The Instigator
zommunist
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
Stottinator
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The Nazis are socialists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
zommunist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/26/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,248 times Debate No: 57178
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (18)
Votes (1)

 

zommunist

Pro

I am challenging Sottinator to a debate about whether the Nazis are socialist or not. I will be arguing that the Nazis are socialists, and my opponent against.

I will not simply define socialism for this round, because the definition of socialism is too broad and that as socialists, myself and Stottinator understand 'what we're talking about'. Having said so, we are not trying to say that the Nazis are good (or bad for that matter). This is simply a debate about how the Nazis should be classfied, as socialist or else, not about whether we support their policies or not.

Round one is for acceptance
Round two is for opening arguments
Round three is for new arguments/rebuttals
Round four is for conclusions and rebuttals

I await my opponent's acceptance...
Stottinator

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
zommunist

Pro

Thank you for accepting the challenge, I shall start off with a quote by Hitler...


In 1930, Otto Strasser interviewed Hitler, in which Hitler said, 'I am a socialist'.
Source:http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk...

Although admittedly the Telegraph and Daniel Hannan are right-wing, the Indepedent (a central-left paper) wrote a similar article talking about Hitler's 'socialist dream'.

Similarly, in Jonah Goldberg's bestselling Liberal Fascism, he argued that Hitler was indeed a leftist. In the early days of the Weimar Republic, a far-leftist would either choose between the Communist and the Nazis. The conversion between the two is very easy. The Nazis and the Communist both hated the liberal values advocated by Weimar officials, and both spoke of collectivism, statism, welfare, mass rallies etc. The similarities are more than superficial- Hitler's programmes, from the Autobahn construction (similar to the gigantomania of Stalinist Russia), to the Volksradio and Volkswagen (People's Radio and People's Car), to his various state directed programmes like KDF, Blood and Soil as well as the DAF (Deutsche Arbeitefront or the German Worker's Front). According to the third edition of the AQA GCSE Modern World History book by Ben Walsh, there was a speech by Goebbels, in which he showed his contempt for their 'capitalist tormentors'. Furthermore, according to a different academic source, Goebbels wanted to create a common front with the Communists to defeat the bourgeois in Germany.

Source: Fest, The Face of the Third Reich, p 89

The clue is in the name as well: the National SOCIALIST German WORKERS' Party. Moreover, Hitler would often speak to his Parteigenosse or just Genosse during speeches. Genosse in a political context is the German word for 'comrade'.

I now turn to my opponents for his counterarguments...
Stottinator

Con

Stottinator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
zommunist

Pro

In the spirit of goodwill and respect to my good friend Stottinator, I shall also skip this round...
Stottinator

Con

Stottinator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
zommunist

Pro

Henceforth I am able to conclude that Hitler was a socialist.

The weight of evidence is overwhelming- Hitler had massive state led public projects and schemes, KDF and Autobahn construction among many (source: various GCSE and A level history textbooks). Hitler's Germany was a very collectivist society- the word Volksgemeinschaft and Volksgenosse could not sound more socialist if one can understand German. Hitler thought he was a saviour of the German people, and spoke of 'German democracy' in his book, Mein Kampf. The name National Socialist German Workers Party was not just a window dressing designed to fool outsiders. As noted by Hayek, Hitler's anti-semitism was caused by his hatred for the capitalist order of Austria at the time (source: F. Hayek, the Road to Serfdom).

