Home About us Products Services Contact us Bookmark
:: wikimiki.org ::
Far-right

Far-right

Far right, extreme right, ultra-right, radical right, or hard right are terms used to discuss the relative position a group or person occupies within a political spectrum. The terms "far-right" and "far-left" are used to say that someone is an extremist. "Far-right" is thus usually a pejorative term. The division between far-left and far-right extremists can be as difficult to discern as the views of those labeled "far right" are to reconcile with one another. The Nazi party, while often viewed as far-right, considered itself to be socialist, quite distinct from the laissez faire economics, isolationism and localism advocated by paleoconservatives, also labeled as far right. To further complicate matters, the rhetoric and positions advocated by many extremists (populism, revolution, social unrest, violence) often appear very similar, and sometimes members and leaders travel between the far-left and far right. Mussolini is one example of such a circumstance, and Bill White (neo-Nazi) is another. National Bolshevism, the international third position and national anarchism are each extremist groups which while often regarded as far right, transcend the boundries of ordinary politics. Ecofascism, eugenics, full employment, and other seemingly leftist concepts are often found amongst those seen to be far right. The far right has often been associated with social and religious conservatism, reactionary nationalism, jingoistic chauvanism and economic protectionism, but this varies wildly.

Usage

A simple, if vague, definition of "far-right" is someone deemed too right-wing to be accepted in the nation's mainstream Political Parties on the Right. "Far-right" ideologies and movements often advocate substantial intervention, typically government intervention, in society in order to protect or promote inequalities or privileges, especially those inequalities or privileges that are viewed as "traditional". It is often associated with extreme nationalism. This is in contrast to the left-wing, who advocate intervention in favor of "equality" and give little or no authority to "tradition". Both stand in contrast also to less interventionist positions such as conservatism, liberalism, and libertarianism, each of which gives varying weights to the value of tradition and equality. The terms "left" and "right" used in this way arose during the French Revolution. The original meaning of "far-right" was the "throne-and-altar" conservatives, like Joseph de Maistre and Louis de Bonald, who rejected democracy, liberalism and individualism, and were in favour of an authoritarian monarchical government. They further proclaimed the submission of the individual to the so-called "natural associations" (families, regions, professions, nations, etc.). For them, we should obey our superiors in Earth (the father in family, the King in the state, the Pope in the Church) because their authority is the mirror of the authority of God in the Universe. Naturally, in societies that differ significantly from Ancien Régime France, the term takes on somewhat different meaning. The original French meaning is specific to a Roman Catholic nation, and more specifically to a Gallican society in which church and state were closely tied to one another. It can be expanded to include the kind of Caesaropapism that occasionally existed in some Orthodox kingdoms, but is poorly equipped to deal with the idea there even can be a far-right outside the Catholic/Orthodox world. This interpretation of "far right" especially lost favor in the decades following the Revolutions of 1848 as a return to the Ancien Régime became increasinly implausible. By the reign of Pope Pius XI this interpretation of far-right had essentially become anachronistic even in conservative Catholic circles. Therefore this original meaning is somewhat rare in a modern context. See Traditionalist School, Ultramontanism, and Reactionary for more on this ideological stream. In the modern world, the term far-right is applied to those who believe society must have upper class (though not necessarily aristocratic) domination, an established church, and an authoritarian state. This authoritarian state can be an absolute monarchy, but more often today it is some form of oligarchy or military dictatorship. This is most true in regions and nations that have no real history of monarchy, such as Central America (discounting the Pre-Columbian era), Switzerland, and the United States. The term "far-right" also embraces extreme nationalism, and will often evoke the ideal of a "pure" ideal of the nation, often defined on racial or "blood" grounds. They may advocate the expansion or restructuring of existing state borders to achieve this ideal nation, often to the point of embracing expansionary war, racialism, jingoism and imperialism. In the English-speaking nations this is often a nationalism descended from the militant aspects of British New Imperialism. Hence the Far Right often embraces state churches, harshly retributive justice, and militarism. More generally, the term "far-right" has been applied to any stream of political thought that rejects democracy in favour of some form of elite rule (including monarchy, plutocracy, and theocracy). Fascism is generally, but not universally, classified as a far-right ideology. Libertarian scholars such as F. A. Hayek and Ludwig von Mises are noteworthy dissenters from that view; Hayek even considered it far-left (see Fascism and ideology). However, even strong Miseans like Murray Rothbard put fascism on the right. A further complication is found in Nazism and other "national-revolutionary" ideologies, such as those of the "Left Nazi" or "Third Position" Strasser brothers, Juan Peron in Argentina, Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt, the Baath in Syria and Iraq and groups like International Third Position or the "national-anarchism". On one hand, these movements are nationalist and anti-communist; but, unlike fascism, they mobilize essentially the lower and middle-classes and, when in power, have often nationalized property, especially property owned by foreigners or by members of ethnicities not defined by them as part of their "nation". Furthermore, the term "far-right" has also been used for certain populist or authoritarian regimes, especially for "free market dictatorships". The epitome of such regimes was that of Augusto Pinochet in Chile, but it can be seen (with less market freedom) in many other 20th-century Latin American military dictatorships. In some contexts—particularly in the United States—the term "far-right" may also be used to denote supporters of extreme conservatism, such as paleoconservatives and other isolationists. While it is occasionally applied to the supporters of extreme laissez-faire capitalism such as some libertarians, calling the libertarians "far-right" or even "right" is a matter of controversy. The libertarians consider themselves as the heirs of the classical liberals, the main enemies of the first far-right. In his essay "Left and Right: the Prospects for Liberty" [http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?control=910] and "Confessions of a Right-Wing Liberal" [http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard77.html], Murray Rothbard even put libertarianism on the "left", claiming that conservatives are the right and socialists merely "midlle-of-the road". The imprecise use of the terms "left" and "right" in politics, and there being no absolute consensus as to what the "archetypes" of left and right are, has led to a number of disputes over the proper usage of "far-right" and "far-left" other than as general terms of derision. "Far-right" and "far-left" are meant to describe two diametrically opposed extremes. However, there are a good number of arguably extremist groups and ideologies that don't fit in the traditional far-left and far-right categories, and some seem to fit in both. There have been many attempts to describe this landscape with a multi-dimensional, rather than a linear, political spectrum; one such approach is the political compass. Much confusion is caused by wildly varying usage of these terms throughout history and the political spheres.

Current political parties referred to as far right

The list below includes a range of political parties, some of which have also been decribed as extreme right or even neo-fascist:
- Alternativa Sociale (Italy)
- Al Wefaq (Bahrain)
- British National Party
- Christian Falangist Party of America (USA)
- Constitution Party (USA)
- Danish People's Party (Denmark)
- Eurasia Party (Russia)
- Finnish People's Blue-whites
- Freedom Party of Austria
- Imperial Party (United Kingdom)
- Jathika Hela Urumaya (Sri Lanka)
- Kach and Kahane Chai (Israel)
- Kärntner Heimatdienst (Austria)
- Liberal Democratic Party of Russia
- Narodowe Odrodzenie Polski (Poland)
- National Democratic Party of Germany
- National Front (Belgium)
- National Front (France)
- One Nation Party (Australia)
- Popular Orthodox Rally (Greece)
- Progress Party (Norway)
- Sweden Democrats
- Swiss Democrats
- Vlaams Belang (Belgium)

References

Betz, Hans-Georg and Stefan Immerfall, eds. 1998. The New Politics of the Right: Neo-Populist Parties and Movements in Established Democracies. New York: St. Martin's Press. Betz, Hans-Georg. 1994. Radical Right-wing Populism in Western Europe, New York: St. Martins Press,. Durham, Martin. 2000. The Christian Right, the Far Right and the Boundaries of American Conservatism. Manchester, England: Manchester University Press. Durham, Martin. 2002. "From Imperium to Internet: the National Alliance and the American Extreme Right" Patterns of Prejudice 36(3), (July): 50-61. Hainsworth, Paul, ed. 2000. The Politics of the Extreme Right: From the Margins to the Mainstream. London: Pinter. Mudde, Cas. 2000. The Ideology of the Extreme Right. Manchester, England: Manchester University Press.

