Template:Vital article

	Nazism is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 6, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted July 11, 2005 Peer review Reviewed
Current status: Former featured article candidate

This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Politics C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Discrimination C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. LGBT studies C‑class This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Jewish history C‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Germany C‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:Wikipedia CD selection

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30

Revolutionary not Reactionary Talk:Nazism and socialism

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Nazism had a powerful influence on neighboring European countries. It seems to me to be appropriate to include some reference to this such as: It was also contemporaneous or promoted in other European countries, particularly those with large ethnic German communities such as Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania and Yugoslavia

• Nicholas M. Nagy-Talavera(2001) The Green Shirts and the Others: A History of Fascism in Hungary and Romania http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gsKbQgAACAAJ&dq=nagy-Talavera&hl=en&sa=X&ei=zJ2UU5OaMYal8AHY-4GACA&ved=0CEgQ6AEwAQ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imersion (talk • contribs) 13:43, June 8, 2014

I don't think it's appropriate to equate Hungary and Czechoslovakia in the lede as countries where Nazism took hold. Hungary as a nation fell to Nazi governance in its entirety and conducted itself as a Nazi state, whereas Czechoslovakia only did so after German invasion. An element (the German minority) within Czechoslovakia supported Nazism, but the same could be said for the United Kingdom. Czechoslovakia should be removed from the lede. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.48.18 (talk • contribs) 04:51, July 21, 2014

I found this about Aryan in Mein Kampf. Hitler seems to be talking about indo-germans when talking about Aryan. I think this should end the discussion about who the Nazis thought were the herrenvolk (master people, usually mistranslated to master race). It were ancient people of Germany that had moved to India, indo-germans.

No definition of the word 'Aryan* is acceptable. German lexicographers were hard pressed to hit upon an accurate description. The term itself is probably of Sanskrit origin, and seems to have meant 'friends/ It was next assumed that these 'friends' were Indo-Germans, who (it was further as- sumed) had invaded India and subjugated the 'lesser breeds/ Finally 'Aryan* became just a synonym for 'Indo-German.' The 1931 edition of the encyclopedia Der grosse Herder said: 'Recently some have used (ethnologically, in an incorrect way) 'Aryan* to indicate Indo-Germans in general. In this case, the term is used as in the nature of a slogan in the struggle over the self-determination and preservation of our race against Jewry, which is of a different order.' For this and similar definitions (surely discreet enough), the earlier volumes of this encyclopedia were ordered withdrawn from circulation. In practice the word is officially used today as a racial term.

