Why were the Nazis called the National SOCIALIST party?

Watch
chloeee!
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#1
How on earth were the Nazis 'socialists' or did that mean something different back then to what it does now? Didn't they hate the Communists, and isn't communism basically a stronger form of socialism?
2
reply
username329981
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#2
Report 9 years ago
#2
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiw...-sounds-babbli
0
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report 9 years ago
#3
(Original post by chloeee!)
How on earth were the Nazis 'socialists' or did that mean something different back then to what it does now? Didn't they hate the Communists, and isn't communism basically a stronger form of socialism?
In their manifesto they had a number of socialist policies. Taking control of some industry and taking the land from certain people all quite socialist policies among others.
0
reply
Suetonius
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#4
Report 9 years ago
#4
There are many examples of this. Iraqi Baathism also claimed to be "socialist" and mixed it with the notion of Pan-Arabism. They also repressed Iraq's secular left, the PUK (the Iraqi member of the 'Socialist International'), liberal democrats, and so on. Their commitment to totalitarianism, and the concentration of power in the hands of the few, was far more overt than their asinine titles.
2
reply
badger-man
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#5
Report 9 years ago
#5
National Socialism is the idea of applying socialism to just one nation, not the entire Earth as most socialists believe. I believe the Nazi Party were the first to try to implement this idea.
2
reply
Hylean
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#6
Report 9 years ago
#6
Because when they started, they were actually a Socialist party and Hitler slowly changed it to a more right-wing slant. They still retained some socialist ideas, though.
4
reply
tc92
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#7
Report 9 years ago
#7
Because once you get past the racist ideology (if that is at all possible), they had some socialist policies, just as the BNP, outside their racism, follow left-wing policies on issues such as the economy.

Left and right mean very little these days: a "left-wing" party like the Liberals can be so far supporting right-wing economic policies on the role of the state in the economy with their free-market ideas.
0
reply
py0alb
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8
Report 9 years ago
#8
Because the "right wing" and "left wing" effectively meet round the back to become totalitarianism. Hence the reason Stalin and Hitler had such similar policies, despite being diametric opposites in theory.
3
reply
beepbeeprichie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#9
Report 9 years ago
#9
For the same reason the BNP is socialist.
0
reply
lizlaz350
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#10
Report 9 years ago
#10
I think it was because they were two parties that joined together and one of the parties was actually socialist, but then joined with another party that turned them into facists.

I seem to remember learning that in history but I may have completely misunderstood it.
0
reply
Simplicity
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#11
Report 9 years ago
#11
This thread is painful.

(Original post by py0alb)
Because the "right wing" and "left wing" effectively meet round the back to become totalitarianism. Hence the reason Stalin and Hitler had such similar policies, despite being diametric opposites in theory.
Firstly, learn the difference between totalitarianism and authoritarian, note guess which was which. Stalin was nothing like Hitler, policies where totally different.

(Original post by badger-man)
National Socialism is the idea of applying socialism to just one nation, not the entire Earth as most socialists believe. I believe the Nazi Party were the first to try to implement this idea.
Hitler was big business and stressed upper class and middle class values. Going as far to put into a program that would see all working class people have less children. Not socialists as he didn't believe that everyone was equal.

If you read Mein Kempf he believed that people will struggle and that the best would reach the top. So in a sense he believed in capitalism.

(Original post by lizlaz350)
I think it was because they were two parties that joined together and one of the parties was actually socialist, but then joined with another party that turned them into facists.
Incorrect. Google Anton Drexler.
0
reply
py0alb
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#12
Report 9 years ago
#12
(Original post by Simplicity)
This thread is painful.


Firstly, learn the difference between totalitarianism and authoritarian, note guess which was which. Stalin was nothing like Hitler, policies where totally different.

.

You learn the difference, dip****. Both Stalin and Hitler fall under the definition of totalitarian. Even a cursory glance at wikipedia would have furnished you with at least a basic understanding. I guess even that was too much effort for you eh?


