SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Raymond Duray who wrote (10717)3/23/2004 11:44:07 AM
From: Oblomov  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 110194
 
(OT OT)
I was basing it on the socialist economic program. Naziism is NOT leftist in the modern, US political sense of the word. It was an antiliberal fusion of socialist and conservative elements - but conservative in the sense of de Maistre, not that of Burke or Hayek. So US conservativism would have little in common with the NSDAP ideology, but continental European conservativism would have some shared positions. Likewise, European leftism still has antiliberal elements that it would share with Naziism.

There is no "pure" practice of any political theory. For example, Dwight Macdonald tried to make the case that Stalin's USSR represented a corruption of Marxist-Leninist ideology. Maybe so, but for three decades Stalin was its leading advocate.

What's interesting is that in the US, UK, and Australia, unlike continental Europe, both the right and left have strong classical liberal traditions, though the two sides emphasize different parts of the heritage. I think this tradition, and each side keeping the other in check, has prevented us from falling victim to native totalitarianism, at least so far.

I'll retract my statement that Hitler was a leftist, because Anglo-American leftism is more than just socialist economics, as I'm sure you'd agree. But he was a socialist, as I think history demonstrates.