National Socialism

To be fair, Mussolini did lower the voting age to 18, make a minimum wage, form a retirement system, put more regulations on business, nationalize all weapons industry, secularized education, used the government to promote public health, put in a heavy graduated income tax, and had been a Socialist all his life until 1914(and in fact maintained he was still Socialist after that, just not part of the Italian Socialist Party.

Controbalanced by clearly rigthwing politics like his militarism and glorification of Italia, Rome, etc...

-Voting age; not really a left issue
-minimum wage; yes
-retirement; yes
-Regulation on business maybe - but there is possibly rightwing anti-capitalism, and you can have a rightwing ecologism
-Public health can be Rightwing, like abstinance and all in USA, and the very rightwing Nazi party forbid smoking at places, I heard
-Graduated income taxes can go both way i say
-And he wasnt really socialist soon after, turning rightwing.

As usual, confusing statism with socialism, and trying to make all the horrors of the 20th century on the fault of the Left, when the Right had its HUGE share.
 
Controbalanced by clearly rigthwing politics like his militarism and glorification of Italia, Rome, etc...

-Voting age; not really a left issue
-minimum wage; yes
-retirement; yes
-Regulation on business maybe - but there is possibly rightwing anti-capitalism, and you can have a rightwing ecologism
-Public health can be Rightwing, like abstinance and all in USA, and the very rightwing Nazi party forbid smoking at places, I heard
-Graduated income taxes can go both way i say
-And he wasnt really socialist soon after, turning rightwing.

As usual, confusing statism with socialism, and trying to make all the horrors of the 20th century on the fault of the Left, when the Right had its HUGE share.

Woah, woah, woah, even IF fascism were viewed as liberal, the evils wouldn't be on the LEFT, but on Nazism, and only certain parts of Nazism which very, very few people support anyways. Besides, had it not been for the unobjective conservatives trying to completely eliminate Germany as a state, Nazi's would never have happened.

In short, I am not trying to put the Holocaust on the left or on the right. I am just relating areas of pure Fascism(such as Italian Fascism) to policies today.

Edit: And militarism is not left or right. Stalin was militarized.
 
Last edited:

Wolfpaw

Banned
To be fair, Mussolini and the Fasci di Combattimento did want to lower the voting age to 18, make a minimum wage, form a retirement system, put more regulations on business, nationalize all weapons industry, secularized education, used the government to promote public health, put in a heavy graduated income tax, and Mussolini had been a Socialist all his life until 1914(and in fact maintained he was still Socialist after that, just not part of the Italian Socialist Party).

EDIT: Not trying to start a fight, just laying out a few facts.
This is an important distinction. Early party rhetoric to attract votes and support is one thing, but I think we'd do better to focus on what the Fascists actually did.

The truth of the matter is that Mussolini didn't touch the economy for the first four years of his rule, expanding on the pro-business/privatization, laissez-faire policies of the preceding Liberal regimes.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Most indeed.

Rohms (?) and the SA got purged for this reason, no? believed too much the -Zi part of Nazi...
The SA leadership was purged for many reasons, and the fact that the SA leadership tended to harbor radical economic views was certainly one of them.
 
Corporations aren't conservative or liberal. Corporations and big business is just corporations and big business and they go where the money is, whether it be left or right. It just so happens that recent conservatives believe that a better economy is achieved through corroboration with businesses, instead of demonizing them. Hitler needed business, and realized he needed business, to achieve his army. But he did attack the wealthy though.

Mussolini loved Nietzche and Sorel, however almost all major conservatives are similar in school of thought to Locke and Smith. So, since when did those philosophies become Fascist?

Also, Mussolini and Hitler both approved of FDR, a progressive liberal. Mussolini and Lenin both admired each other. Hitler and Mussolini both emphasized faith and emotion over reason. Stalin and Hitler had similar policies except the fact that Hitler is supposedly 'economically and fiscally conservative'.

Black Power Cornell students got energized to Mussolini speeches in the spring semester of 1969.

Statism is most assuredly and completely liberal as it is big government, which most conservatives emphasize small government.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Corporations aren't conservative or liberal. Corporations and big business is just corporations and big business and they go where the money is, whether it be left or right.
Yes, corporations go where the money is, but you oughtn't to dismiss corporate leanings out of hand. When the politically-active leadership of major corporations are dominated by anti-Leftists and traditional elites, then it's a little disingenuous to say that corporations are neither liberal nor conservative.
But he did attack the wealthy though.
Okay. How?
Mussolini loved Nietzche and Sorel, however almost all major conservatives are similar in school of thought to Locke and Smith. So, since when did those philosophies become Fascist?
I don't believe anybody said that they were, but academics have noted that the potential seedlings of fascism can be read in Locke. And this really doesn't matter because I'm basing my evaluation of fascists off of their actions, not whatever Mussolini read in the days when he used to be a socialist.
Also, Mussolini and Hitler both approved of FDR, a progressive liberal.
They approved of Roosevelt because he employed similarly Keynesian methods to tackle the Depression. They didn't approve of him for any other reason, much less for being a liberal or a progressive, which both Mussolini and Hitler hated. Hitler often complained about "Rosenfeld" and his "mongrel" administration.

