Nazism and Socialism are two completely different ideologies, so why did Hitler call his political system "National Socialism?"
137936
I remember hearing that it's a typical strategy for parties to adopt words in their names that don't necessarily reflect their ideology in order to get votes from those people in addition to their core base. For example, until recently Canada's largest right-wing party was called the 'Progressive Conservatives' - also seen by many as an oxymoron.
81487
Someone who believes in the socialist ideologies put forth by the philosopher Karl Marx, though he was once quoted as saying "I am not a Marxist" which goes to show that the term really took on a life of its own historically.  The basic concept is that all members of society make roughly equal contributions and receive roughly equal benefits, as opposed to capitalism where people compete for a greater share of society's benefits.  The theory is very in-depth, and scholars still debate over what exactly is implied by the term Marxism, or if or how it differs from socialism or communism.\n\nI think socialism focuses more on social equality and pooling of resources.  Communism focuses on the economic and political constructs of a government that commands the economy and the major industries.
416758
Welcome to the world of political philosophy vs political propoganda.  Okay a couple of things socialism means that the government has more control over business.  MAking sure there is money for healthcare, welfare, education, etc.  There are many socailistic countries in Europe that are democratic and doing fine.  Communism is further left.  Communism is an economic model and not a political one.  You could have a democratic communism.  What has happenned is a lot of solcialistic dictatorships.  There is yet to be a true communist country.  Unfortunately human greed always ruins communism as it will do with capitalism (according to marx) and there is examples of it starting to happen now (outsourcing jobs for penny wages).  Captilism will expand until it cannot expand any further and then collapse upon itself (basically once the rich have starved the poor whats left?).  It is a very confusing issue.   Anarchy is a political model and I would say is the opposite of socialism...which is no governemnt at all.  However I have been an anarchist for awhile, not because of punk, but because I have no faith in the politcal process today.  Too much business influence and lobbyists to really help most individuals.  But the pistols do rock.
356
He was the creator of the white supremist group the Nazi. He killed millions of Jewish people and people who where beleived to be Jewish but might not have been. He helped start World War 1 and World War 2. He discriminated against many races. Hitler was a horrible person thats why every one,including me, is mad at him. He killed millions of innocent people. Including some of his own people.
495455
Communism is an economic system and Socialism is a political system (a form of government)  that can be adopted under a capitalist system (Examples: Spain, France).\n\nCommunism is opposed to Capitalism.\nIn Capitalism businesses are owned by private businessmen. This is a system of free enterprise, where anyone can start their own business and sell what they want to whom ever they want. \n\nCommunism is a "command economy." This economic system has only public ownership of businesses, where the national government has complete control of all industries. People are told what to produce, how much is needed and the price to sell it at. \n\nWhile there is wide variation between socialist groups, nearly all would agree that they opperate according to principles of solidarity and advocating an egalitarian society, that would serve the broad populace rather than a favored few.
300878
The Nazi's wanted to be the dominent race and rule the world. The Jew's were an easy target. The Nazi's viewed them as inferior and were determined to wipe them out. It didn't work. There were a lot Jew's killed but the Nazi's died out. The Jew's are still here.
433261
***Correct Answer***\nd. the government control of the media.\n\nTotalitarianism, by its very nature, sets out to make the government the "total" controller of a nation.  The Third Reich is a prime example of this.\n\n***Incorrect Answers***\na. the establishment of two-party elections\n\nUp to the 1930s, Germany had multiple-party elections.\n\nb. the encouragement of private business enterprise\n\nAlthough this is what voters for the Nazi Party wanted to see when the Party took power (it was a part of their platform), the opposite happened.  However, the Third Reich later curtailed private business enterprise, but it still existed. \n\nc. the decline of the german economy\n\nThe decline of the German economy prior to the election that gave control to the Nazi Party was due to the Great Depression (which was a worldwide event).
579109
Jim, I understand just what you mean. I post scripture after scripture here proving what a barbaric piece of crap their invisible friend is, and they just don't get it. \n\nIncidentally, you probably already know this, but Hitler was a Roman Catholic. Every year on his birthday, Hitler received a note from the Arch Bishop of Germany by order of the Vatican. \n\nThe beliefs of the SS were preached alongside the Bible at worship services. Hitler also incorporated many church laws as secular law. He abolished abortion in Germany, and enacted many corporal punishments based on church law.\n\nHitler was never condemned by the Vatican. In fact, the church supported his killing of innocent men, women, and children of Jewish descent, because the Vatican (at that time) believed the Jews to be responsible for the death of Jesus. They also supported his killing of homosexuals.\n\nThe sad, simple truth is that Hitler was a monster, who was created and groomed by the Catholic Church. Unfortunately, the Christian revisionists cannot face the facts in the matter and lay the blame where it truely lies. On the preaching of Jesus Christ and Jehovah as the path to salvation.\n\nIt is far easier to deny the truth than accept it, which seems to be the general theme of Christianity. \n\n-SD-
29749
Socialism is where the means of productions are owned by the society, hence the state and under the hegemony of the proletariat or the working class. It is for ending the exploitations of capitalism by the capitalists over the working people and bringing the working people up for the communist society. Communism is the next stage of socialism where the society will be classless and free of any sort of exploitation. It is more of kind of ultimate goal of the real human society which should be achievable after sufficient span of time, struggle, experiment and effort.
107847
I consider them both pretty evil.  Consider this, Stalin's mass killings were mostly before WW II (100,000 a year), and mostly from his purges and 'collectivization in early 30's with the latest estimate of around 20-30 million dead.  His genocide wasn't a full time occupation to his death, unlike Hitler, but that's where the comparison stops.  When comparing the two, both were evil, both put people in concentration camps, both committed genocide, both were dictators, both...well you get the picture.  The one factor Hitler had over Stalin tho, Hitler was insane.  Stalin was just angry and distrustful.\n\nOther things to consider,Stalin killed more people, Hitler started WW II, Hitler killed the Jews and some people in his nation, but he started the war that resulted in many troops dying on both sides.  Hitler may be considered the greater of both evils; tho Stalin killed more people it is said, Hitler's action ensured that those loses were as high as possible.
82514
Socialism is a form of government that controls its society through over taxation. Nobody really rich, nobody really poor. Due to the fact that most Socialist regimes have more funds going out, then coming in, they are destined to go bankrupt. Socialism has had success in countries that have people sharing the same ideologies. (usually places that don't like immigration like Finland, Norway ect.). Communism differs in that it does not allow a balance of privatization vs. government at all and is controlled by more authoritarian measures. Everything is for the "state", and market economies are not allowed to exist. Lack of ownership by individuals is another difference between Communism and Socialism. Hillary Clinton agenda is a good example of a socialist. Chavez in Venezuela is a good example of how Communism takes root.....Best to think of governments in this way. Draw a line.....at the furthest left is communism....then socialism...then the democratic party in the US....then moderate.....then repblican party US.........then fascism.......and all the way Right no government.
557554
No I think both extremes are pretty wacked.  The left really has no agenda - just hatred of everything moderate and to the right.  At least I don't get or understand the far lefts agenda.  The radical right agenda would border on racist and is full of hate as well - I guess "hate" is the similarity of the two.
503201
Communism, capitalism, and socialism are primarily economic systems.  There are a variety of political philosophies and systems that interface with any of these.  Added to that is the fact that many nations have economic and political systems that blend aspects of these various systems.\n\nKim Jong Il might use the mantle of communism, but North Korea is far from being a communist or socialist state.  Most of its population lives in poverty.  Famine is a constant threat for them.  There is no equal distribution of goods.  Kim Jong Il is a dictator, as was Stalin.  Their regimes were about centralized power and nothing about socialism or communism.
231710
I am sorry to notice - you have a wrong understanding of 20th century history...\n\n1.  If the Alias wouldn't have helped the USSR, and Hitler had manged to win the war with USSR, the US would be able to win the war against Germany (Japan has lost the war after the Germany was defeated, and USSR has started the war against Japan).  And in that case the process of genocides (not only Jews, but also of African Americans, Native Americans, etc. would have taken place...)\n\n2.  Stalin was brutal, but he didn't kill everyone who was smarter.  That was an issue of politics.  He killed everyone who could get stronger than he is (in political meaning) - but the scientists who were inventing things were working (although not being free) and they invented a lot... beginning from thermonuclear bombs - finished with AK47, tanks, airplanes etc.\nbut what Stalin did, he made up a certain hierarchy... and collected all the sources in the country - which made it for USSR possible to win the 2nd World war... and USSR become a SUPERPOWER... \n\nP.S. I don't want you to think I agree with what Stalin did... that is the positive part (there is too much of negative).
615908
"Nazis" are National Socialists. Search accordingly. Also, they don't call themselves "Neo-" anything; this is a media-appointed term. \n\nYou might also want to search under religous groups like the Church of the Piney Woods, or the Christian Identity Movement. I'm not making this up, sadly. There's lots of hate out there to keep an eye on - but you have to know where to look.
437815
The basic difference is that Communism is a pure political philosophy where the Government controls all the means of production while Capitalism is on the opposite end of the spectrum, where the people own the means of production.\n\nSocialism is the hybrid of Communism and Capitalism.  Socialism is essentially Capitalism where the government controls certain industries within the country's marketplace.\n\nSome examples:\n\nCapitalist:  United States; Or, more purely, Hong Kong (but not the rest of China).\n\nSocialism:  Germany, Norway\n\nCommunism:  Cuba or China
543669
Interesting question. Forget, for just a moment if you can, the atrocities of the Hitler regime. Hitler brought prosperity back to a floundering Germany. Under is initial reign, Germans went from abject poverty to having jobs and food and prosperity. It wasn't until they discovered his megalomania that the wheels fell off and his true nature was discovered.\n\nSo to answer your question, it's quite possible that many people would vote for him if they knew nothing about his true nature and only the political promises he made.