To finish off, perhaps we should have a look at some Nazi propagandas as a comparison to a similar socialist state, namely the USSR, and look at the revolutionary natures of them (I will not quote the sources because the images can be found just by typing in 'Soviet propaganda' and 'Nazi propaganda' in Google Search):




Thank you for the debate and thank you my esteemed opponent and audience.
Please, support pro!
Stottinator

Con

Stottinator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by zommunist 2 years ago
zommunist
I guess, but I was a Communist due to various reasons.
Posted by zommunist 2 years ago
zommunist
But that's the problem with the majority of the socialists. They believe and actively try to do things in accordance to what they perceive to be 'the greater good'. Furthermore, I can't help to think that you have a very black-and-white distinctions of what some socialists actually believe. I am a largely relativist person- I am not completely for or against most things.
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
That's not stereotyping or generalizing, per say. I believe cultures have regional influences. For example, someone born in Soviet Russia is more likely to be a communist. Someone born in Fascist Italy is more likely to be an authoritarian or fascist. This is just how the world works. Someone born in Iran is more likely to be Islamic. You said you were once communist, so this is the most reasonable thing to assume. Correct?
Posted by zommunist 2 years ago
zommunist
To whether Sun Yat-sen does, the answer is yes. Also, you are kind of stereotyping to say that being from China makes you a Communist. If the same analogy can be applied, I'm sure North Koreans still believe in Juche (to some extent they still do, thanks to brainwashing). But anyway, perhaps it would be better to say that I was later on a communist as opposed to a Communist.
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
There is still a Sun Yat Sen cult in China. I am wondering if the government there also reveres him as a national hero like they do in Taiwan?
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
I find it interesting that you're from China. That might explain why you were once a communist. Today, the politically correct term for socio capitalist, is progressive, which is a philosophy that was developed by Sun Yat Sen, which is actually the most correct form of socialism. The first principle of the people was in the San-Min doctrine was Democracy. The third principle of the people, was the "welfare of the people". Sun Yat Sen took the definition of democracy a bit more seriously than the west though. He thought democracy had to be based 100% on the will of the populist majority. A theory that is making Taiwan, Switzerland, and South Korea some of the richest plots of land in the world (sorry if your beliefs are against these nations). True socialism, which the Chinese have screwed up (They are just an authoritarian capitalist country), is democratic in nature.

With that said, I am also a capitalist, as its silly to think the people always know everything about economics, in the macro or micro scale. We need to set a line between free market and people's market, which is something that has left nations torn. Socio-capitalist nations will never fail. I am confident in that claim. True direct democracy, with the will of the people and the will of the 1% equally represented is the best course of action for a progressing world.
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
This was the same definition I was using. Like it says, socialism is the control of the economy based on the communities (communions) will. Which brings me back to your argument. How did the community have a say in Nazi Germany? Germany wasn't a socialist state, because the people had no say in how the economy was run. Maybe in the manner that the government oversaw a private sector, but this really comes down to one simple yes or no contention. If you can prove the people's will was represented in the economic policies of Nazi Germany, you win. If your opponent can prove the people's will was not represented in the economic policies of Nazi Germany, then you lose.

I think your opponent has the upper hand here.
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
One second, I am writing my response to your post.
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
Most radical ideologies are based on the idea of a end game. Both left wing communism and right wing fascism (which Hitler labels himself in mein kampf) advocate for a state of self sufficiency as the final stage of the nation building process. Communism was the level of complete communion culturally integrated within people, and Autarky, the final stage of fascism (In NK, they call it juche), is the stage of complete self reliance on a nation. A movement of rule by authority to make a nation powerful and self sufficient without the institution of foreign x factors. I am trying to develop a radical ideology just for the sake of doing so.

I am short on ideas. Unlike radical Marxism and Fascism, which use authority as the second step to self sufficiency, my philosophy would be built on the idea that liberty can escalate a nation to such a level. It has been hard given the fact that you are dealing with to many x factors in a democracy, but I'm sure I will figure something out. All radical ideologies have evident flaws.
Posted by zommunist 2 years ago
zommunist
I was once a Communist.

Socialism, according to the dictionary definition, is 'A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.' More appropriately, I think it is the organisation for the 'social' or 'societal good' (hence the name 'social-ism'). The reason why I try not to define socialism is because it is a quite big 'umbrella' idea. But nevertheless, 'from each according to his ability and to each according to his contribution' is what Marx said socialism is.

Also, National Socialism has been around before Hitler, and not necessarily anti-semitic.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
zommunistStottinatorTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF