What produces RUTHLESS DICTATORS?

He deliberately makes false statements on matters he doesn't know much about, then gets hysterical and throws a hissy fit after being exposed as a fraud.

okie wrote:

As ican points out, the actual practices of collectivism within the fascist idealogy I think clearly indicates it to be a leftist or socialistic brand of politics. Government nationalizing or controlling companies is a leftist philosophy

If you're interested in "actual practices of collectivism" and if you want to use the nationalisation and control of companies by the government as a yardstick to judge whether a particular government is right-wing or left-wing, you might be interested in reading this paper

OE - it is absolutely remarkable that you would expect all your readers to be too stupid to understand that the paper you cite, as well as all standard works on the subject of privatizations, reach the exact opposite conclusion than the one you claim.
[...]
What gives, OE? You never read the paper, you read it and don't know enough about public finances to understand it, or none of the above, just an attempt to confuse and obfuscate in order to promote some leftist agenda?

From 1941 onward into the postwar era, Soviet propaganda, diplomacy, and scholarship consistently depicted Nazism as a right-wing phenomenon, communism on the left, with the Western powers arrayed on a vague spectrum somewhere in between. Western academics and journalists fell into the same practice, often but not always because of their own leftist sympathies. Few bothered to contest the analysis and assumptions that underlay the new model, and it was a convenient way to depict and describe political camps. Thus the classic political spectrum of the 20th century became second nature to everyone, not just to communists.

A bit to the right are the softer tyrannies of socialism, as commonly practiced in Western Europe. Liberalism comes next, then "moderation." Moving further along the spectrum toward greater liberty, one finds conservatism, and finally libertarianism.[/b]

The author focusses on what he thinks was Stalin's view.

However, as pointed out and sourced with original (sic!) material dozens of times: the Nazis' contempories in Germany thought the NSADAP to be a right wing party.
And they were, in the true and actual classical poltical spectrum.

Where, okie, do you think we have got those "softer tyrannies" here, just now?

And, coming back to your actual topic, why didn't you include those countries in your list?

Again, I have pointed this out, but Nazi comtemporaries thought of the NSADAP as to the right of what?

Its all about comparison, in context with what?

And finally, your mention of the "true and actual classical political spectrum," that is according to who and defined as what?

Instead, the systems may be more socialistic and collectivist, which requires the limitations of individual liberty to achieve its goals.

Again, I have pointed this out, but Nazi comtemporaries thought of the NSADAP [sic] as to the right of what?

you simply cannot consider Germany or Europe in the political vacuum or landscape of the 1930's, we must compare the actual policies to those of a wider range of comparison, especially considering the fact that when you utter the word "right wing," people now are going to consider what it means now, not what Nazi contemporaries thought it meant, assuming you are entirely accurate about what they thought in the first place.

I have not mentioned soft tyrannies, so you took that from the article I posted. I already said that I may not agree with all the details of the article. I don't think I would use the term "tyranny" to describe various forms of socialism, that would not be my choice of words. I know what is meant by the term, it basically indicates a political system that denies people more of their rights than what happens in more open and free societies, but it does not include killings and starvation by a dictator. Instead, the systems may be more socialistic and collectivist, which requires the limitations of individual liberty to achieve its goals.

Quote:

Again, I have pointed this out, but Nazi comtemporaries thought of the NSADAP [sic] as to the right of what?

Everything.

So again: what Western European countries are meant, since you know what is meant by the term.

Walter Hinteler wrote:

So again: what Western European countries are meant, since you know what is meant by the term.

You don't know what the meaning of it is?

Actually, I am tired of debating about whether parties in Germany considered the Nazies right or not, I don't care, I would rather look at the policies.