Talk:National Socialism

Please add Portal:National Socialism to "See also". --Crusader (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

The National Socialist definition of socialism

Right-wing populists and their supporters accuse National Socialism of being “left-wing” because National Socialism was “socialist” and “socialism” is left-wing. This is usually done because the worldview (mostly of boomers) says that National Socialism is metaphysically evil and that today's anti-national leftists are just as evil as the National Socialists. The conversation between the right-wing populist Weidel and Elon Musk in particular has revived this accusation.

Of course, National Socialism has nothing to do with Marxism and the National Socialists and the NSDAP have already made it clear themselves what they understand by “socialism”

Since the article is read-only, I suggest it here.

--Heaviness1225 (talk) 18:10, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

All-in-all, I agree ... BUT, the argument is de facto not wrong ... socialism is in general leftist, and as many books have shown, the early NSDAP as well as the SA had leftist, anti-conservative, working-class tendencies. Although I must say, the definitions of "left" and "right" are spongy (especially today), always depending on the source of the academic debate. --Crusader (talk) 19:20, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

National Socialism cannot be described as “left-wing”. The arguments that right-wing populists like to use in favor of it are that there was no Manchester capitalism (there was and still is no Manchester capitalism in Germany) and that there was a centrally administered economy during the war (it is impossible to run a war economy without state planning). National Socialism was an elite ideology that was never characterized by this class-struggle, envious view of history. Emperors, kings, princes, bishops, landowners, industrialists, entrepreneurs, knights and generals were evaluated according to their historical achievements, but the very existence of classes was never questioned. --Heaviness1225 (talk) 22:39, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

National Socialism, as described, is neither left or right as far as in fake terms such as "Far-Right" where the media tries to compare their similarity to Conservatives by leaning "farther right" which of course is false. But the Rightists at the same time will refer to them as Communists because of "Socialism" in the name, Adolf Hitler created National Socialism to counter against international socialism. Those believing that they were leftists, they may as well say they were all "Strasserists" then, a conservative is not as bright as a modern liberal, they both may function differently, but they serve the same group of people. National Socialism has nothing to do with any sides, it seeks an alternative to the modern problem even we face today, I'd have to agree with Crusader.

CelticCross (talk) 21:33, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

As I said, National Socialism was anti-communist. During the Weimar Republic, the most right-wing thing was not National Socialism but a monarchist or someone who wanted to bring back the German principalities with several small states. They also stood by German-Prussian traditions. The NSDAP themselves were economically ideology-free/pragmatic, and had to "deweimarize" Germany. There are also definitive records that prove that there were economic plans for after the war that tended towards a market economy on the market economy - centralized economy spectrum. One prominent example was the proposal that Ludwig Erhard, later Chancellor of the FRG, was to draw up for the National Socialists. This proposal had clear parallels to Erhard's later “social market economy”. And by that I mean his original idea, which was much more deregulated, and not what was later implemented under the influence of Adenauer. At least the commissioning authority was impressed by Erhard's idea of the post-war economy. Egalitarianism, class struggle, materialism and atheism were also explicitly rejected. --Heaviness1225 (talk) 09:35, 1 March 2025 (UTC)