Spanish socialists get $500 million cash infusion from American capitalist system.

[agamemnus]

It's got nothing to do with socialism. It's lawyers pure and simple. Should fit well in with American legal system.

It's the irony of the idea that a government which tends to discourage things like what this company did actually taking the fruits of their labor... of course both Cain and I exaggerate that the Spanish government is socialist, but it's the irony of the above that we are trying to point out...

[RandBlade]

Oh no, the Spanish government IS socialist. Much of the time anyway, I don't follow their politics. Just THIS isn't.

[Timbuk2]

Agreed, this has nothing to do with socialism/capitalism.

[Hazir]

Agreed, this has nothing to do with socialism/capitalism.

I think that every single Spaniard would be surprised to hear their government described as socialist. The Partido Popular is a party significantly right of center.

[earthJoker]

Hazir, the whole continent is socialist for them. Including the far right, which are just racist socialists.

[RandBlade]

The far right are racist socialists. They're far more socialist than the centre right. Do you dispute that?

[earthJoker]

Depends on the party. But as I see you really believe the right on the continent are just different shades of socialists.

[RandBlade]

I do not think the centre right are socialists. I do think the far right are.

However I think all French governments are shades of socialists.

[Nessus]

In general, or as in the BNP?

[RandBlade]

In general, or as in the BNP?

Definitely the BNP are. In general too from what I've seen. Economically Le Pen would definitely have been to the left of Thatcher for example.

There may be some far right parties which are racist capitalist parties - but I'm not aware of any. Are you?

[earthJoker]

There may be some far right parties which are racist capitalist parties - but I'm not aware of any. Are you?

Right wing of the SVP.

[Nessus]

Currently, I'm not aware of any except the Tea Party. I was mostly thinking historically, given my fetishes, that the Nazis weren't really a radical left movement. But some of the key players I would call true lefties and others true righties.

[Loki]

Currently, I'm not aware of any except the Tea Party. I was mostly thinking historically, given my fetishes, that the Nazis weren't really a radical left movement. But some of the key players I would call true lefties and others true righties.

The key economic difference between right and left wing parties is the emphasis on individualism vs. collectivism. Do you think the Nazis were more individualist or collectivist when it came to economics? In general, nationalist parties are left-wing economically because they want some form of national self-sufficiency, which privileges the state or nation over the individual. For the most part, "right wing" dictatorships tend to be ones that practice crony capitalism and don't have a coherent economic ideology (there are also a handful of military juntas, like Chile's).

[Nessus]

The key economic difference between right and left wing parties is the emphasis on individualism vs. collectivism. Do you think the Nazis were more individualist or collectivist when it came to economics? In general, nationalist parties are left-wing economically because they want some form of national self-sufficiency, which privileges the state or nation over the individual. For the most part, "right wing" dictatorships tend to be ones that practice crony capitalism and don't have a coherent economic ideology (there are also a handful of military juntas, like Chile's).

Are you saying Nazism was a leftist ideology?

[Loki]

Are you saying Nazism was a leftist ideology?

Economically, yes. Corporatism is a left-wing ideology that has been implemented in opposition to both communism and classical liberalism. The individual is not the focus of this system; the group is. The chief desire is to avoid conflicts between different groups, which means subordinating the individual interest to the group interest. And to the extent that the private sector was allowed to exist, it was to required to serve the "national interest".

[Nessus]

I obviously defer to your poli-sci judgements, but I would like to remind you that fascism was always meant to be the "third option" against both left and right. And National Socialism at least was very favoured among the analogues of who are today favouring Mittens.

[Loki]

I obviously defer to your poli-sci judgements, but I would like to remind you that fascism was always meant to be the "third option" against both left and right. And National Socialism at least was very favoured among the analogues of who are today favouring Mittens.

It was a third option between Marxism and liberalism; that doesn't mean it wasn't meant to be left-wing. It's different in that it didn't call for direct government ownership over the means of production. Businessmen tended to be liberal; it just so happens that there were no serious liberal parties in much of the Western world, and fascists were the main electoral alternative to socialists/communists. I could see why business owners would like a system that guaranteed labor peace, but it's also a system with inflated wages and extensive regulation.

[Nessus]

It also provided slave labour, which as an industrialist I'd welcome in a pre-automation technological level. But you once cited studies that said slave labour wasn't as productive as free labour?

[CitizenCain]

It also provided slave labour, which as an industrialist I'd welcome in a pre-automation technological level. But you once cited studies that said slave labour wasn't as productive as free labour?

Slave laborers also have a tendency to sabotage the thing they're forced to make, paid employees do not.

[Nessus]

Slave laborers also have a tendency to sabotage the thing they're forced to make, paid employees do not.

And fascists have a tendency to shoot the saboteurs and their families to boot, I'm sure some plateau would be reached eventually as the system iterated.

[RandBlade]

Slave laborers also have a tendency to sabotage the thing they're forced to make, paid employees do not.

Source wanted. Employee theft is a rife form of sabotage now.

[CitizenCain]

Source wanted. Employee theft is a rife form of sabotage now.