See also


- Reactionary
- Far-left
- Right-wing politics
- Far right includes list of political parties
- Ideology
- Left-Right politics
- Glossary of the French Revolution
- Political spectrum
- Nolan chart
- Political compass
- Words to avoid
- Biographical Dictionary of the Extreme Right Since 1890
- Occident (far-right group)
- Neo-Fascism
- Neo-Nazism
- Neofascism and religion
- Christian Identity
- Creativity Movement
- Ku Klux Klan
- National Alliance
- American Nazi Party
- Alain de Benoist
- William Luther Pierce
- George Lincoln Rockwell

External Links


- [http://ssr1.uchicago.edu/PRELIMS/Political/pomisc2.html Political Sociology]
- [http://www.lewrockwell.com/long/long15.html They Saw It Coming: The 19th-Century Libertarian Critique of Fascism]by Roderick T. Long Category:Anti-communism Category:Fascism Category: Christian fundamentalism Category:Euronationalist parties category:right-wing populists

Political spectrum

A political spectrum is a way of comparing or visualizing different political positions, by placing them upon one or more geometric axes.

Determining political spectra

The key assumption of such a spectrum is that people's view(s) on many issues correlate strongly, or that one essential issue subsumes or dominates all others. For a political spectrum to exist, there must be a range of beliefs. Political systems in which most people fall clearly into one group or another with almost no one in between, such as most nationalist controversies, are not well described by a political spectrum. In Iran, for instance, a political spectrum might be divided along the issue of the clergy's role in government. Those who believe clerics should have the power to enforce Islamic law are on one end of the spectrum, those who support a secular society are on the other; moderates fall at various points in between. In Taiwan, the political spectrum is defined in terms of Chinese reunification versus Taiwan independence. Even in issues of nationalism, spectra can exist; for example, in the Basque Country of Spain, Basque nationalists range from the EAJ/PNV, who have engaged in coalition governments with both the socialist PSOE and the conservative Partido Popular, to ETA, which engage in terror tactics and armed struggle against the Spanish national government, which they view as an occupying power. Political spectra can end when one group wins so thoroughly that there is no longer a divergence of opinions. This occurred in the 1960s during the Cultural Revolution in the People's Republic of China in the case between the rightists and the leftists in which the leftists won, or in the late 18th century controversy between the Federalists and the Anti-federalists in the United States. Often in this situation the winners start disagreeing over new issues, and a new political spectrum is created. In some cases, the defeated side can re-appear after several years or several decades, and start the controversy anew. At other times the political spectrum remains, while the issues which define the spectrum change. The controversy over the selection of William of Orange's successor to the English throne helped to define the British political spectrum which exists to this day, long after the original controversy was resolved. In some cases, especially in democratic countries without a "first past the post" system, multiple spectra can co-exist. For example, from its founding in 1901 to 1909, the Commonwealth of Australia had two equally strong policial spectra - Free Trade vs. Protectionism and Workers vs. Bosses (Liberals). However, by 1909 the first continuum had become irrelevent, and the two leading parties of each idea (Free Trade Party and Protectionist Party) merged to become the Liberal Party, in order to better compete with the strong workers' party (Australian Labor Party). This second continuum remained dominant in federal Australian politics until the mid-1990's.

Left and Right

See main article Left-Right politics In modern Western countries, the political spectrum usually is described along left-right lines. This traditional political spectrum is defined along an axis with conservatism, theocracy, and fascism ("the Right") on one end, and socialism, communism, ("the Left") on the other. Free market liberalism is generally considered to be centrist or center-right; new liberalism or social liberalism is generally assigned to the center, center-left or sometimes (when viewed by conservatives) the left. Christian Democracy may be anywhere from center-right to center-left, depending on the country and era. National and cultural differences in the use of the terms left and right are common. In China, left and right have referred to different positions at different times, although the issues were often very different from those in Western nations.

Multiplicity of interpretation of the left-right axis

There are various different opinions about what is actually being measured along this axis, and lines often blur among parties. For more detail see the main article Left-Right politics:
- Equal outcomes (left) versus consistent processes (right).
- Redistribution of wealth and income (left), or acceptance of inequalities as a result of the free market (right).
- Whether the government's policy on the economy should be interventionist (left) or laissez-faire (right).
- Support for widened lifestyle choices (left), or support for traditional values (right).
- Whether the state should prioritise equality (left) or liberty (right). Both the left and the right tend to speak in favor of both equality and liberty - but they have different interpretations.
- Whether human nature is more malleable (left) or intrinsic (right).
- Whether the government should promote secularism (left) or religious morality (right).
- Collectivism (left) versus individualism (right).
- Support for internationalism (left), or national interest (right).

Historical origin of the terms

The terms Left and Right to refer to political affiliation originated early in the French Revolutionary era, and referred originally to the seating arrangements in the various legislative bodies of France. The aristocracy sat on the right of the Speaker (traditionally the seat of honor) and the commoners sat on the Left, hence the terms Right-wing politics and Left-wing politics. Originally, the defining point on the ideological spectrum was the ancien régime ("old order"). "The Right" thus implied support for aristocratic or royal interests, and the church, while "The Left" implied opposition to the same. Because the political franchise at the start of the revolution was relatively narrow, the original "Left" represented mainly the interests of the bourgeoisie, the rising capitalist class. At that time, support for laissez-faire capitalism and Free markets were counted as being on the left; today in most Western countries these views would be characterized as being on the Right. As the franchise expanded over the next several years, it became clear that there was something to the left of that original "Left": the precursors of socialism and communism, advocating the interests of wage-earners and peasants.

Alternative spectra

Some people feel that it is not obvious how these various concepts are related. They say that it is very confusing to speak of the right or the left without indicating what exactly you are referring to. They believe that one should first establish context by defining the axes upon which different positions will be measured. Many individuals and groups do not fit on such a simple spectrum. While the right-left spectrum is so common as to be taken for granted, numerous alternatives exist, usually having been developed by people who feel their views are not fairly represented on the traditional right-left spectrum. The design of a spectrum itself can be politically motivated. Another alternative spectrum offered by the conservative American Federalist Journal emphasizes the degree of political control, and thus places totalitarianism at one extreme and anarchism (no government at all) at the other extreme. Another alternative, currently popular among certain environmentalists, uses a single axis to measure what they consider to be the good of the Earth against the good of big business, which is seen as being the force most likely to harm the Earth. In 1998, political author Virginia Postrel, in her book The Future and Its Enemies, offered a new single axis spectrum that measures one's view of the future. On one extreme are those who allegedly fear the future and wish to control it: stasists. On the other hand are those who want the future to unfold naturally and without attempts to plan and control: dynamists. The distinction corresponds to the utopian versus anti-utopian spectrum used in some theoretical assessments of liberalism, and the book's title is borrowed from the work of the anti-utopian classic-liberal theorist Karl Popper. Other axes include:
- Role of the church: Clericalism vs. Anti-clericalism. This axis is not significant in the United States where views of the role of religion tend to get subsumed into the general left-right axis, but in Europe clericalism versus anti-clericalism is much less correlated with the left-right spectrum.
- Urban vs. rural: This axis is also much more significant in European as well as Australian and Canadian politics than American.
- Foreign policy: interventionism (the nation should exert power abroad to implement its policy) vs. isolationism (the nation should keep to its own affairs)
- Political violence: pacifism (political views should not be imposed by violent force) vs. militancy (violence is a legitimate or necessary means of political expression). In North America, holders of these views are often referred to as "doves" and "hawks", respectively.
- Foreign trade: globalization (world economic markets should become integrated and interdependent) vs. autarky (the nation or polity should strive for economic independence). During the early history of the Commonwealth of Australia, this was the major political continuum. At that time it was called Free trade vs. Protectionism.
- Trade Freedom vs. Trade Equity: Free trade (businesses should be able trade across borders without regulations) vs. Fair trade (international trade should be regulated on behalf of social justice).
- Diversity: multiculturalism (the nation should represent a diversity of cultural ideas) vs. assimilationism or nationalism (the nation should primarily represent the majority culture)
- Participation: Democracy (rule of the majority) vs. Oligarchy (rule by a limited number of people) vs. Republic (a compromise between the two; this is a specialised use of the term 'republic' based on an interpretation of classical history)
- Freedom: Positive liberty (having rights which impose an obligation on others) vs. Negative liberty (freedom from interference by others)
- Change: radicals (who believe in rapid change) vs.progressives (who believe in measured , incremental change)vs.conservatives (who believe in minimal or cautious change), and sometimes vs. reactionaries (who believe in changing things to the way they were)
- Origin of state authority: popular sovereignty (the state as a creation of the people, with enumerated, delegated powers) vs. various forms of absolutism and organic state philosophy (the state as an original and essential authority)
- International action Multilateralism (states should cooperate and compromise) versus Unilateralism (states have a strong, even unconditional, right to make their own decisions).

