In high school, several times over. Several people accused me of being a Nazi because I said there were several aspects to socialism, such as state health care, which were just the best way to go government wise. I said if I was a socialist that wasn't the same and they insisted that socialist equaled Nazi. The teacher corrected them and said they were polar opposites, technically speaking.

Since then several times I've heard people make the same error, usually fat slobs who don't like to read. It's not surprising.

Yes. More commonly, though, you find people who just group everyone that doesn't agree with their own ideologies together as one giant "evil" group, like the Legion of Doom. But seriously, we all know the Darwinists, psychics, gargoyles, Nazis, terrorists, aliens, vampires and liberals are all in cahoots.

Er, the Nazis were, in fact, socialists, Mr. Rodents. I'm sure that your school chums weren't aware of the fact, but the old National-Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeits Partei based their party platform on sharing and stuff. Within the racial community, obviously, but all of the foundations of a comprehensive social welfare system were there, and then some: nationalised industry, vast tracts of happy subsidized workers' housing, free health care and education, subsidized education and cultural events on a vast scale, massive public infrastructure programs (autobahns, railways, etc.) Many scholars have based A LOT of work on pointing out the vast similarities between the Soviet system, under Stalin, and Hitler's Germany. To say they are polar opposites is entirely untrue; although the nasty racial element does separate them, there was significant persection of non-ethnic Russians, or minority groups associated with 'anti-soviet' activity under Stalin. etc.

Nihilists! Fuck me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

The need for Americans to polarize communism and National Socialism stems largely from the need to deny Nazism ever had any successes at all (which it did, on a scattershot and ultra-specific basis, i.e. Autobahn and Strength Through Joy) while also maintaining that conservative Republicanism has benefits galore, without actually putting either of those thoughts into so many words.

Considering the only way you will get your history book published for the private schools is to pander to the extreme right wing, you can see how this sort of nonsense muddies the water as far as the brains of children go.

Can someone explain to me what cognitivedissonance is trying to say here?

Calling themselves socialists does not make them socialists. Socialism means that the workers control the factories. This did not happen under Leninism (party control of the state, state control of the factories) or Nazi-style socialism. State control does not mean socialism. Again, State Control != Socialism.

Wow. A lot of people here seem to have taken the same undergrad survey course on 'World History and Politics'. And skipped a bunch of lectures. Maybe you all took hits on the same bong before class Thursday nights. I'm not really here to speculate. One thing that I can say for sure: a little bit of knowledge, and a LOT of nerd indignation (in abundant supply here on the Interweb), while not necessarily a 'dangerous' thing, is annoying. A bit like athlete's foot. Socialism describes an array of political systems in which political and economic power is controlled by the broad community subject to those same political and economic forces. And the goal of that control is often to level social and economic inequalities. So, yes, the Nazis are considered socialists. As are the Soviets. When Jingoro was babbling angrily about 'workers controlling factories' and stuff, I think he may have been referring to an ideal state of Marxism in which workers control 'the means of production'. Now, how workers would control those means (via proxy, perhaps), and a few other details, we will leave to political philosophers. There are many flavours of socialism (see Fourier, for example). I don't think we are really going to capture the essence of it here on the Poe-TV boards, but if you guys need to know more about stuff, like politics or rockets or Jingoro's mom's favourite type of underwear, don't be afraid to ask.

Check. When my girlfriend at the time picked up some Marx at a bookstore the wiener behind the counter asked "Are you a Nazi?"
I wanted to strangle him.

Then a few weeks later I found her hidden stash with her Wagner records and her stick-on Chaplin mustache and her Jew-skin underwear.
The joke was certainly on me.

Dude, I so feel your pain.

OldScratch, I was just going by the terms generally associated. Soviet and Chinese socialism do differ radically from Nazi infrastructures, I was going by those elements rather than the similarities.

Scratch, some of your points are kind of valid. They would probably be taken seriously if you went easy on the sixth-grade insults. We're sorry the internet was mean to you.

I would like to apologize to all the people I have hurt. In the end, I was only hurting myse... Hey, wait a minute! This is Portal of EVIL! I take that all back.

Ah, noobs. Their innocence reminds us all of a simpler time.

Mike, a man just died.

Mrrrrrrrrrrgh

Erm, no. In many 'Fascist' (and not 'facist') dictatorships, there was close alliance between state and corporate power. But political ends governed the measure of state control. Industries in 'unfriendly' private hands were often completely nationalised. And, as you rightly state, in other industries, the 'profits' went straight to the government. How do you think that happened? Majority state ownership of an otherwise 'private' concern is a start. In Germany, the party was not called the 'National Socialsts' for nothing. Corporate ownership was, to some extents, different in Stalin's Russia, I agree, but both regimes shared national control of industry on a vast scale. [At this point, OldScratch rips off his shirt to reveal his enormous 'guns' and the prominent tattoo - 'D.Phil. University of Oxford 1999'.] How would you differentiate the 'privileges' granted those who controlled capital and industrial output in either system? Their positions were at the whim of the party, and were dependent entirely on party loyalty in both cases.

I am actually enjoying this much more than the cartoon.

The National Socialist party had some socialist aspects, I've seen a clip of Goebbels praising the New Deal. But to try to say it was similar to the USSR is garbage. Sure the state controlled industry because it was on a perpetual war footing. In peace time the Nazis would have stepped back and let industry build nice BMWs and brewS oceans of Spaten. The USSR told factory owners how much stuff to make, even if they didn't need it. Factories filled up with useless widgets. The Soviets killed or exiled all of the rich and nobility, while the Nazis came to power with their blessing and were supported by the Junkers.

After FDR, one can make the argument that US was semi-socialist, but no one would ever say it was similar to the Soviet Union. The same is true for America's Western European allies.

What are you? Some kind of commie or something?

Exactly my point.

Thin end of the wedge!

Commies tookerjobs!

There. Do you feel better now?

Because the people on youtube are normal