If you don't know the difference between theft and sabotage, there's very little any source can do to help you out. In the general case, a thief wants to enrich himself, a saboteur wants to harm his victim.

And that's enough remedial... information... for today, I think.

If we have to look at someone or -thing to define Nazism for us, it would be Hitler, for he was Nazism. And he wasn't leftist.

So, you're trying to define Nazism by the head individual to prove it's not a collectivist philosophy? Yeah, that's completely honest and productive. Clearly communism wasn't a left-wing philosophy either, given that ol' Uncle Joe was more interested in his own power and well being than the plight of the proletariat.

[Nessus]

So, you're trying to define Nazism by the head individual to prove it's not a collectivist philosophy? Yeah, that's completely honest and productive. Clearly communism wasn't a left-wing philosophy either, given that ol' Uncle Joe was more interested in his own power and well being than the plight of the proletariat.

I'm not saying it wasn't collectivist, indeed one of the reasons I like Nazism is the collectivist nature. The point was, there were so many conflicting under-currents within Nazism that if we have to pin down one ideological line, it must be Hitler's, since he was the ultimate authority of Nazism. My point to Loki was that Nazism arose from rightist circles and was intended as a defense against leftism (in the form of Bolshevism).

A figure like Thomas Jefferson would agree with Santorum on several points, but we don't think Jefferson was as loathsome as we think Santorum is; it doesn't benefit understanding one iota to look at things in hind-sight and label them accordingly. To understand what happened, and why, we must place things in context.

Indeed, the guy with hind-sight has perfect vision, and his sole eye is located much farther from his nose than you'd think...

[Loki]

It also provided slave labour, which as an industrialist I'd welcome in a pre-automation technological level. But you once cited studies that said slave labour wasn't as productive as free labour?

Bro-business doesn't make it right-wing. As I said, right-wing economics emphasizes individualism and forcing people to work for free isn't very individualist. When you add the fact that the goal of this slave labor is to benefit the nation, you get an ideology that's far more left wing than right.

[Nessus]

Bro-business doesn't make it right-wing. As I said, right-wing economics emphasizes individualism and forcing people to work for free isn't very individualist. When you add the fact that the goal of this slave labor is to benefit the nation, you get an ideology that's far more left wing than right.

Bro business huh

But now you're just defining right wing-ism so as to stake claim on liberalism, liberty and all sorts of warm fuzzy things. Fascism was co-opted by those parties we'd consider conservative, the petty bourgeoisie. In the historical frame-work Nazism was beget by the right wing conservatives. If you now, a hundred years down the line, want to define right wingism so as to preclude fascism, how honest an approach is that?

[Loki]

Bro business huh

But now you're just defining right wing-ism so as to stake claim on liberalism, liberty and all sorts of warm fuzzy things. Fascism was co-opted by those parties we'd consider conservative, the petty bourgeoisie. In the historical frame-work Nazism was beget by the right wing conservatives. If you now, a hundred years down the line, want to define right wingism so as to preclude fascism, how honest an approach is that?

Freudian slip.

Why equate liberalism with conservatism? Conservatism wants to preserve existing structures and norms. In cases where those structures and norms are liberal, then conservatism will be very similar to liberalism. But in cases like Germany, where the old status quo was nationalist and authoritarian, it's not surprising that many conservatives would support illiberal parties.

I don't think it's fair to classify fascism as either left wing or right wing. After all, it was meant to be the "third way". It was right wing socially, while generally left wing economically, traits that are shared by most nationalist parties today.

[Nessus]

Freudian slip.

Why equate liberalism with conservatism? Conservatism wants to preserve existing structures and norms. In cases where those structures and norms are liberal, then conservatism will be very similar to liberalism. But in cases like Germany, where the old status quo was nationalist and authoritarian, it's not surprising that many conservatives would support illiberal parties.

I don't think it's fair to classify fascism as either left wing or right wing. After all, it was meant to be the "third way". It was right wing socially, while generally left wing economically, traits that are shared by most nationalist parties today.

Which is kind of what I said several posts back. Okay, I think we're converging to an agreement, so I'd just like to point out as one last thing that the raison dêtre of Nazism was to combat Bolshevism, arguably the most left-wing ideology ever implemented. The whole crusade against Bolshevism was argued to be about preserving European culture and free enterprise, even if said enterprise was expected to abide by the nation-state. And it's certainly not at all clear how much the enterprises themselves could sway the nation state. If you knew an SS guy, it could go a long way, and that's just how business operates, right?

[earthJoker]

Productive as in output per hour or output per cost?

[Nessus]

I want to say per cost, but my memory is shoddy and I don't want to misrepresent what Low-key's said

[Nessus]

I'm sorry, but that's just not true. The early movement activists loathed the communists for their atheism, and the socialists for their lip service to democracy. The nebulous nature of the top Nazi brass's views doesn't allow for a coherent interpretation (just look at Goebbels and Streicher, to pick an example), but the SS apparatus at least was very connected with German business. And the point is that the German businessmen who helped the Nazis into power obviously thought they had something to gain by doing so, otherwise they wouldn't have done it, right?