Multi-axis models

A one-axis model is highly over-simplified, and lumps together fairly different political propositions; in particular, as seen before, there are many ways to define the left-right spectrum, which do not yield the same classifications. Several of the political philosophies that have arisen over the past two centuries do not fit on the one-dimensional left/right line, in particular anarchism and libertarianism. Anarchism is assumed to be "left", while Libertarianism is assumed to be "right". However, on the one-dimensional spectrum, anarchism shares almost the same position as various forms of Marxism, which is obviously inappropriate. Anarchism implies the rejection of government and societal control (as well as private property), while Leninism and other forms of Marxism imply the control by society of many activities. At the other end of the left/right line, Libertarianism finds itself in the same position as fascism, which is equally inappropriate. In order to address these problems, a number of proposals have been made for a two-axis system, which combines two models of the political spectrum as axes. Sometimes these systems are constructed for the specific purpose of placing one political group in a particular position, and associating it with motherhood values (values with 100% positive connonations). These charts are academic in origin, but are not widely used in political science.

Eysenck model

The first person to devise such a two-axis system was Hans Eysenck in his 1964 book "Sense and Nonsense in Psychology." Starting with the traditional "left-right" spectrum Eysenck added a vertical axis that considered "tough-mindedness" (authoritarian tendencies) and "tender-mindedness" (democratic tendencies). The effect of this new axis is that those who have very different views with regard to authority, but have the same "left-right" view (people like Stalin and Noam Chomsky), can be distinguished.

Nolan chart

Noam Chomsky] Main article: Nolan chart A second chart is the Nolan chart, created by libertarian David Nolan. This chart shows what he considers as "economic freedom" (issues like taxation, free trade and free enterprise) on the x axis and what he considers as "personal freedom" (issues like drug legalization, abortion and the draft) on the y-axis. This puts left-wingers in the left quadrant, libertarians in the top, right-wingers in the right, and authoritarianism and communitarians (whom Nolan originally named populists) in the bottom. The traditional left-right spectrum forms a diagonal across the Nolan chart, with communism and fascism both in the ultra-populist corner, an assignment hotly disputed by more liberal-minded communists who do not advocate state control over matters of "personal freedom". The Nolan chart has been reoriented and visually represented in many forms since David Nolan first created it, and has been the inspiration for an endless array of political self-quizzes, perhaps the most famous of these being the [http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html World's Smallest Political Quiz], which places one on the Nolan Chart.

Political compass

populists Largely following the Eysenck method, the model used by the political compass Organization has economic issues on the horizontal axis and issues of freedom on the vertical axis. Possibly the most popular and well-known online political [http://politicalcompass.org/ quiz], it asks a wide-range of questions before placing you on a chart.

Pournelle chart

political compass Main article: Pournelle chart A third, very different, two axis model was created by Jerry Pournelle. The Pournelle chart has liberty (a dimension similar to the diagonal of the Nolan chart, with those on the left seeking liberty and those on the right focusing control, farthest right being state worship, farthest left being the idea of a state as the "ultimate evil") perpendicular to Rationalism, defined here as the belief in planned social progress, with those higher up believing that there are problems with society that can be rationally solved, and those lower down skeptical of such approaches.

Other models

Rationalism Rationalism] In its January 4, 2003 issue, The Economist discussed [http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/library/main_illustrations.asp a chart, proposed by Dr. Ronald Inglehart] and supported by the World Values Survey (associated with the University of Michigan), to plot cultural ideology onto two dimensions. On the y-axis it covered issues of tradition and religion, like patriotism, abortion, euthanasia and the importance of obeying the law and authority figures. At the bottom of the chart is the traditionalist position on issues like these (with loyalty to country and family and respect for life considered important), while at the top is the secular position. The x-axis deals with self-expression, issues like everyday conduct and dress, acceptance of diversity (including foreigners) and innovation, and attitudes towards people with specific controversial lifestyles such as homosexuality and vegetarianism, as well as willingness to partake in political activism. At the right of the chart is the open self-expressionist position, while at the left is its opposite position, which Dr. Inglehart calls survivalist. This chart not only has the power to map the values of individuals, but also to compare the values of people in different countries. Placed on this chart, EU countries in continental Europe come out on the top right, Anglophone countries on the middle right, Latin American countries on the bottom right, African, Middle Eastern and South Asian countries on the bottom left, and ex-Communist countries on the top left. In addition to the distinctions between different types of "control" on many of these spectra, there is no clear way to locate philosophies such as feminism or environmentalism, even using a two-axis spectrum. Additional dimensions would be required to accommodate them, and that would make the model far too complex to be of any use. As an example, there are even some three axis models, both based on the Nolan Chart. The Friesian Institute has suggested a model that combines the economic liberty and personal liberty axes with positive liberty, creating a cube. The Vosem Chart splits the economic axis of the Nolan chart into two axes, corporate economics (z-axis) and individual economics (y-axis), which combine with the civil liberty axis (x-axis) to form a cube.

Ab-initio derived models

While multiple axes on the political spectrum had been postulated for a while, statistical analysis of survey data using principal component analysis to verify the theory and establish their existence, number and meaning was not done until recently. A 2003 study in the UK yielded two significant eigenvectors (that is, groups of questions that tend to be answered consistently), one less well-constrained than the other. If one examines the survey questions and tries to assign a meaning to the axes it turns out that one is like the familiar "left-right" axis that mixes economic and social issues, and the other indicates a degree of political pragmatism. The outcome of that study is that the UK political spectrum is most sensibly described with two axes. [http://politics.beasts.org] [http://www.politicalsurvey2005.com/]

Suggested reading

Maximum Liberty by Anonymous. 2003. (ISBN 0974443905) Provides an overview of the different models of the political spectrum. The author proposes a new, universal model for the political spectrum and explains why the various existing models are inadequate. The model separates the scope of government from the form of government, whereas the political spectrum only describes potential levels of government control over society, not forms of rulership and administrative organization. Beyond Liberal and Conservative: Reassessing the Political Spectrum by William S. Maddox and Stuart A. Lilie; foreword by David Boaz. Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute, 1984. (ISBN 0932790437) This book emphasises that the world needs a better model of the political spectrum. The authors favor the American libertarian concept of a two-axis model.

See also


- List of politics-related topics
- Nolan chart
- Political compass
- Spectrum (disambiguation)
- Left-right politics
- Syncretic politics

External links


- [http://www.politicalcompass.org/ The Political Compass]
- [http://www.self-gov.org/wspq.html World's Smallest Political Quiz]
- [http://www.baen.com/chapters/axes.htm The Pournelle Political Axes - All Ends of the Spectrum]
- [http://www.friesian.com/quiz.htm Friesian Institute]
- [http://www.federalistjournal.com/spectrum.php Alternative Spectrum - American Federalist Journal]
- [http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org The World Values Survey - main site]
- [http://wvs.isr.umich.edu University of Michigan World Values Survey]
- [http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/6/14/45425/6208 Vosem Chart] Category:Political partiesCategory:Elections Category:Politics

Far-left

The term far left refers to the relative position a person or group occupies within the political spectrum. Originally the term considered spacing in the French Revolution with the most radical of the Jacobins being viewed as the far-left. The term "Jacobin" for a kind of far-left person continued throughout much of the nineteenth century. In modern times it is ideally used to describe persons or groups who hold radical egalitarian views thus supporting radical social and political change by taking over or overthrowing the existing order in society. It also usually includes hostility to most or all existing Hierarchical organizations. Depending on a group's militancy and the given political circumstances, revolutionary change may be achieved through democratic or authoritarian, violent or nonviolent means. Groups that advocate some form of revolution without being egalitarian, are generally not part of the far left, and may indeed be far right. For much of the English speaking world, especially Australia and the United States, it is perhaps primarily a perjorative term to indicate a person is extreme or fringe in their Left-wing politics views. In France, the term extrême-gauche is normally only used for Trotskyist or anarchist parties or groups, while the French Communist Party is not considered far left; the difference seems to be that far-left groups do not actually wish to govern within the current institutional framework, while the Communist Party seeks to govern, possibly even in coalitions. Although the modern term is ideally to be used for advocates of radical egalitarianism and social change it is often used for something slightly different then that. To be precise the modern use of the term far-left is often more to describe those seen as strongly opposed to Traditional values, Globalization, Capitalism, and Nationalism. In some nations it is defined as "to the Left of mainstream Communist parties" as communist parties are acceptable in several nations. Hence it includes Trotskyism, Maoism, Anti-Revisionists, Anarcho-communism, Anarcho-syndicalism, and others strongly opposed to capitalist governments and institutions. Anarchism itself is not inherently left or right, but the forms that are "Leftist Anarchism" are often considered far-left. In nations where Communist parties are not acceptable, like the United States, it can simply mean to the "Left of the most left-wing member of the legislature." "Far-Left" can also describe groups who support an intense "cultural revolution" on anti-traditional lines, like the most extreme thinkers in Radical Feminism. Sometimes the term "far left" is used pejoratively by those on the right wing to describe any view they perceive as hostile to capitalism. Others on the right-wing may use it to mean someone strongly antitheist even if their politics is otherwise centrist or even to the right. The term "far-left" must be understood as relative to either the speaker or the context in which they are speaking. Two hundred years ago, for example, anyone who supported secularism and universal suffrage would be seen as a far-left extremist, but were often referred to as ultra-radicals at the time. Likewise, as mentioned, parties that'd be deemed "far-left" in one nation might be mainstream in another. This should not be overstated however as certain "far left" ideals like Anarcho-communism or collectivizing all land rights are arguably no more mainstream now then they were in the nineteenth century. The far-left is distinct from the ultra-left, according to whom the far-left are still part of the left wing of capitalism, even if they are prepared to use violence and rebellion to seize power. These groupings oppose Maoism and anarchism as both being based on the terrain of wage labor which they regard as a hallmark of capitalism.

Current organizations or parties belonging to the Far Left


- Anarchist Black Cross Federation
- Anti-Imperialist National Democratic Front (South Korea)
- Co-ed Revolutionary Anarchist Liberation Union (Poland)
- Communist Party (Sweden)(formerly Communist Party Marxist-Leninists (the revolutionaries))
- Feminist Initiative (Sweden)
- Industrial Workers of the World
- International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organizations (Unity & Struggle)
- International Workers Association
- Maoist Internationalist Movement
- Melbourne Anarchist Communist Group
- National Democratic Front (Philippines)
- Organization for the Reconstruction of the Communist Party of Greece
- Party for Socialism and Liberation(USA)
- Peoples' Global Action
- Red and Anarchist Action Network
- Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist)
- Revolutionary Internationalist Movement
- Unity List(Denmark)
- Workers' Communist Party (Norway)
- Workers Solidarity Movement(Ireland)

See also


- Ultra-left
- Far-right
- Left-wing politics
- Liberal elite
- Ideology
- Left-Right politics
- Glossary of the French Revolution
- Political spectrum
- Political compass
- Words to avoid Category: Syndicalism Category: Maoism

Nazi

:The term "National Socialism" has been used in self-description by a number of different political groups and ideologies, some of which have no connection with the Nazis; see National socialism (disambiguation). Nazism was the ideology held by the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, commonly called NSDAP or the Nazi Party), which was led by its "Führer", Adolf Hitler. The word Nazism is most often used in connection with the dictatorship of Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945 (the "Third Reich"), and it is derived from the term National Socialism (German: Nationalsozialismus, often abbreviated NS). Adherents of Nazism held that the Aryan race were superior to other races, and they promoted Germanic racial supremacy and a strong, centrally governed state. Nazism has been outlawed in modern Germany, yet small remnants and revivalists, known as "Neo-Nazis", continue to operate in Germany and abroad. Originally, Nazi was invented by analogy to Sozi (a common and slightly pejorative term for the Nazis' main opponents, the socialists in Germany). The Nazis from the era of the Third Reich rarely referred to themselves as "Nazis", preferring the official term "National Socialists" instead. Nazi was most commonly used as a pejorative term; however, its use became so widespread that, currently, some Neo-Nazis also use it to describe themselves. There is a very close relationship between Nazism and Fascism. Since the term Nazism is normally used to refer to the ideology and policies of Nazi Germany alone, while Fascism is used in a broader sense, to refer to a wider political movement that exists or existed in many countries, Nazism is often classified as a particular version of Fascism.

Ideological theory

According to Mein Kampf (My Struggle), Hitler developed his political theories after carefully observing the policies of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He was born as a citizen of the Empire, and believed that ethnic and linguistic diversity had weakened it. Further, he saw democracy as a destabilizing force, because it placed power in the hands of ethnic minorities, whom he claimed "weakened and destabilize" the Empire, by dividing it against itself. The Nazi rationale was heavily invested in the militarist belief that great nations grow from military power, which in turn grows "naturally" from "rational, civilized cultures". Hitler's calls appealed to disgruntled German Nationalists, eager to save face for the failure of World War I, and to salvage the militaristic nationalist mindset of that previous era. After Austria's and Germany's defeat of World War I, many Germans still had heartfelt ties to the goal of creating a greater Germany, and thought that the use of military force to achieve it was necessary. Many placed the blame for Germany's misfortunes on those, such as Jews and communists, whom they perceived, in one way or another, to have sabotaged the goal of national victory, by obtaining a stranglehold on the national economy, and using the nation's own resources to control and corrupt it.