And when you say Hitler "approved" of Roosevelt, are you talking about when he did things like this?
Mussolini and Lenin both admired each other.
This is horrendously misrepresented. Lenin spoke approvingly of those Italian socialists who were becoming more revolutionary, of which Mussolini happened to be one (he was never referred to specifically). This was in 1912.

I have never been presented with anything that would indicate that Mussolini "admired" Lenin. After 1919 Mussolini did nothing but ferociously denounce Lenin and the Bolsheviks.
Stalin and Hitler had similar policies except the fact that Hitler is supposedly 'economically and fiscally conservative'.
Apart from both being police states, what policies did Hitler and Stalin share?
Black Power Cornell students got energized to Mussolini speeches in the spring semester of 1969.
I'm sure they did. And I'm equally sure that they were speeches made before Mussolini became a fascist. Besides, BP groups tend to be radicals, which many of the early fascists definitely were.
Statism is most assuredly and completely liberal as it is big government, which most conservatives emphasize small government.
Statism is both conservative and socialistic. Liberalism tends to be less in favor of state intervention. But you're using the American labels, which, as an American, I freely admit confuses things.

I always found it funny, though, that conservatives always wanted a government that wouldn't be allowed into the boardroom but would be allowed into somebody's bedroom.
 
Last edited:

Wolfpaw

Banned
China is too. So is North Korea. Communist, communist. And North Vietnam. Communist.
I never said that Communist regimes couldn't be militant, only that they were not nearly as militant as fascist ones.

And North Korea isn't even Communist anymore, it's just outright 1984.
 
Yes, corporations go where the money is, but you oughtn't to dismiss corporate leanings out of hand. When the politically-active leadership of major corporations are dominated by anti-Leftists and traditional elites, then it's a little disingenuous to say that corporations are neither liberal nor conservative.Okay. How?I don't believe anybody said that they were, but academics have noted that the potential seedlings of fascism can be read in Locke. And this really doesn't matter because I'm basing my evaluation of fascists off of their actions, not whatever Mussolini read in the days when he used to be a socialist.They approved of Roosevelt because he employed similarly Keynesian methods to tackle the Depression. They didn't approve of him for any other reason, much less for being a liberal or a progressive, which both Mussolini and Hitler hated. Hitler often complained about "Rosenfeld" and his "mongrel" administration.

And when you say Hitler "approved" of Roosevelt, are you talking about when he did things like this?
This is horrendously misrepresented. Lenin spoke approvingly of those Italian socialists who were becoming more revolutionary, of which Mussolini happened to be one (he was never referred to specifically). This was in 1912.

I have never been presented with anything that would indicate that Mussolini "admired" Lenin. After 1919 Mussolini did nothing but ferociously denounce Lenin and the Bolsheviks.
Apart from both being police states, what policies did Hitler and Stalin share?I'm sure they did. And I'm equally sure that they were speeches made before Mussolini became a fascist. Besides, BP groups tend to be radicals, which many of the early fascists definitely were.Statism is both conservative and socialistic. Liberalism tends to be less in favor of state intervention. But you're using the American labels, which, as an American, I freely admit confuses things.

I always found it funny, though, that conservatives always wanted a government that wouldn't be allowed into the boardroom but would be allowed into somebody's bedroom.

I have to make this brief as I am leaving to go on a trip for a few days in about an hour and I still need to pack, but I still maintain that Hitler wasn't anti-Liberal, but anti-communism and only and for the sole purpose because they were fighting for the same demographics of people.

Hitler had a vehement hatred for the 'bourgeoisie' and the 'ruling class' and had large chunks of voters from the 'proletariat'(populism speaks!) and the working class. How much of the vote is a current?(and most assuredly future) debate. Also, Jews were typically well-off. I don't doubt he stole their money for his war effort.

Hitler and Mussolini, of course, didn't like Roosevelt once they began their independent nation invasions! Also, many of FDR's brain trust praised Communism and Fascism as successful social experiments, which were all the rage to Progressives. The Nazi Party paper, the Volkischer Beobachter said in 1934 that Roosevelt was a man of "irreproachable, extremely responsible and immovable will" and "warm hearted leader of the people with a profound understanding of social needs". Mussolini praised FDR's book Looking Forward.

Perhaps it was still when Mussolini was a socialist on the Lenin-Mussolini admiration thing. I dunno, I'll have to research it more. And refer to Communism and Fascism battling for the same constituents as per the hating Bolshevism later.



Perhaps, I don't know which speech the Black Power radicals got jazzed up to.

I still maintain that Statism for the purpose of unifying a people is a completely Liberal trait. Fascism and Communism did that. Some Liberalism favors less intervention(Hippies), but most says more, more, more(especially economically and with social programs)!

As for the Religious Right 'in your bedroom', I completely agree. It is ironic and stupid. I have harsher judgement but I don't want to go out of bounds.
 
Top