I might just not be reading correctly, but on the off chance I parsed your comment correctly, I respond to:

> The Z in Nazi is for "sozialistische" === socialist

by pointing out the Nazis were not, in fact socialist. They executed socialists and communists, but called themselves socialist in the same way the DPRK and PROC call themselves republics.

▲

colechristensen 5 days ago | parent [-]

The Nazis and the Communists were different flavors of collective society based governments that put the whole ahead of the individual with a tight control over the thoughts and behaviors of people. Government, business, and industry blended together and you couldn't be in business without sharing the ideology and sharing power with the government.

"not socialism" is nonsense by people who really like socialism, nazism was just a different flavor of socialism and saying otherwise has been part of the propaganda in favor of socialists for a century.

You can be nice and have a socialist society, but it's also a lot easier to have a dictator rise to power in a socialist society because it's easier to hijack the collectivist mindset into a collective with extreme loyalty to an autocrat. You just have to make them angry and afraid.

▲

actionfromafar 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

Reflection: I have never seen upfront a more collectivist mindset than MAGA.

▲

LinXitoW 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You've now watered down your frankly crazy statement of "Nazis were socialist, actually" to "Nazis and socialists a group of people that make policies to improve the wellbeing of that group". This fits every single other form of governance, outside of anarchy or extreme versions of libertarianism.

There's absolutely no good reason to ever make the statements you've made, outside of trying to make Nazis look better.

▲

colechristensen 5 days ago | parent [-]

I swear to god everybody is just stupid and thinks socialism means "stuff I like"

Nothing you said there is true.

	▲	KPGv2 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		You're the one claiming the Nazis were socialist, which makes you look like a fool at best, and like a liar at worst. A cursory understanding of pre-war politics in German, which you could get from any number of sources, would lay bare how wrong the idea is. > Were the Nazis socialist? https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists Answer: "No." > Were the Nazis socialist? https://www.abc.net.au/religion/nazism-socialism-and-the-fal... Answer: "Any analysis of the electoral platforms, internal party dynamics and political actions of the Nazis between 1921 and 1945 makes this clear [that the Nazis were not socialist]. Perhaps the German Workers Party - the party of around 100 members led by Anton Drexler that preceded the Nazi Party (NSDAP) - might have sought to cobble authoritarian anti-capitalism (which is not the same as socialism) onto biological racism. The early, pre-Nazi party that Hitler joined toyed with forms of market control to benefit small businesses and to halt ostensible "foreign" - that is, Jewish - control over markets. But such dalliances would not last long." > Were the Nazis socialist? https://www.csun.edu/~vcmth00m/NazismSocialism.html Answer: "This is standard propaganda for Fox News and the Tea Party. . . . "National Socialism" includes the word "socialism", but it is just a word. Hitler and the Nazis outlawed socialism, and executed socialists and communists en masse, even before they started rounding up Jews. In 1933, the Dachau concentration camp held socialists and leftists exclusively. The Nazis arrested more than 11,000 Germans for "illegal socialist activity" in 1936. . . . In the 1930s and even beyond, nazism, in sharp contrast to socialism, was strongly supported by leading capitalists." > Were the Nazis socialist? https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/02/05/right-need... "The Nazis hated socialists." Essentially, the name comes from a few socialists long before Hitler came to power, and the name just stuck even as non-socialists took over (early 30s) and began doing despicable things. It's a bit like saying "Johnson and Johnson is a company comprised of two individuals with the same last name" rather than acknowledging that's just the original name, long before it was rendered inaccurate.