Nazi Theory

Alfred Rosenberg's racial philosophy wholly embraced the Aryan Invasion Theory, which traced Aryan peoples in ancient Iran invading the Indus Valley Civilization of India, and carrying with them great knowledge and science that had been preserved from the antediluvian world. This "antediluvian world" referred to Thule, the speculative pre-Flood/Ice Age origin of the Aryan race, and is often tied to ideas of Atlantis . Most of the leadership and the founders of the Nazi Party was made of members of "Thule Gesellschaft" (the Thule Society), who romanticized the Aryan race through theology and ritual. Hitler also claimed that a nation is the highest creation of a race, and great nations (literally large nations) were the creation of homogenous populations of great races, working together. These nations developed cultures that naturally grew from races with "natural good health, and aggressive, intelligent, courageous traits". The weakest nations, Hitler said, were those of impure or mongrel races, because they have divided, quarrelling, and therefore weak cultures. -If this were correct theUnited States of America with its famous Melting pot would be weak. The United States is clearly strong.- Worst of all were seen to be the parasitic Untermensch (Subhumans), mainly Jews, but also Gypsies, homosexuals, the disabled and so called anti-socials, all of whom were considered lebensunwertes Leben (Life-unworthy life) owing to their perceived deficiency and inferiority, as well as their wandering, nationless invasions ("the International Jew"). The persecution of homosexuals as part of the Holocaust has seen increasing scholarly attention since the 1990s. Adolf Hitler spent some time homeless in Vienna. If he had not been the Führer he could easily have been designated as having a "lebensunwertes Leben" (Life-unworthy life). The role of homosexuals in the Nazi Party is considered anecdotal by most historians. Some tiny groups, like the International Committee for Holocaust Truth, and authors Scott Lively and Kevin E. Abrams in The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, (ISBN 0964760932), argue that many homosexuals were involved in the inner circle of the Nazi party: Ernst Röhm of the SA (whose execution was thinly rationalized as being based on his homosexuality), Horst Wessel, Max Bielas, and others. This perspective is denounced as hateful propaganda by most human rights associations and groups, stirring heated debates and accusations of censorship and "hate-speech" from both sides. Most historians and scholars of fascism do not take the work of Lively and Abrams seriously, and dismiss it as part of a Christian Right campaign against gay rights. Conversely, some Nazi supporters argue that such claims are simply more attempts to discredit Nazi ideology. According to Nazism, it is an obvious mistake to permit or encourage multilingualism and multiculturalism within a nation. Fundamental to the Nazi goal was the unification of all German-speaking peoples, "unjustly" divided into different Nation States. Hitler claimed that nations that could not defend their territory did not deserve it. Slave races he thought of as less worthy to exist than "master races". In particular, if a master race should require room to live (Lebensraum), he thought such a race should have the right to displace the inferior indigenous races. Hitler draws parallels between Lebensraum and the American ethnic cleansing and relocation policies towards the Native Americans, which he saw as key to the success of the US. Hitler had always admired the Americans for their treatment of the Indians, and considered America to be a shining example of what Germany's ambitions should be. Hitler often compared his Lebensraum policies to the Manifest Destiny policy of the United States, in which the ultimate destiny of the American people was to expand west and defeat the Indians. "Races without homelands", Hitler proclaimed, were "parasitic races", and the richer the members of a "parasitic race" were, the more "virulent" the parasitism was thought to be. A "master race" could therefore, according to the Nazi doctrine, easily strengthen itself by eliminating "parasitic races" from its homeland. This was the given rationalization for the Nazis' later oppression and elimination of Jews, Gypsies, Czechs, Poles, the mentally and physically handicapped, the homosexuals and others not belonging to these groups or categories in what is known as the Holocaust. Hitler and his living space doctrine found immense popularity among the German population. The Wehrmacht, Waffen-SS and other German soldiers as well as civilian paramilitary groups in occupied territories were responsible for the deaths of an estimated eleven million men, women, and children in concentration camps, prisoner-of-war camps, labor camps, and death camps such as Auschwitz and Treblinka. Hitler extended his rationalizations into religious doctrine, claiming that those who agreed with and taught his "truths", were "true" or "master" religions, because they would "create mastery" by avoiding comforting lies. Those that preach love and tolerance, "in contravention to the facts", were said to be "slave" or "false" religions. The man who recognizes these "truths", Hitler continued, was said to be a "natural leader", and those who deny it were said to be "natural slaves". "Slaves", especially intelligent ones he claimed, were always attempting to hinder masters by promoting false religious and political doctrines. Many Nazis thus regarded Christianity as a cowardly creed founded deliberately by Jews, and hoped to see it replaced with a reborn Germanic paganism based partly on Norse myth and partly on the principles of National Socialism. The ideological roots which became German "National Socialism" were based on numerous sources in European history, drawing especially from Romantic 19th Century idealism, and from a biological reading of Friedrich Nietzsche's thoughts on "breeding upwards" toward the goal of an Übermensch (Superhuman). Hitler was an avid reader and received ideas that were later to influence Nazism from traceable publications, such as those of the Germanenorden (Germanic Order) or the Thule society. He also adopted many populist ideas such as limiting profits, abolishing rents and generously increasing social benefits - but only for Germans. Hitler's theories were not only attractive to Germans. People in positions of wealth and power in other nations are said to have seen them as beneficial. Examples are Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company, and Eugene Schueller, founder of L'Oréal. Nevertheless, the support for these theories was highest among the general population of Germany.

Nazi mysticism

Nazi mysticism is a term used to describe a philosophical undercurrent of Nazism; it denotes the combination of Nazism with occultism, esotericism, cryptohistory, and/or the paranormal. Heinrich Himmler was one of the few Nazi leaders to show a strong interest in such matters.

Key elements of the Nazi ideology


- National Socialist Program
- Racism
  - Especially anti-Semitism, which eventually culminated in the Holocaust.
  - The creation of a Herrenrasse (or Herrenvolk) (Master Race = by the Lebensborn (Fountain of Life; A department in the Third Reich)
  - Anti-Slavism
  - Belief in the superiority of the White, Germanic, Aryan or Nordic races.
- Anti-Marxism, Anti-Communism, Anti-Bolshevism
- The rejection of democracy, with as a consequence the ending the existence of political parties, labour unions, and free press.
- Führerprinzip (Leader Principle) Belief in the leader (Responsibility up the ranks, and authority down the ranks.)
- Strong show of local culture.
- Social Darwinism
- Eugenics; sometimes included sterilization and euthanasia
- Religious freedom (Point #24 in the 25 point plan) [http://www.hitler.org/writings/programme/]
- Environmental protection
- Rejection of the modern art movement and an embrace of classical art
- Defense of Blood and Soil (German: "Blut und Boden" - represented by the red and black colors in the Nazi flag)
- "Lebensraumpolitik", "Lebensraum im Osten" (The creation of more living space for Germans in the east)
- Related to Fascism

Nazism and romanticism

According to Bertrand Russell, Nazism comes from a different tradition from that of either liberalism or Marxism. Thus, to understand values of Nazism, it is necessary to explore this connection, without trivializing the movement as it was in its peak years in the 1930s and dismissing it as little more than racism. Many historians say that the anti-Semitic element, which did not exist in the sister fascism movements in Italy and Spain, was adopted by Hitler to gain popularity for the movement, as anti-Semitic prejudice, was very common among the masses in the German Empire at that time. Likewise, anti-Semitism fit very well with the Dolchstosslegende (betrayal myth) which blamed "non-German" Germans for the loss of WW I. Historians universally accept that Nazism's mass acceptance depended upon nationalistic and anti-immigrant (i.e. anti-Semitic) appeals, and a patriotic flattery toward the wounded collective pride of defeated WW I veterans. Others have focused on anti-Semitism (rather than the general anti-immigration) claiming it to have been central to Hitler's Weltanschauung, or world view. Many see strong connections to the values of Nazism and the irrationalist tradition of the romantic movement of the early 19th century. Strength, passion, frank declarations of feelings, and deep devotion to family and community were valued by the Nazis though first expressed by many Romantic artists, musicians, and writers. German romanticism in particular expressed these values. For instance, Hitler identified closely with the music of Richard Wagner (a noted anti-Semite, author of Das Judenthum in der Musik, and idol to the young Hitler). Wagner's most important operas, the Ring cycle, express Aryanist ideals, contain what some people interpret as anti-Semitic caricatures. The idealisation of tradition, folklore, classical thought, the leadership of Frederick the Great, their rejection of the liberalism of the Weimar Republic and the decision to call the German state the Third Reich (which hearkens back to the medieval First Reich and the pre-Weimar Second Reich) has led many to regard the Nazis as reactionary.

