How should Nazism be classified, particularly when compared to socialism? Are these ideologies at opposite ends of a spectrum, or are they simply different sides of the same collectivist coin?
In my humble opinion, both views are correct, which is why I think this triangle is the best way to classify various ideologies.
Nazis are motivated by race hatred and the socialists are motivated by class hatred, so they basically are at opposite ends at the bottom of the triangle.
But both ideologies are against free markets and both put the state over the individual, so they are far away from libertarianism (or classical liberalism) when looking from top to bottom.
These different ways of looking at the issue explain why Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post created a controversy when he decided to “fact check” this statement from gadfly Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene.
According to Kessler, Greene deserved “four Pinocchios” for asserting that Hitler and the Nazis were socialists.
The full name of Hitler’s party was Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. In English, that translates to National Socialist German Workers’ Party. But it was not a socialist party; it was a right-wing, ultranationalist party dedicated to racial purity, territorial expansion and anti-Semitism — and total political control.
…the 1920 Nazi party platform…there are…passages denouncing banks, department stores and “interest slavery.” That could be seen as “a quasi-Marxist rejection of free markets. But these were also typical criticisms in the anti-Semitic playbook …Hitler adamantly rejected socialist ideas, dismantled or banned left-leaning parties and disapproved of trade unions. …We suggest Greene brush up on her history… She earns Four Pinocchios.
This is remarkable. The Nazis called themselves socialists, yet Kessler says Greene is lying for saying the same thing.
I’m not the only one to notice this bizarre example of media bias.
Professor Hannes Gissurarson from Iceland debunked Kessler’s hack analysis.
A ‘fact-checker’ at Washington Post, Glenn Kessler, asserts that a Republican Member of the House of Representatives is wrong in a recent comment on Hitler’s national socialism. It is not, as she had said, a branch of socialism. Kessler writes that the German Nazi Party, despite its name (the National-Socialist Workers’ Party), ‘was not a socialist party…’
In support of his case, Kessler quotes the first eight of the 25 points in the 1920 Nazi political programme… He lukewarmly concedes that in the Nazi programme there were also passages denouncing capitalism. But why does he not quote them as well? …It is hard not to discern the socialist overtones in these points. Why did the Washington Post fact-checker not quote them in full like the first eight? …according to Hayek national socialism could be considered to be the rebellious socialism of the lower middle class… Traditional socialists, democrats as well as communists, shared with Hitler’s national socialists the belief that conscious organisation had to replace the spontaneous order… Hayek is certainly right that there are strong family resemblances between traditional socialism and national socialism. Both are totalitarian creeds.
Professor David Henderson also eviscerated Kessler’s sloppy column.
Glenn Kessler, the Post‘s official fact checker, …analyzes various statements and claims to determine whether they are true. If he finds them false, he awards them Pinocchios, with the number of Pinocchios depending on
the degree of falsehood. The highest number of Pinocchios he awards is 4. On May 29, Glenn Kessler earned his own Pinocchios. …Nazis…really were a socialist party. …Kessler attempts to buttress his case by listing the first 8 of 25 planks in the 1920 Nazi Party platform. Those planks do help his case that the Nazis were anti-Semitic (duh) and nationalists (ditto duh). But what about the other 17 planks? …pretty socialistic.
Here are some of those planks that Kessler conveniently omitted.
11. Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of rent-slavery. …
13. We demand the nationalization of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).
14. We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
15. We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare. …
17. We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on land and prevention of all speculation in land.
Henderson also zings Kessler for using a misleading quote from Martin Niemoller.
By the way, the Nazis didn’t merely advocate for socialism in an early platform. They also implemented statist policies once they took power.
Back in 2007, Michael Moynihan wrote about the Nazi welfare state in a book review for Reason.
…the Nazis maintained popular support—a necessary precondition for the “final solution”—not because of terror or ideological affinity but through a simple system of “plunder,” “bribery,” and a generous welfare state. …Requisitioned Jewish property, resources stolen from the conquered, and punitive taxes levied on local businesses insulated citizens from shortages and allowed the regime to create a “racist-totalitarian welfare state.”