Totalitarianism is an extreme version of authoritarianism. Building on the work of Yale political scientist Juan Linz, Paul C. Sondrol of the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs has examined the characteristics of authoritarian and totalitarian dictators and organized them in a chart

Totalitarianism Authoritarianism
Charisma High Low
Role conception Leader as function Leader as individual
Ends of power Public Private
Corruption Low High
Official ideology Yes No
Limited pluralism No Yes
Legitimacy Yes No

Sondrol argues that while both authoritarianism and totalitarianism are forms of autocracy, they differ in "key dichotomies":

(1) Unlike their bland and generally unpopular authoritarian brethren, totalitarian dictators develop a charismatic 'mystique' and a mass-based, pseudo-democratic interdependence with their followers via the conscious manipulation of a prophetic image.
(2) Concomitant role conceptions differentiate totalitarians from authoritarians. Authoritarians view themselves as individual beings, largely content to control; and maintain the status quo. Totalitarian self-conceptions are largely teleological. The tyrant is less a person than an indispensable 'function' to guide and reshape the universe. (3) Consequently, the utilisation of power for personal aggrandizement is more evident among authoritarians than totalitarians. Lacking the binding appeal of ideology, authoritarians support their rule by a mixture of instilling fear and granting rewards to loyal collaborators, engendering a kleptocracy.[6]

Thus, compared to totalitarian systems, authoritarian systems may also leave a larger sphere for private life, lack a guiding ideology, tolerate some pluralism in social organization, lack the power to mobilize the whole population in pursuit of national goals, and exercise their power within relatively predictable limits.
2
reply
Joluk
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#13
Report 9 years ago
#13
(Original post by chloeee!)
How on earth were the Nazis 'socialists' or did that mean something different back then to what it does now? Didn't they hate the Communists, and isn't communism basically a stronger form of socialism?
Because they were socialists, it means the same now as it did then. They nationalised major industries, brought in higher tax rates, started major social programs, invested in public services, focused on reducing unemployment etc etc. They were just raving nationalists at the same time.
0
reply
metro2610
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#14
Report 9 years ago
#14
(Original post by chloeee!)
How on earth were the Nazis 'socialists' or did that mean something different back then to what it does now? Didn't they hate the Communists, and isn't communism basically a stronger form of socialism?
The Nazis started life as the NSDAP (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei) under Anton Drexler (correct me if I'm wrong someone), otherwise known as the 'German Worker's Party' for short. With Hitler's involvement, the party introduced more Nationalistic policies in it's 'Twenty-five point programme' (Their manifesto, basically) but kept many socialist ones in order to create cross-ideological appeal, which would eventually attract more voters and support, especially after 1924-5.

I guess then, the name just stuck because it was the party's origin.
0
reply
username196545
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 9 years ago
#15
The far right and the far left can be closer than you think.
1
reply
badger-man
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#16
Report 9 years ago
#16
(Original post by Simplicity)

Hitler was big business and stressed upper class and middle class values. Going as far to put into a program that would see all working class people have less children. Not socialists as he didn't believe that everyone was equal.
You're confusing socialism with communism (there is a difference). The communist ideology strives for a classless society. Socialism involves redistributing resources to help those who are less well off. (These are just simple definitions. The ideologies are far more deep obviously)
0
reply
Simplicity
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#17
Report 9 years ago
#17
(Original post by py0alb)
You learn the difference, dip****. Both Stalin and Hitler fall under the definition of totalitarian. Even a cursory glance at wikipedia would have furnished you with at least a basic understanding. I guess even that was too much effort for you eh?
Lol at wikipedia. What ten year wrote that?
2
reply
py0alb
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#18
Report 9 years ago
#18
(Original post by Simplicity)
Lol at wikipedia. What ten year wrote that?

I don't know Professor Paul C. Sondrol of the University of Colorado personally, but I think he's probably older than 10 years old.


If you aren't convinced by wikipedia, just follow the references, they say exactly the same thing. Either way, you really should make sure you know what you're talking about before you start getting all sarcastic about other people's posts, otherwise it's you that looks like the idiot.
3
reply
Invictus_88
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#19
Report 9 years ago
#19
(Original post by chloeee!)
How on earth were the Nazis 'socialists' or did that mean something different back then to what it does now? Didn't they hate the Communists, and isn't communism basically a stronger form of socialism?
It isn't difficult to see the hand of socialism in there;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...m_of_the_NSDAP
0
reply
Howard
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#20
Report 9 years ago
#20
(Original post by chloeee!)
How on earth were the Nazis 'socialists' or did that mean something different back then to what it does now? Didn't they hate the Communists, and isn't communism basically a stronger form of socialism?
Because they were socialists.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What are you most likely to do if you don't get the grades you were expecting?

Go through Clearing (150)
37.78%
Take autumn exams (123)
30.98%
Look for a job (14)
3.53%
Consider an apprenticeship (17)
4.28%
Take a year out (68)
17.13%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (25)
6.3%

Watched Threads

View All