Ideological competition

Nazism and Communism emerged as two serious contenders for power in Germany after the First World War, particularly as the Weimar Republic became increasingly unstable. What became the Nazi movement arose out of resistance to the Bolshevik-inspired insurgencies that occurred in Germany in the aftermath of the First World War. The Russian Revolution of 1917 caused a great deal of excitement and interest in the Leninist version of Marxism and caused many socialists to adopt revolutionary principles. The 1918-1919 Munich Soviet and the 1919 Spartacist uprising in Berlin were both manifestations of this. The Freikorps, a loosely organised paramilitary group (essentially a militia of former World War I soldiers) was used to crush both these uprisings and many leaders of the Freikorps, including Ernst Röhm, later became leaders in the Nazi party. Capitalists and conservatives in Germany feared that a takeover by the Communists was inevitable and did not trust the democratic parties of the Weimar Republic to be able to resist a communist revolution. Increasing numbers of capitalists began looking to the nationalist movements as a bulwark against Bolshevism. After Mussolini's fascists took power in Italy in 1922, fascism presented itself as a realistic option for opposing "Communism", particularly given Mussolini's success in crushing the Communist and anarchist movements which had destabilised Italy with a wave of strikes and factory occupations after the First World War. Fascist parties formed in numerous European countries. Many historians, such as Ian Kershaw and Joachim Fest, argue that Hitler's Nazis were one of numerous nationalist and increasingly fascistic groups that existed in Germany and contended for leadership of the anti-Communist movement and, eventually, of the German state. Further, they assert that fascism and its German variant, National Socialism, became the successful challengers to Communism because they were able to both appeal to the establishment as a bulwark against Bolshevism and appeal to the working class base, particularly the growing underclass of unemployed and unemployable and growingly impoverished middle class elements who were becoming declassed (the lumpenproletariat). The Nazis' use of pro-labor rhetoric appealed to those disaffected with capitalism by promoting the limiting of profits, the abolishing of rents and the increasing of social benefits (only for Germans of course) while simultaneously presenting a political and economic model that divested "Soviet socialism" of elements which were dangerous to capitalism, such as the concept of class struggle, "the dictatorship of the proletariat" or worker control of the means of production.

Support of anti-Communists for Fascism and Nazism

Various right-wing politicians and political parties in Europe welcomed the rise of fascism and the Nazis out of an intense aversion towards Communism. According to them, Hitler was the savior of Western civilization and of capitalism against Bolshevism. During the later 1930s and 1940s, the Nazis were supported by the Falange movement in Spain, and by political and military figures who would form the government of Vichy France. A Legion of French Volunteers against Bolshevism (LVF) and other anti-Soviet fighting formations were formed. The British Conservative party and the right-wing parties in France appeased the Nazi regime in the mid- and late-1930s, even though they had begun to criticise its totalitarianism. However Britain under both Conservative and Labour had appeased pre-Nazi Germany as well. Left-wing contemporary commentators suggested that these parties did in fact support the Nazis. Important reasons behind this appeasement included, first, the erroneous assumption that Hitler had no desire to precipitate another world war, and second, when the rebirth of the German military could no longer be ignored, a well-founded concern that neither Britain nor France was yet ready to fight an all-out war against Germany.

Nazism and Anglo-Saxons

Hitler admired the British Empire as a shining example of expansionist Germanic genius. Racialist theories had been developed in Britain and elsewhere during the 19th century to justify European imperial power. Nordicism and Aryanism arose from these developments. Especially important was the idea that North Europeans represented the highest branch of the Aryan peoples, who had in ancient times extended into India and created Indian culture (see Aryan invasion theory). Such Racist imperialist theories justified the idea that some races were innately superior, born to rule, while others were parasitic or inferior "savages". These concepts were taken to an ultimately genocidal conclusion by the Nazis. Aryan invasion theory flag (invented by Otto von Bismarck, based on the Prussian colors black and white, blended with the red and white of the medieval Hanse cities). In 1871, with the foundation of the German Reich, the flag of the North German Confederation became the German Reichsflagge (Reich's flag). Black, white and red subsequently became the colors of the nationalists (e.g. during World War I and the Weimar Republic).]] In his early years Hitler also greatly admired the United States of America. In Mein Kampf, he praised the United States for its race-based anti-immigration laws and for the subordination of the "inferior" black population. According to Hitler, America was a successful nation because it kept itself "pure" of "lesser races". However, as war approached, his view of the United States became more negative and he believed that Germany would have an easy victory over the United States precisely because the United States, in his later estimation, had become a mongrel nation, calling it "half Judaised, half Negrified".

Economic practice

Nazi economic practice concerned itself with immediate domestic issues and separately with ideological conceptions of international economics. Domestic economic policy was narrowly concerned with three major goals:
- Elimination of unemployment
- Elimination of hyperinflation
- Expansion of production of consumer goods to improve middle- and lower-class living standards. All of these policy goals were intended to address the perceived shortcomings of the Weimar Republic and to solidify domestic support for the party. In this, the party was very successful. Between 1933 and 1936 the German GNP increased by an average annual rate of 9.5 percent, and the rate for industry alone rose by 17.2 percent. This expansion propelled the German economy out of a deep depression and into full employment in less than four years. Public consumption during the same period increased by 18.7%, while private consumption increased by 3.6% annually. However, as this production was primarily consumptive rather than productive (make-work projects, expansion of the war-fighting machine, initiation of conscription to remove working age males from the labor force and thus lower unemployment), inflationary pressures began to rear their head again, although not to the highs of the Weimar Republic. These economic pressures, combined with the war-fighting machine created in the expansion (and concomitant pressures for its use), has led some to conclude that a European war was inevitable. (See Causes of war.) Some economists argue that the expansion of the German economy between 1933 and 1936 was not the result of the measures adopted by the Nazi Party, but rather the consequence of economic policies of the prior Weimar Republic which had begun to have an effect. In addition, it has been pointed out that while it is often popularly believed that the Nazis ended hyperinflation, the end of hyperinflation preceded the Nazis by several years. Internationally, the Nazi Party believed that an international banking cabal was behind the global depression of the 1930s. The control of this cabal was identified with the ethnic group known as Jews, providing another link in their ideological motivation for the destruction of that group in the Holocaust. However, broadly speaking, the existence of large international banking or merchant banking organizations was well known at this time. Many of these banking organizations were able to exert influence upon nation states by extension or withholding of credit. This influence is not limited to the small states that preceded the creation of the German Empire as a nation state in the 1870s, but is noted in most major histories of all European powers from the 16th century onward. In an economic sense, Nazism and Fascism are related. They both followed the economic model of corporatism, which included government control of finance and investment (allocation of credit), and supervision of industry and agriculture, combined with a strong influence of corporate business interests in the government's economic decisions. Corporate power and market based systems for providing price information co-existed with a strong, militaristic state. Independent labor unions were banned, and a single, government-run labor organization was created to replace them. Officially, the fascist and Nazi state sought to incorporate and harmonize all diverging economic interests. It was considered very important to unite labor and capital (workers and bosses) in order to combat socialism. The socialist and communist call for the workers of all countries to unite was seen by fascists and Nazis as a mortal enemy of the nationalist spirit which stood at the center of their beliefs.

