Amazon.com Widgets
Attention: Debate.org is closing and the website will be shut down on June 5, 2022. New Topics can no longer be posted and Sign Up has been disabled. Existing Topics will still function as usual until the website is taken offline. Members can download their content by using the Download Data button in My Account.
  • No responses have been submitted.
  • No, Adolf Hitler was a national socialist. A Nazi. Short german for "National Socialist German Workers Party". I will summarize the sequence of events.

    In the 1800s, The fall of Feudalism was underway. The Americans had won their independence from Britan, The French revolution shook the seat of power in western Europe. India started their fight for independence in the 1850s. This paved the way for new ideas. Enter socialism.

    The French revolutionaries primarily Maxamillian Robspierre can be looked at as a kind of proto socialist. Despite his revolution ending in fire and blood, The socialist message of worker rights was in demand as we reached the turn of the century. Enter Marx and Engles.

    In the mid 1800s Karl Marx articulated Marxism and the transitional role socialism would play in an end result communist utopia. This spured widespread socialist movements across Europe and Asia. Enter The German workers party.

    The German workers party was the precursor to the Nazi party. Not so much marxist or communist as anti capitalist the party was eventually taken over by the antisemetic wing lead in part by Adolf Hitler. Also during which time uniting with a paramilitary organization called Freikorps, Which was largely anti communist and had much in common with Hitlers view of a German superpower. Enter Hitlers rise to power and yhe Nazi party.

    After the end of WW1, Europe (especially germany) was in pieces. Hitler was able to harness the fuel of the socialist movement at a time when the german people were living in squalor. He took the title of National Socialism to populize his movement. However, The "National" aspect of "National Socialism" was not ignored. In place of state run industry he bolstered private industry that would fuel the German war machine in an almost "crony capitalist" sense. Enforced by the heavy tyrannical hand of the state.

    In conclusion Nazism, Was not socialist in nature. It was another formulated political system that occurred in the wake of feudalist europe. The "socialist" misconception comes obviously from the name but also from the false idea that Hitler believed state ownership was a form of Marxism.

  • In name only.

    I've seen poor arguments from conservatives suggesting that we should oppose Socialism because Hitler identified as a Socialist and the Nazis themselves were called National Socialists. To the people who tout this kind of logic, I ask you: Is the regime of North Korea a Democratic Republic just because they call themselves a Democratic Republic? No, Don't be silly. It's characteristic of fascists like Hitler or Stalin to use the names of of popular ideas to promote their regime and make it seem more pleasant than it really is.

    The Nazis were not a worker's party anymore than North Korea is pro-democracy. Surely enough, When the North Korean regime falls, There will be pundits claiming that Democracy is bad because of North Korea's incorrect self labeling or tankies making North Korea out to be based just because they had Democratic Republic in the title.

    The actual socialists in Germany were chased out of the political scene or the country by Hitler who hated Marxism. There's a good video on Youtube titled "Was Hitler a Socialist" by Three Arrows. His videos are well researched. He provides sources in the description.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.