Link: https://archive.org/stream/meinkampf035176mbp/meinkampf035176mbp_djvu.txt

37.253.210.97 (talk) 01:45, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There´s something that still bothers me in this article.... If nazism (or national socialism) has so many characteristics of leftists forms or government, like government centralization, anti-capitalism, and totalitarism, among others, why the article still consider it as a "far-right" movement? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.187.133.122 (talk) 15:15, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just see the countless discussions above – and in the archive. Your basic premises are just wrong. Rgds ✦ _hugarheimur 17:49, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. This is an old and somewhat boring debate, and not directly related to any likely improvements to the page, but for what it's worth, the characteristics you single out are not universally or exclusively those of the left as most serious political scientists see the world (for example there are plenty of non-totalitarian leftists and quite a few anti-capitalist rightists). And Nazism is usually bracketed, along with other forms of fascism, as a phenomenon of the right in both academic and general, standard discourse, for reasons not worth repeating here and which discussion here is not going to change. Whether individual commenters or WP editors agree with that broad classification is neither here nor there. Perhaps the next time this comes up, the thread could simply be closed off and hatted. N-HH talk/edits 21:32, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is always hard to tell when this question is being asked in good faith but clearly it is asked in good faith at least some of the time. Maybe we could save ourselves some trouble, while still providing anybody who is genuinely interested with a good quality answer, if we made a little FAQ for this and just referred them to that each time it is asked? --DanielRigal (talk) 22:32, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would just say that articles are supposed to represent what reliable sources say. Further discussion is unproductive, since people who think the nazis were left-wing do not follow the same reasoning process that we do, that is they do not examine evidence and draw conclusions but selectively look for evidence to support their views. I suppose someone who knows little about politics could wonder why a party that called itself "National Socialist" was right-wing, but I have not come across anyone. TFD (talk) 22:51, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is probably that there is differnt understandings of the "left" and "right". The article claims that they are on the right "because they belived superior elements in society had the right to dominate". The people on the right don't belive this, and view the term as "freedom, liberty, capitalism etc.". And view left as "goverment, anti-capitalism, state intervention in private life (totalitarianism), welfaire etc.". The National Socialist parti fit under their defention of the "left". The only difference is nationalism I guess, because todays left are not nationalists. Jacob3939 (talk) 17:16, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are referring to a specific segment of the Right. Most of the "left-wing" policies you mention were introduced by Conservatives and continued by the Nazis. On the other hand, the Nazis actually privatized government owned corporations. Both Left and Right change policies depending on economic circumstances and what is popular at the time. The group that came closest to what you call "right-wing" in the Weimar Republic were "left liberals," who were considered centrist. Some elements on the Left are completely opposed to government, state intervention or welfare, since they see government as an instrument of capitalism. Note that the precursors of the Christian Democratic and Free Democrats voted to make Hitler a dictator while the Social Democrats voted against. TFD (talk) 19:49, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The term right wing is used to describe political positions that are promoting a social hierarchy and social inequality, and hold that they are natural and desirable. The currents that are more moderate are considered to be center-right (christian democrats, national conservatives and economic liberals), and currents that are more extreme are considered to be far-right (fascist, nazis and racial supremacists.). While the term left wing is used to describe political positions promoting social equity and egalitarian society. Again, currents that are more moderate and want to reduce inequality are considered to be center-left (social democrats, democratic socialists), And currents that are more extreme and want to Abolish hierarchy and the class system are considered to be far-left (socialists, communists and anarchists). The word "socialism" in national socialism has a different meaning from system geralaly known as socialism, in the context of national socialism the term "socialism" means social solidarity and economic security for German peoples, but generally speaking socialism is a system in which the means of production are in social ownership and control. Economically Nazi Germany was corporatist state capitalism and it opposed both free-market capitalism and socialism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IWA1864 (talk • contribs) 02:21, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is an interesting point that Nazi is considered by so many as right wing, and I struggled to find information on it for a couple of years. Hitler's economic policy can be described as taking a Keynesian approach, traditionally 'left wing'. Many of the great Socialist thinkers in Germany had a central role in developing 'National Socialism'. The idea Nazi was just called Socialism to appeal to the masses, whilst not being Socialist, is clearly ridiculous. It could be considered right wing socialism and had early support from the Christian (right wing) socialists, but essentially it was authoritarian and collectivist and both left and right wing Germans (and other nations) loved it in the 1930's. Nazi occupies the same political space as Communism, but has a different 'fairy tale'. The right is harking back to a 'glorious past' and the left looks forward to a 'glorious future'. Hitler understood the similarity, he battled Communism because it was common knowledge 'you could easily convert a Communist to a Nazi and vice versa', with socialists acting as the 'fodder' for this. He was not actively attacking liberals, because there were no liberals in 1930's Germany, left and right were Socialist in approach. For the references to pretty much this entire paragraph, please read FA Hayek's 'The Road to Serfdom' written in 1943, it is an excellent treatment of the rise of Fascism from ostensibly left wing beginnings. Hitler did not dismantle democracy in Germany to enact a far right state, it was already gone. But Liberal ideals (traditionally right wing) are not usually concerned with increasing the coercive power of the state and stron governmental control in all aspects of life (Nazi's actually defined how Germans should spend their 'free time' which is obviously nonsense, and also a little to intrusive for a government!). Also, if you want a quick self test on the idea that Nazi is left wing, I sincerely suggest looking up the Nazi Creed and then list points within it that are 1:racist, 2:left wing and 3:right wing (you can have left and right wing racists). You may be surprised at your judgement re left and right in the Nazi Creed. Rhys 11:33, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

We have all heard those arguments before. How Nazism is described cannot be based on users' interpretations but on the assessment of experts. Only if you can persuade the experts they are wrong then we can revise the article. Incidentally, Hayek was not "right wing" in the context of the Weimar Republic, but a centrist. (Conservative=right, liberal=center, socialist=left) TFD (talk) 19:19, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ig farben : zyklon b producer ... after 1945 ig farben continues as basf siemens : siemens built trains, with that were the prisoners deported at concentration camps ... krupp thyssen : paid hitler ... volkswagen vw : founded by hitler ... ferdinand porsche is a friend by hitler ibm built punch cards ... telefunken built propaganda radios ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.193.177.48 (talk) 20:42, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It would be dishonest to write about these companies on this page, because they had no knowlege about the mass killings of Jews and others that would happend. This is also an article about Nazism, their world view. The companies did probably have no choice either. Jacob3939 (talk) 17:18, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's not true, but neither are some of the accusations; for example, IG Farben didn't produce zyklon B - Degussa did. The inventor of it was executed for war crimes. What's a "propaganda radio" as opposed to a "radio"? At any rate, Jacob is correct - this article isn't about Nazi Germany, it's about the Nazi philosophy. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 17:43, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, the article is about Nazism the ideology, rather than how they governed. TFD (talk) 02:51, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A user some time ago removed the specification that the Nazis meant Nordic or Germanic people when talking about "Aryans". Don't you think this should be specified, since people may misunderstand if not included? This has been discussed before and we concluded that it should be included. Jacob3939 (talk) 11:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]