Timeline for How does Hitler's interpretation of "Nationalist Socialism" relate to the modern interpretation of "Socialism" and "Nationalism"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 10 at 12:46 | comment | added | phoog | @John an excellent point, but I would note that the North Korean claim of democracy goes farther than the country's name. It's also possible that the claim is directed more toward the country's people than to the international community; I don't think it is very effective with the international community in any event. I do not know whether any elements of the NSDAP platform were also crafted with an eye to attracting people from the left, or if it went no farther than the name. | |
| Aug 9 at 20:29 | comment | added | John | @phoog How governments call their state at the time of the founding and how parties call themselves at the time of their recruiting phase needs to be valued differently. The NSDAP clearly meant to attract socialists and nationalists initially. North Korea called itself democratic likely as an attempt to get legitimacy internationally. | |
| Aug 8 at 12:44 | comment | added | Paul Johnson | @John and others try to tar anything "socialist" with the assertion that the Nazis were socialist too: look, it says so right there in the name! | |
| Feb 15, 2022 at 10:07 | comment | added | Sam Ginrich | That h-ref.de-link well displays, that there was a transient initial phase of collaboration on level of political parties, which then was stopped by ´Socialists´. | |
| Feb 12, 2022 at 17:26 | comment | added | Acccumulation | @SamGinrich That's not a correct use of the word "connotation". | |
| Feb 11, 2022 at 2:13 | comment | added | Acccumulation | "anti-communist" It was certainly opposed to Bolshevik/Marxist/Stalinist communism, but the Nazis did view it as socialism. "It is inherently antisemitic, racist, nationalist, völkisch, social-Darwinist, anti-communist, anti-liberal, and antidemocratic." The USSR was also antisemitic, racist, nationalist, anti-liberal, and antidemocratic. So this isn't really addressing whether it was socialist. | |
| Feb 10, 2022 at 18:59 | comment | added | Sam Ginrich | @John That's why this topic is important: It reveals that socialism today has reached the status of infallible religious dogmatism, allowing nearly everything in the name of anti-nazism and so might ask for God's wrath in a totally new dimension. | |
| Feb 9, 2022 at 9:04 | comment | added | phoog | "Democratic People's Republic of Korea is not a democracy": nominally, it is. Wikipedia says of its constitution, "Article 4 gives the sovereignty of the country to the working people ... who exercise it through their representatives in the Supreme People's Assembly and the local people's assemblies." Now regardless of how that works in practice, it nonetheless reflects a link between the word "democratic" and the political system of the DPRK. The example therefore does not support the assertion that there is no link between "nationalism" or "socialism" and "national socialism." | |
| Feb 8, 2022 at 23:05 | comment | added | Sam Ginrich | The difficulty of the decomposition to Nationalism and Socialism as atomic elements well justifies the question and the discussion. | |
| Jun 24, 2020 at 23:54 | comment | added | Italian Philosopher | +1 And just be very clear on Communism vs Nazis and the stupidity of trying to make too much of the term: you have to keep in mind that one reason the Nazis got to power is that at least some of the big German employers struck a Faustian pact with them, precisely in order to avoid Communism as the USSR was trying to spread it in Germany. Not saying they knew what they were signing up to, no, but they definitely knew why they made that decision at the time. It doesn't make sense to read too much into the name, aside from the fact that both Stalinist Communism and Nazism are despicable. | |
| Dec 18, 2019 at 13:09 | comment | added | John | Some also try to deny that there are no socialist aspects in Nazism at all in an atempt to rescue the label socialism from disrepute. | |
| Oct 22, 2019 at 18:01 | vote | accept | yolo | ||
| S Dec 26, 2018 at 23:16 | history | mod moved comments to chat | |||
| S Dec 26, 2018 at 23:16 | comment | added | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. | |
| S Dec 20, 2018 at 17:13 | history | suggested | J.G. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Corrected a spelling error
|
| Dec 20, 2018 at 17:06 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Dec 20, 2018 at 17:13 | |||||
| Dec 19, 2018 at 19:42 | comment | added | PhillS | @yolo then you make up a new word or phrase to describe it that doesn't carry all the negative associations of ' national socialism '. | |
| Dec 19, 2018 at 19:39 | comment | added | yolo | And if you want to refer to said 'odd national version of socialism'? | |
| Dec 19, 2018 at 19:38 | comment | added | tim | @yolo There is no such thing as a "definition of name"; only a definition. The way a word is used determines what it means, not how the word looks. There are plenty of words that look like they might mean one thing, but which are never used that way. National Socialism is such a word. It is always the National Socialism of the Nazis, and never some sort of odd national version of socialism. | |
| Dec 19, 2018 at 19:32 | comment | added | yolo | So you are saying that we define the idea nationalist socialist against Hitler's ideals albeit the ideals did not follow that of what the name suggested. If so- how do we differentiate if someone who is talking about a nationalist socialist (by definition of name) and a nationalist socialist (by definition of Nazi ideals)? | |
| Dec 19, 2018 at 19:27 | history | answered | tim | CC BY-SA 4.0 |