[What is national socialism? Is it similar to fascism?] ~by SS
Today, I’d like to talk about Nazism, formally known as national socialism. Neo-liberals say that it is far right due to the “Germany is great.” and socially conservative rhetoric that Hitler projected. Neo-conservatives believe that it is a leftist ideology similar to communism due to “socialism” in its name, the economy liberty that Hitler seized by nationalising many industries, and since they like to quote his speech of 1927 where he claims,”We are socialists.”
[A formidable definition]
It is national chauvinism due to its power structure, and an economic system composed of corporatism mixed with certain socialistic tendencies.
National Chauvinism means that a race, religion, or nationality must assert its dominance and authority in order to establish “superiority” over them. Hitler believed that the Germanic Aryan race was supreme. To assert dominance and secure a utopian future for them, he sought to compromise his way through non-aggression pacts or treatires with countries like Poland (German-Polish Non Aggression Pact), USSR (Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact), UK (Naval Agreement of 1935), etc. When it didn’t work, such as with Danzig, he went to war. That was Lebensraum.
Remember! Chauvinism is not nationalism! I will explain this further on.
Corporatism means combining state power and corporate power. For example, Henschel, Porsche, MAN, and other companies competed with each other for having their tank designs accepted by the Third Reich leadership. Henschel made the Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger, Porsche made the Ferdinand, MAN made the Panzerkampfwagen V Panther. When the Germans wanted a heavy tank, a more formidable one than the hideous Großtraktor, Henschel and Porsche would start competing as 1938 using prototypes like VK 36.01 (H) and VK 30.01 (P). When the Germans found the Henschel Tiger simpler in terms of engine design, profit. Corporates weren’t knocked out, though. The Tiger (P) was converted into Elefant tank destroyers, one of the early turrets of Tiger II were designed by Porsche, and their Panzerkampfwagen VIII Maus was also approved by Hitler. Similarly, Opel made Blitz trucks, BMW made their motorcycles, Diamler-Benz made the plane engines, and so on.
“We are socialists.” is a speech often misused by neo-conservatives. Let me give you some context. Hitler claimed that “National Socialism is not Marxist Socialism. Marxism is anti-property, true Socialism is not.” Hitler was against trade unions and Bolshevik economics. The socialistic elements were planned economies, they could control salaries as of 1936, they still could decide who gets how much and for what price in spite of claiming to have privatised banks and private property. After all, they wanted to produce a classless society.
[Nazism vs Fascism]
While it has been a very old rumour, Nazism is not the same as fascism; it is not German fascism. Fascism means ultranationalist authoritarianism. Knocking two questions with one answer, chauvinism is different from nationalism. Hitler rose using traditional German rites, but wanted to produce a totally new Germany. Instead of churches, colossal buildings made of magnificent architecture would have been used to project power in Hitlerite Germany. A truly fascist Germany would have sought to relive the prosperity and glory of the Holy Roman Empire and the German Empire. Simply said, fascism relives the glorious past, national socialism builds a utopian future.
While a lot of features are similar to fascism like corporatism and being a third position. But then again, detailed differences overwhelm its similarities. Nazis were anti-Jewish and anti-zionism (Hashemites and Ashkenazis had nothing to do with being ethnically inferior). Fascism proposed no such racist policies; Mussolini did not oppress Jews until Hitler arrived on the big stage. Mosley was not an ethnonationalist but he did not believe in multiculturalism in the sense that mixing a large number of people from different groups would inevitably result in strife among them. Fascism was supposed to unite the people under an autocracy — may it be Mussolini’s dictatorship or Mosley’s union. Nazism was about making space for their own people, Trotsky-styled internationalism was not necessarily a part of national socialist expansionist policies.
This was actually just a rumour spread by the USSR outside and inside of it because the Soviets did not want national socialists to associate with them. Nazis were anti-capitalist, so they deemed it fit to place them along fascism. Fascism was a reactionary ideology who believed in a society with non-egalitarian roles preserving traditional family and religious values. Nazism was modern, and hence did not believe in preserving old legends, including Gods of a religion. Hitler wanted people to live in the present and develop a future, hence he wanted Volkshalle to be the projection of German power, not a Notre Dame-styled super Church. He wanted the people to worship the Führer, not dwell over the grave of Otto von Bismarck, may the Führer be Adolf Hitler, or Karl Dönitz, with the exception of the foundation of national socialism being static rather than dynamic.
In a short answer, Nazism lies in the centre of the economic sides, being extremely authoritarian. This is for the sole reason that it is not organically a centrist ideology, but it is both left and right wing all the while not being any in particular; it isn’t an ugly product of capitalism and socialism, just an inspiration by Mussolini’s work of fascism which too takes policies from both the sides of the political spectrum.
For neo-liberals and neo-conservatives: to call it left wing would be a disgrace, as it is not a degenerate child of cultural Marxism. To call it right wing would be a disgrace, as it is above the consumerist and materialistic ambitions of big corporations that pave way for cultural capitalism.