…To understand Hitler’s popularity, …”it is necessary to focus on the socialist aspect of National Socialism.” …Adolf Eichmann viewed National Socialism and communism as “quasi-siblings,” explaining in his memoirs that he “inclined towards the left and emphasized socialist aspects every bit as much as nationalist ones.” As late as 1944, Propaganda Minister Josef Goebbels publicly celebrated “our socialism,” reminding his war-weary subjects that Germany “alone [has] the best social welfare measures.” Contrast this, he advised, with the Jews, who were the very “incarnation of capitalism.” …Hitler implemented a variety of interventionist economic policies, including price and rent controls, exorbitant corporate taxes, frequent “polemics against landlords,” subsidies to German farmers…and harsh taxes on capital gains, which Hitler himself had denounced as “effortless income.”
The bottom line is that the Nazis are justifiably hated for reasons that have nothing to do with economic policy.
But it’s also true that their economic policy was a version of socialism (fascism involves government control rather than government ownership, but the result is the same).
Here are two videos from Prager University for those who want more information. First, we can learn about communism and Nazism.
Second, we can learn about the history of fascism.
Let’s wrap up by quoting George Will on the interrelated ideas of fascism, Nazism, and socialism.
Fascism…was a recoil against Enlightenment individualism: the idea that good societies allow reasoning, rights-bearing people to define for themselves the worthy life. …Mussolini, a fervent socialist
until his politics mutated into a rival collectivism, distilled fascism to this: “Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” The Nazi Party — the National Socialist German Workers’ Party — effected a broad expansion of socialism’s agenda…
Last, but not least, here’s a reminder that we should be very wary of demagogues who promise goodies.
P.S. Kessler should have “fact checked” the last part of Rep. Greene’s statement. As much as I dislike “democratic socialism,” today’s Democrats are not trying to impose a totalitarian system.
[…] every leftist is a socialist (and you can argue that not every socialist is a […]
[…] not every leftist is a socialist (and you can argue that not every socialist is a […]
[…] right” fascism of Benito Mussolini. From an economic perspective, though, it would be more accurate to say that Mussolini is […]
[…] an economic perspective, though, it would be more accurate to say that Mussolini is “far […]
[…] definition of socialism (government ownership of the means of production), the fascist version (nominal private ownership but government control), or the Bernie/AOC version […]
[…] using the technical definition of socialism (government ownership of the means of production), the fascist version (nominal private ownership but government control), or the Bernie/AOC version (confiscatory […]
just for fun….. it might be interesting to read “The National Socialist’s 25-point Plan” and compare it to the current positions of both the democrat socialist and republican party platforms… the last election cycle… one socialist democrat candidate for President introduced “a 21st Century Economic Bill of Rights.” largely based on positions outlined in the Stalin’s “1936 Constitution of the Soviet Union”… it’s included as well…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_the_Democratic_Party
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_the_Republican_Party
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_Constitution_of_the_Soviet_Union
National Socialism is Altrurian looter economics plus Lutheran Positive Christianity and eugenic determination to expunge individualism via racial culling. This is roughly the same thing today’s Republican party is all about. The 1920 NSDAP program and the Enabling Act speech in the Reichstag make this so painfully evident that Republicans skip all the relevant passages hoping nobody will ever compare their platforms with Hitler’s. Rotsa ruck with that.
Dan, you missed out the most important word in that sentence: “yet.”
National Socialism provided Hitler with a command economy… and a means to exploit German patriotism through a focused Nationalist agenda… He demonized part of his population… exploited anti-Semitic racism… and turned one of the finest educational systems in Europe into a propaganda mill… he is responsible for the deaths and displacement of over 28M people… the democide attributed to the Nazi government is just under 21M… that’s 49M dead… with Europe largely destroyed… Hitler blended Socialism with Nationalism in order to maximize his influence over the economy… industry… and most important… the German People… was Hitler a Socialist? a Militarist? or just a Lunatic… maybe a Socialist Lunatic………………..