Effects

These theories were used to justify a totalitarian political agenda of racial hatred and suppression using all the means of the state, and suppressing dissent. Like other fascist regimes, the Nazi regime emphasized anti-communism and the leader principle (Führerprinzip), a key element of fascist ideology in which the ruler is deemed to embody the political movement and the nation. Unlike other fascist ideologies, Nazism was virulently racist. Some of the manifestations of Nazi racism were:
- Anti-Semitism, culminating in the Holocaust
- Ethnic nationalism, including the notion of Germanic people's status as the Herrenvolk ("master race") and Übermensch
- A belief in the need to purify the German race through eugenics - this culminated in the involuntary euthanasia of disabled people and the compulsory sterilization of people with mental deficiencies or illnesses perceived as hereditary Anti-clericalism was also part of Nazi ideology, although it was never acted on as the Nazis often used the church to justify their stance and included many Christian symbols in the Third Reich.

Backlash effects

Perhaps the primary intellectual effect has been that Nazi doctrines discredited the attempt to use biology to explain or influence social issues, for at least two generations after Nazi Germany's brief existence. The Nazi descendants have been mute in the post-war democracies, with some exceptions, when interviewed by psychologists and historians. In Norway, a group of descendants have taken the official stigmatizing appellation "Nazi children" in order to break the silence and to protest against the continuous demonization of their families. Some historical revisionists disseminate propaganda which minimizes the Holocaust and other Nazi acts, and attempts to put a positive spin on the policies of the Nazi regime and the events which occurred under it. These revisionists are often, however, either aligned with, or in the employ of, neo-Nazis, and this fact itself often casts suspicion on their beliefs.

People and history

spin The most prominent Nazi was Adolf Hitler, who ruled Nazi Germany from January 30, 1933, until his suicide on April 30, 1945, and led the German Reich into World War II. Under Hitler, ethnic nationalism and racism were joined together through an ideology of militarism to serve his goals. After the war, many prominent Nazis were convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity at the Nuremberg Trials, where 21 were executed. A few scattered people, mostly not from Germany, converted to Nazism during or after World War II and contributed to further development of the ideology, especially in a spiritual or esoteric direction: Sean Russell, Savitri Devi of India, Miguel Serrano of Chile, George Lincoln Rockwell of the United States.

Nazism in relation to other concepts

See the article Nazism in relation to other concepts for a detailed discussion of Nazism's relation to:
- Religion
- Fascism
- Socialism
- Race

The role of the nation

Race The Nazi symbol is the right-facing swastika. The Nazi state was founded upon a racially defined "German Volk". This is a central concept of Mein Kampf, symbolized by the motto Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer (one people, one empire, one leader). The Nazi relationship between the Volk and the state was called the Volksgemeinschaft—a concept that defined a communal duty of citizens in service to the Reich. The term "National Socialism", arguably derives from this citizen-nation relationship, whereby the term socialism is invoked (despite the fact that socialism is traditionally defined as "the public ownership over the means of production") and is meant to be realized through the common duty of the Volk to the Reich or German nation; all actions are to be in service of the Reich. This notion of the Reich, in turn, was a virulently nationalist ideology, a tendency which decisively defined its organizational thrust and overall immediate and long-term aims. In practice, the Nazis argued, their goal was to bring forth a nation-state as the locus and embodiment of the people's collective will, bound by the Volksgemeinschaft as both an ideal and an operating instrument, geared to serve the interests of the German people. In comparison, many socialist ideologies oppose the idea of nations, which they see as artificial divisions that support the status quo and oppression. They argue that one crucial consequence of national divisions is that they lead to wars of aggression, waged for the interest of the ruling class.

Factors which promoted the success of Nazism

An important question about Nazism is that of which factors promoted its success in Germany. These factors may have included:
- Economic devastation all over Europe after World War I.
- Humiliation of Germany at the Treaty of Versailles, and the widespread belief that the German military were not defeated on the battlefield but "stabbed in the back" by politicians, Jews and socialists.
- A perception that there were a disproportionate number of rich Jewish bankers controlling Germany's finances.
- Perceived Jewish involvement in war profiteering during WWI.
- Appeal of nationalist rhetoric.
- Rejection of Communism and the perception that Communism was a Jewish-inspired and Jewish-led movement; hence the Nazi use of the term Judeo-Bolshevik.
- The split in the working class between Social Democrats and Communists, exacerbated by the Communist's policy of treating the SDP as "Social Fascists"
- The Great Depression.
- Hitler's choice of taking power through legal political means rather than a violent coup after the failure of the Beer Hall Putsch.

Nazi / Third Reich terminology in popular culture

The multiple atrocities and racist ideology that the Nazis followed have made them notorious in popular discourse as well as history. The term "Nazi" has become a genericised term of abuse. So have other Third Reich terms like "Führer" (often spelled "fuhrer" or less often, but more correctly, "fuehrer" in English-speaking countries), "Fascist", "Gestapo" (short for Geheime Staatspolizei, or Secret State Police in English), "uber/ueber" (from Übermensch, superior person, Aryan as opposite to Untermensch) or "Hitler". The terms are used to describe any people or behaviours that are viewed as thuggish, overly authoritarian, or extremist. In the context of the Western World, Nazi or fascist is also sometimes used by (generally Left-wing) opposition to malign political groups (such as the French Front National) advocating restrictive measures on immigration, or strong law enforcement powers. It is sometimes used by other left-wing groups and individuals in the United States and other countries as a type of insult, used broadly against anyone they perceive as disagreeing with their beliefs or opposed to them; conservatives or anyone who is not left-wing. Variations on this theme in the US can include calling someone a "goose-stepper" or a "brownshirt." The terms are also used to describe anyone or anything seen as strict or doctrinaire. Phrases like "Grammar Nazi", "Feminazi", "Open Source Nazi", and "ubergeek" are examples of those in use in the USA. These uses are offensive to some, as the controversy in the popular press over the Seinfeld "Soup Nazi" episode indicates, but still the terms are used so frequently as to inspire "Godwin's Law". More innocent terms, like "fashion police", also bear some resemblance to Nazi terminology (Gestapo, Secret State Police) as well as references to Police states in general. It can also be found that German-sounding or German-looking spellings of English words are used to claim superiority in some area, or to create some impression of power or brutality. For example, to give English words a German touch, the letter 'C' is often replaced by 'K', like "kool" or "kommandos". A well known example of "germanization" of names are the names of heavy metal bands like Mötley Crüe, or Motörhead. See Heavy metal umlaut. Another similar effect can be observed in the usage of typefaces. Some people strongly associate the blackletter typefaces (e.g. fraktur or schwabacher) with Nazi propaganda (although the typeface is much older, and its usage, ironically, was banned by government order in 1941). A less strong association can be observed with the Futura typeface, which today is sometimes described as "germanic" and "muscular".

"Holy sites"

As, especially after World War II, Nazism became for many of its followers a spiritual path akin to a religion, it naturally had some sites of pilgrimage, which one might call "holy sites". Savitri Devi visited many of them during her pilgrimage in 1953.
- Berchtesgaden, home of the Berghof.
- Braunau am Inn, birthplace of Adolf Hitler.
- Feldherrnhalle, site of, the end of, the failed Munich Putsch
- Leonding, where the parents of Adolf Hitler were buried.
- Linz, where Hitler went to school.
- Landsberg am Lech, where Hitler was imprisoned.
- Nuremberg, site of the enormous Nazi rallies.
- Wewelsburg, headquarters of the SS.
- Wunsiedel, burial site of Rudolf Hess. Devi also visited some sites, as part of her pilgrimage, not directly connected to Nazism, but of Germanic spiritual, or German national significance:
- Externsteine, pre-christian formation
- Hermannsdenkmal, statue of Germany's national hero Arminius the Cheruscan Source: [http://library.flawlesslogic.com/devi_bio.htm]

See also

Cheruscan]] Cheruscan]]
- :Category:Nazism

Further reading


- Alfred Sohn-Rethel Economy and Class Structure of German Fascism,London, CSE Bks, 1978 ISBN 0906336007
- List of Adolf Hitler books

