[Riddick]

[ QUOTE ]
I could keep going and going and going, but I'll spare everyone. Now, you can keep making the disingenuous claim that Hitler was a socialist, or that Nazis were a bunch of pesky socialists, but it will only make you look bad/intellectually dishonest.

[/ QUOTE ]

He most certainly was a socialist, as were the Nazis, and they were even "idealist, purist" socialists before they gained the absolute power of the state. Of course he didn't believe in equality for the Jews et al. This doesn't mean that the socialist policies he promoted did not appeal to the minds and hearts of those he directed them at, the pure blooded "folks".

[ QUOTE ]
Of course, you could make the claim that anyone that believes in any kind of redistribution at all (including Libertarians that think there should be taxes to fund national defense) are socialist.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you couldn't.

[ QUOTE ]
How about this. National Socialism is not considered socialism by anyone not 5000 miles to the right of centrism, and only then it's to score cheap partisan points by saying "Nationial Socialist German Workers Party? Hello?? THE NAZIS WERE SOCIALISTS!!! This is what happens when you introduce socialism."


[/ QUOTE ]

So in 1938, when 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated from the state, those aren't clearly socialist policies?

When the state collectivized agriculture, thats not a socialist policy?

The National Labour Law stating that the government shall exert direct influence on all businesses with over 20 employees is not a socialist policy?

Creating massive public works projects with the sole intent of eliminating unemployment is not a socialist policy?

Announcing a national price freeze due to the fear of inflation is not a socialist policy?

This quote addresses Hitler's rejection of complete nationalization:

[ QUOTE ]
It is of course true that, as he came closer to power, Hitler did reject the outright nationalization of industry as too Marxist. As long as the State could enforce its policies on industry, Hitler considered it wisest to leave the nominal ownership and day to day running of industry in the hands of those who had already shown themselves as capable of running and controlling it. This policy is broadly similar to the once much acclaimed Swedish model of socialism in more recent times so it is amusing that it has often been this policy which has underpinned the common claim that Hitler was Rightist. What is Leftist in Sweden was apparently Rightist in Hitler! There are of course many differences between postwar Sweden and Hitler's Germany but the point remains that Hitler's perfectly reasonable skepticism about the virtues of nationalizing all industry is far from sufficient to disqualify him as a Leftist.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Now, imagine a socialist saying "Look at what capitalists have done to the world. They've began horrible wars, they've rigged our country's electoral process to their advantage, they create harmful monopolies, they stifle debate that's outside of their narrow ideological range, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera [insert any number of complaints against statist capitalists here]. LOOK AT WHAT THE CAPITALISTS HAVE DONE. AND YOU WANT A PURELY CAPITALIST SOCIETY???? DIDN'T YOU LOOK AT MY LIST OF WHAT THEY'VE DONE???? You want an anarchocapitalist society?"


[/ QUOTE ]

Only a statist can accomplish any of these objectives. War, electoral processes, and monopolies mean nothing to anyone who has a hint of a clue of what anarcho-capitalism is.

War, electoral processes, and monopolies are all statist objectives.

[ QUOTE ]
Which is why I take issue with National Socialism (or rather, the Nazis particular brand of dictatorship, bearing no resemblance to anything a real socialist would consider socialism) being considered socialism in your misinformed jeremiad.

[/ QUOTE ]

You would take issue with someone saying that a butterfly was once a caterpillar? But a butterfly has no resemblance to a caterpillar.