Whatever iteration of toxic ideology our current Leftists are trying to forcibly install, no thinking person should want any part of it and yet, they long ago began their own “march through the institutions” starting with universities…where teachers and leaders of industry and gov’t and journalists went to be prepared for their future positions.
[…] Were Hitler’s National Socialists Really Socialists? […]
You did not correct prior post or place it into the comment section:
Here again is the correct post:
George Will, an aging talking head with zero real-world experience at being a practicing capitalist who in his ignorance judges a real capitalist such as Trump. That was enough to make a typical person want to throw up. There is and never will be any meaningful comparison between Trumpism and Fascism. Observant citizens know that Trump was not a feckless person like George Will who is completely out of his element when discussing capitalism. Trump is a person who hid nothing from the public and during his public discussions, his mind was crystal clear with his points put forward that all could easily digest. No president in my lifetime has been more transparent than Trump and I have listened to many, starting with Truman and on up to Biden.
A real leader exposes national ongoing problems that the country faces and offers solutions for Congress to act upon these same problems. If Congress does not act then it’s up to a caring president to place an appropriate temporary solution (presidential edict) to plug the leak of illegal immigrants, dope smugglers, and other crooks illegally crossing our borders, etc.
Trump is the first president in my lifetime that outlined real problems such as our immigration problems (since at least LBJ). Even my hero R.Reagan screwed up our national borders with his silly idea of giving citizenship to illegals to obtain more stringent future laws and walls, which never happened. Reagan passed the immigration problem forward to Trump to correct. I hate presidents hiding behind pleasant platitudes who come up with half-baked solutions. Seemingly, that is something that George Will likes, never solving a problem.
I have spent from 1959 to 2003 in one form of being a bureaucrat to another. The major problem in our government hiring practices is that NO ONE should be in any form of government position, from janitor to president, for more than 10 years total in a lifetime. No one should be allowed into either an elected or bureaucratic job until that person has been in private employment for at least ten years before being eligible for any government job. The Administrative State started by W. Wilson has to be finally eliminated. The Administrative State was just another way of establishing a totalitarian government. In 2021 we have recreated the monarchial type of governance (like old-world Great Britain) in the USA and we need to return to a limited government as proposed by our founding fathers.
Correct one word (Trump to Truman) from prior post.
[…] Source: Were Hitler’s National Socialists Really Socialists? | International Liberty […]
That huge improvement in living standards since 1800 (in those countries which practiced some form of capitalism) is absolutely true. My only quibble is that improvements did not stop in the 1970s.
At the risk of proposing a No True Scotsman, socialists believe that the amount of wealth in a system (country, world, etc.) is fixed. Hitler believed in the shrinking markets fallacy, where there were only so many resources to go around in a country, so you had to take over your neighbors or eventually starve.
When someone talks about “more than his fair share”, they’re just calling back to the concept that there is a share at all. If you can’t create wealth, then you can only buy it fairly or steal it unfairly, and since he’s wealthy and we’re not, it’s stealing.
My personal counterargument is that I, and 90% of the US now, are functionally wealthier than every king, dictator, or conquerer before 1800. I can walk to my kitchen and open a cabinet full of preserved canned goods, a stocked fridge, and a freezer. I can turn a tap on and get more fresh drinking water in a day than I could drink in a decade. My waste flows in pipes away to be treated, instead of sitting in a cesspool breeding diseases. With one trip to the store, I can get fresh bananas, avocado, berries, and tomatoes, something impossible to anyone with any amount of money then. In comparison, the nutritional composition of even a king’s diet in 1800 was a starvation diet. One button press, and my house is my preferred comfortable temperature, no matter the outside temperature. And let’s not even go into the availability of cars, planes, the Internet, entertainment, gadgets, etc.
The socialists (Communists, fascists, etc.) tried to propose the shrinking markets fallacy into the headwind of the largest expansion of wealth in the poor’s hands in the history of mankind (1800 to 1970s). That’s why socialism has failed in the poor, and the intellectuals have had to turn to the rich to finance it.