maschmann wrote a book about her experience entitled Account Rendered.[28] She did not refer to herself as a “Nazi”, even though she was writing well after World War II. In 1933, 581 members of the National Socialist Party answered interview questions put to them by Professor Theodore Abel from Columbia University. They similarly did not refer to themselves as “Nazis”.[29]
Nazi party’s official name: NSDAP- Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei- National Socialist German Workers’ Party (They weren’t actually socialist, it’s just the name they chose)
AfD: Alternative für Deutschland- Alternative for Germany
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany
Excerpt from Wikipedia:
Basically, they meet the requirements (or so I’ve heard, but correct me if I’m wrong) to be banned as an extremist party, like how the Nazi party was banned.
Technically, they were, at least to some degree until the Night of the long Knifes during which all left-leaning SA Leaders were purged.
Yeah, to claim that people like Ernst Roehm weren’t socialist is revisionist, to put it mildly. Dude was anticapitalist and wanted to nationalize most industries.
There is nationalization, and there is nationalization.
Mussolini/Gentile stated that the goal of fascism was the merger of the state with the corporation, eg their economic theory of corporatism.
Or, to put it another way, “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.”
The Soviet Union’s obsession with nationalization as the means of socialism was one of the many reasons other leftist thinkers coined the term “red fascism” to describe them.
What, after all, is the functional difference between a state taking 70% of your productivity and a capitalist splitting that 70% with a statist?
(Well, hopefully it’s infrastructure and social benefits, including a army strong enough to defend yourself from all the real fascists, but power and weak oversight corrupts)
Very helpful!
Fascists aren’t socialists. Jesus Christ. Rohm wanted social safety nets, he didn’t want the workers to control the means of production, he wanted a corporate state - because he was a fascist, not a socialist.
You’re confusing the left wing of a fascist party with the left wing.
On what planet does “socialism” refer exclusively to worker-owned means of production? That’s communism. Nobody uses socialism that way unless they’re manipulating wording to fit an agenda.
this planet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
it’s always amazing when people like you are SO CONFIDENTLY INCORRECT about basic information that can easily be determined with a simple search.
I have to break it to you, but that just as well describes state-owned companies. It has nothing at all to do with worker ownership. Your own definition makes Roehm a socialist lmao
moron. learn what private property means. fascism is not state ownership of corporations, it’s corporate ownership of the state, a very different dialectic.
Name-calling now? Keep eating those muffins buddy. It’s OK to admit you’re wrong once in a while.
Edit: directly from the horse’s mouth!
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3vdkls/comment/cxn4p61/
It’s not revisionist. Most people see the atrocities committed by the Nazis, and then say “yeah that shit isn’t socialist”. It’s a historical blind spot most people have about post-Weimar Germany.
It also helps that the socialist wing of the party was wiped out (literally) before the party became, er, internationally famous. If nobody had heard of the USSR until Stalin’s purges, they might have said they weren’t socialist either.
Also, the “left” wing of the party were still fucking unhinged.
Is there a book I can read? I’ve fallen for this oversimplification, yet knowing about the night of the long knives, and incorrectly underatood this bit of history.
Sorry, it’s been ages since I read up on WWII in general, and I don’t have a specific recommendation for you. Roehm wrote a memoir but I think it’s Mein Kampf-esque) rambling and incoherent). Mind you, from the mid 30s onward the Nazis were not especially socialist, so people aren’t necessarily wrong when they point out the “socialist” is a misnomer.
How does that name get shortened to “nazi”?
From Wikipedia: