The Definition Of NAZI
Posted by zaphriel on July 13, 2006
And the Danger of Ignorance.
Given the prevalence of the accusations that conservatives are Nazis, I should perhaps note in passing here a a bit of basic history: Just as the Ku Klux Klan were Democrats, so Hitler was a socialist. The word “Nazi” is in fact short for “National socialist” (Nationalsozialistisch in German).
There is a danger in ignorance and not knowing the difference between mainstream, and extremism.
July 15, 2006 at 7:58 pm
In the manner of Bill O’Reilly, what say you to me calling members of the Bush administration and its followers “fascists”?
July 15, 2006 at 9:30 pm
Thank you for this. I knew the Nazies were socialists…but did NOT know the KKKs were democrats.
July 16, 2006 at 7:43 am
Read F.A. Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom - that’ll turn anyone away from socialism - “national” or otherwise. Of course, any government with branches that are dominated by one political party with extreme authoritarian designs of either a “politically correct” or a theocratic nature is a threat to liberty. . .”Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. . .You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.” Barry M. Goldwater
July 17, 2006 at 6:33 am
Just surfing through with BlogExplosion, and your headline, doing its job, caught my eye. I thought I should leave a quick response before stumbling onward.
There is a lot of name-calling and labelling for the sake of taunting rather than for the sake of categorizing or understanding.
For example, saying something like, “Conservatives are Nazis” is a ridiculous accusation. Overlooking, for the moment, the generic and therefore unhelpful comparison, it is an error in scientic processing. You can’t categorize an entire large group as a subsection of a smaller group. Conservatives, by definition, are people with a political perspective that is more regressive or reactionary than the current norm; Nazis, or National Socialists, are, in fact, reactionary by nearly all current standards–but the national socialist perspective exists only on a certain segment of reactionary thought.
Liberals who make a statement such as “Conservatives are Nazis” are guilty of unthinking blather.
On the other hand, Matthew, when you say that KKK members historically vote with the Democratic party, you aren’t connecting them to any political perspective. Democrats aren’t by definition liberal; Republicans aren’t by definition conservative. They are simply party names. In fact, historically, the Democratic party usually sympathized with a conservative perspective while the Republican party sympathized with a liberal perspective. Also, historically, the Dems were typically associated with the southern population and the Reps with the northern.
Party alignments is a matter of shifting political alliances rather than shifting political theory.
KKK operations follow a reactionary perspective; they fall on the right side of the political spectrum.
It is true that Socialism is a perspective that falls on the left side. National Socialism, however, falls far to the right of our current norm. Though an interesting add-on to that truth would be this: while the Nazis used brute force to secure continual majority support, they did acquire a considerable majority (of those people considered citizens). Which, of course, from a German-local perspective, means that National Socialism didn’t fall as far to the right of the center as it does now. Nazis, from that local perspective, weren’t fringe reactionaries.
But that’s exactly the point: reactionary (rightist) thinking is about isolating “power” into smaller and smaller groups, until, eventually, all power resides within the individual–government will no longer be necessary. Revolutionary (leftist) thinking is about expanding “power” into larger and larger groups, until, eventually, power has been spread so thin that it no longer has any relevance–government will no longer be necessary.
isn’t it interesting that both ultimate perspectives end up taking humanity to the same place? but the journey to this end would be very, very different.
taboo
July 17, 2006 at 3:34 pm
Kevin, I would say to you, while it is at least the right side of the extreme perspective to call us, it is still inaccurate. But at least you wouldn’t be calling us socialists.
Jon, thank you for your perspective. I happen to agree with it for the most part. Extremists do help us keep our perspective, but they should never RULE in my opinion. There is great danger in that.
Taboo, that is an interesting perspective, while at least in the mainstream, it is wrong. By your definition, both Mark and I are extreme moderates. It is semantics from my point of view. Conservatives such as myself look to conserve our society and our heritage, as well as protect our general way of life. Admittedly I am very close to my position, so I don’t see it as extreme or reactionary.
Tracifish, Glad to help, but as was pointed out in a comment, Democrat and Republican do not mean liberal and conservative. Parties change, left and right do not. However, in my book, extremists are extremists and are rarely useful.
July 21, 2006 at 7:17 pm
Great discussion! Ummm, Jon, do I still have your F.A. Hayek book?!?!