Not by a hair of my chiny chin chin....

[Watchman]

I offer up Scandinavia as the poster child of how you do applied Leftism right. Not that say most of Western Europe has done too badly with it either...

Where exactly is he rightwing? Let's start there, first thing about the political spectrum thingie, top down vs bottom up, state control vs power of the individual.

Oh right, because the Left-Right distinction is solely about the degree of control the regime exterts on the society. And the sole difference between the two is that the Leftists are the micromanaging control freaks. How could I forget ?

Did you forget somewhere that the Nazi political program was basically ultranationalist reactionarism - both traits of the far Right - taken to something of a logical extreme and beyond ? They pretty much rejected wholesale the heritage of Enlightement ideas about universalist human equality, "as much good for as many as possible" and w/e - which conversely as it happens are the very philosophical lineage the "Marxist"/Leftist end of political spectrum largely hails from.

[Watchman]

Also, Mangu's comparision list is made of fail and tendentiousness as it entirely disregards differences in historical starting points, resources etc. Plus seems to forget most of the LatAm examples at some point of another were ruled by some kind of tyrant, military junta or similar unpleasantness with definite Right leanings (the US made sure of that, anyway). Quite often the Left-wing regimes thereafter have been busy trying to undo the damage and socioeconomic retardation those jolly folks left behind...

Also, why's Cuba not there somewhere ? Far as I know it's a decent enough place to live as LatAm states go (as long as you don't get in trouble with the authorities anyway), and by the yardstick of LatAm autocrats Castro has really been a real softy. Plus AFAIK the improvement in general standard of living, healthcare etc. under the Communist regime has been pretty noticeable compared to what was before...
Would it have muddled the grossly simplistic equation presented too much or something ?

[Fragony]

Oh right, because the Left-Right distinction is solely about the degree of control the regime exterts on the society. And the sole difference between the two is that the Leftists are the micromanaging control freaks. How could I forget ?

Did you forget somewhere that the Nazi political program was basically ultranationalist reactionarism - both traits of the far Right - taken to something of a logical extreme and beyond ? They pretty much rejected wholesale the heritage of Enlightement ideas about universalist human equality, "as much good for as many as possible" and w/e - which conversely as it happens are the very philosophical lineage the "Marxist"/Leftist end of political spectrum largely hails from.

not so much

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler

That really gets the blood pumping doesn't it

[Watchman]

...your argument is based on taking Hitler's populist BS at face value...?

Jeez.

[Tribesman]

That really gets the blood pumping doesn't it

Wow hitler talked of unseemly evaluation of human beings

We are racists, we are enemies of today's Jews for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of the master race being according to wealth and property instead of respectable lineage, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions

[Fragony]

...your argument is based on taking Hitler's populist BS at face value...?

Jeez.

Like you do with the marxist theory's?

[Watchman]

Like you do with the marxist theory's?

Marxism at least has a proper theory, although "Really Existing Socialism" as the Soviets rather ambigiously called their system didn't actually have much to do with it.
Do explain where exactly I'm taking it at a face value, though. 'Cause I know for a fact I could write you a short essay on where the man was patently wrong... (Pretty much *no* serious academician these days employs Marxist theories in their pure, classical form; as with any viable school of thought, they have been adapted and modified and whatever as the discourse develops.)

Oh looky, a strawman. Let's BBQ!

The Nazis chiefly had delusions of racial supremacy, a raging case of ultranationalist militarism and copious amounts of wholly shameless opportunism. If they thought they had a reason to tell you black is white, they did - and changed it right back the next day if convenient.
Well, those guys did deny rationality having too much value. They didn't have to be consistent or make much sense...

Anyway, what you're patently missing with your original quote from Adolf is that the Nazis competed with the Communists over the support of the same populist-fodder demographic - angry, disenfranchised working class stiffs who'd just been royally screwed over by the Great Depression. Like any good populist movement both gleefully played the "fat cat capitalists suck" card for the benefit of the audience; among the major differences were that the Communists actually meant it (if you know anything at all about the economic policies of the Third Reich, you know the Nazis were quite cozy indeed with Big Business - as long as it served their purposes, anyway) and that the Nazis were wont to indentify those "fat cat capitalists" as Jews...
Yeah, they actually did think just about everything bad in the world was the work of a vast Jewish conspiracy for some reason hellbent on destroying the German race. I did say they didn't put much stock on rationality, no ?


As for Stalinism, fair enough - although it is actually pretty debatable how much anything at all that has in common with the principles of Marxist theory anymore. But the only thing that proves is that anything taken to extremes turns toxic and insane, and probably not too different from comparable fringe lunacy at the other end of the spectrum. (Well, the nutso-Lefties generally fail to play the nationalism card and instead claim everyone equally should be included in their "happy workers' paradise"; the Right-wing whackjobs conversely have a notable propensity for being exclusivist and racist.)
Probably also worth noting the USSR in peacetime was actually mostly a mellow enough place; the really bad happened chiefly on Stalin's watch. That guy seriously should be the illustration by the textbook definition of Dubious Management Practices.
Also, North Korea's "Juche" thingy is pretty crackpot even by Stalinist standards.

I'm incidentally a bit surprised nobody's brought up the Khmer Rouge yet. Probably because it's pretty seriously difficult to see where their stark lunacy had anything to do with any commonly recognised ideological framework, and because the Vietnamese came over and booted tham back into the jungles (and got flak from both the US and China for it... ).

[Kralizec]

Left/right catagorisation has outlived its usefulness by at least three or four generations. An X-Y graph with economy and state power as seperate dimensions is a major improvement, but I particulary like the horseshoe model as it illustrates how close stalinism and fascism are in practice.

I recall someone mentioned Cuba as communist succes story, and I'll have to disagree. It managed so well during the cold war because the USSR bought their agricultural products deliberately far above the market price to support a strategicly located ally. After the USSR was disbanded Cuba lapsed into poverty. That the USA still won't trade is only one factor, and not a decisive one.