External links


- [http://www.shoaheducation.com/nazibeliefs.html Nazi Beliefs]
- [http://www.shoaheducation.com/befehl.html Blind Obedience: Fuhrerprinzip and Befehlnotstand]
- [http://www.third-reich-books.com/x-582-germanys-hitler.htm "Hitler's Boyhood"] - excerpt from contemporary Hitler biography about his boyhood
- [http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/ German Propaganda Archive]
- [http://www.fsumonitor.com/stories/082800Lith.shtml Lithuanian National Socialist Party]
- [http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=35868 Estonian SS men]
- [http://www.ns-archiv.de/index.php NS-Archiv] - Large collection of original scanned Nazi documents
- [http://www.axishistory.com AxisHistory] - contains a lot of information on the Axis countries
- [http://www.jewwatch.com Jewwatch.com] Anti Jewish Site purporting to expose some type of agenda Category:Nazism Category:Nazi Germany Category:Ethnocentrism Category:Eugenics Category:Anti-Semitism Category:Politics and race ja:ナチズム simple:Nazism

Laissez-faire

Laissez-faire is short for "laissez faire, laissez passer," a French phrase meaning "let do, let pass." It is pronounced approximately lessEH fare, lessEH pahssEH. First used by the eighteenth century Physiocrats as an injunction against government interference with trade, it is now used as a synonym for strict free market economics. Laissez-faire economic policy is in direct contrast to statist economic policy. Adam Smith played a large role in popularizing laissez-faire economic theories in English-speaking countries, though he was critical of a number of aspects of what is currently thought of as laissez-faire (such as lack of government regulation of business practices). As well as being used in economic management, the term has also been applied more broadly to a style of management and leadership. It describes any form of control where the controlled are given most or all of the decision-making power. Some use the term anarchist as a synonym for this use of laissez-faire. Small Government and Minarchism are other synonyms used when describing this theory being applied to government. Both terms can include economic policy. Some critics of laissez-faire argue that the attainment of pure capitalism is impossible, since, for example, it is difficult to deal with market failures without an active role for government. Laissez-faire (imperative) is distinct from laisser faire (infinitive), which refers to a careless attitude in the application of a policy, implying a lack of consideration or thought.

Economic Theory

The laissez-faire school of economic thought holds a pure or free market view, that the free market is best left to its own devices; that it will dispense with inefficiencies in a more deliberate and quick manner than any legislating body could. The basic idea is that less government interference in private economic decisions such as pricing, production, and distribution of goods and services makes for a better (more efficient) economy.

History

Pre WWII

Thomas Jefferson was one of the first to use the laissez-faire philosophy, as can easily be interpreted through his inaugural speech. Laissez-faire philosophy is dominant throughout the late 19th and early 20th century in the wealthier countries of Europe and North America. Many historians also see that period as the height of laissez-faires implementation in those countries. However, there are critics who suggest that what was described as "laissez-faire" policy was simply pro-business policy, as with large subsidies for businesses to produce the railroads in the United States or the common use of tariffs by Republican presidents there. In this context, laissez-faire rhetoric was used to justify denial of similar subsidies to the poor and working classes. Some believe these claims are still valid. For many, laissez-faire theories fell into disrepute because of their failure to allow governments to deal with managing the economy during and after World War I, and their alleged role in creating the Great Depression However, some libertarians, such as Milton Friedman argue that by the time of the Great Depression, significant government economic regulation had already taken place in most major economies, as workers and employees in all industries organized themselves into trade unions to demand better living standards, as well as various checks and balances to the perceived "tyranny of laissez-faire". Workers succeeded in obtaining minimum wage laws and a progressive income tax in some countries. International trade barriers were also in the policy pipeline (e.g. Smoot-Hawley Tariff in the USA). So, according to the above-mentioned libertarians, the economies that suffered from the Depression, although possibly closer to laissez-faire than any other economic models that were ever used, still did not embrace pure capitalism.

Post WWII

In the Cold War era, state regulation and involvement in the economy reached a peak. Such policies were implemented by most countries, no matter what side of the Iron Curtain they were on. In this environment laissez-faire economics assumed a stronger ideological edge, especially through the Austrian School (cf. Chicago School) and such luminaries as Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek. Some argued that if the Free World was truly defined by its freedom, then its citizens should have full economic freedoms. Hong Kong was the first Free World territory to embrace laissez-faire economic policy in this era, having officially followed that path since the 1960s and perhaps earlier. During the late 1970's, the Free World experienced many economic difficulties. The government of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom believed that lessening the power of the state in the economy would improve things. Following Thatcher's lead, President Ronald Reagan of the United States, Finance Minister Roger Douglas of New Zealand and Chile's military ruler General Augusto Pinochet also followed a generally laissez-faire path during the 1980's. Other Western leaders implemented more laissez-faire policies at this time, but not to the same extent as these countries. Modern industrialised nations today are not typically representative of laissez-faire principles, as they usually involve significant amounts of government intervention in the economy. This intervention includes minimum wages, significant redistribution through tax, welfare and subsidy programs, government ownership of businesses, regulation of market competition and economic trade barriers. However, much less intervention occurs than did before Thatcher and Reagan's changes were made.

See also
- Economic liberalism
- Liberalism
- Manchester capitalism

Contrast:


- Central planning
- Collectivism
- Communism
- Corporatism
- Dirigisme
- Economic Democracy
- Fascism
- Government ownership
- Market socialism
- Mixed economy
- Planned economy]
- [[Socialism]]
- [[Statism
- Third way Category:Economic ideologies ja:レッセフェール

Localism

Localism usually describes social measures or trends which emphasise or value local and small-scale phenomena. This is in contrast to large, all-encompassing frameworks for action or belief. Localism can therefore be contrasted with globalisation, although the two are best seen as complementary rather than opposing. Localism can be geographical, but often it is not. Examples of localism are:
- The slow food movement, using diverse, seasonal, natural food in reaction to multinational merchandizing of food which is uniform, produced using industrial methods, and called fast food.
- The Interactive Local Media movement as evidenced by:
  - [http://www.kelseygroup.com The Kelsey Group]
  - [http://www.northwestvoice.com The Northwest Voice]
  - [http://www.backfence.com Backfence.com]
- Local radio broadcasting, which is useful to small local communities rather than the national or international community.
- Tertiary government where small community councils make relevant decisions, with some degree of independence from local or national government.
- Workers councils, where the employees of a particular workplace discuss and negotiate with their employer, rather have this done by a national union which may be remote from local issues .
- Postmodernism can be seen as a sort of cultural localism, where accepted cultural values may be ignored in favour of people creating their own criteria of value.
- Federalism and devolution are examples of politically localistic movements.
- Religion (Protestantism and heresies):
  - Exclusive localism holds that there can't be more than one legitimate institutionally visible church at one given location, the variation of which varies but is usually held to be either a city or a neighbourhood.
  - Localism is more generally the congregationalist idea that each local church should be autonomous, only extended to reject any formal association of churches. It is specially relevant among Baptists, where localists reject the forming of Conventions.

See also


- Local church

External link

[http://www.geocities.com/ishmaelsword The Localist Party] Category:Sociology

Populism

Populism is a political philosophy or rhetorical style that holds that the common person's interests are oppressed or hindered by the elite in society, and that the instruments of the state need to be grasped from this self-serving elite and used for the benefit and advancement of the people as a whole. Abraham Lincoln summed up the populist ideology in his famous Gettysburg Address, when he advocated "... government of the people, by the people, for the people." A populist reaches out to ordinary people, talking about their economic and social concerns, and appealing to their common sense. Most scholarship on populism since 1980 has discussed it as a rhetorical style that can be used to promote a variety of ideologies. Populism is often used derisively against appeals on behalf o