this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
896 points (96.8% liked)
Political Weirdos
1187 readers
65 users here now
A community dedicated to the weirdest people involved in politics.
- Focus on weird behaviors and beliefs
- Follow Iemmy.world TOS
- Don’t be a jerk
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think you're missing the main parts of being a Nazi that people dont like about Nazis.
Nope, those parts are common to all fascists.
To be historically correct, the nazis were not fascists, they were Nazis. The italians with Mussolini were fascists. Hitler wanted so hard to be a fascist, a bit like donald wants to be putin.
Incorrect. Nazism is a form of fascism. They're not mutually exclusive any more than either is with the even broader category 'right wing politics ".
The original ones, yeah, but nowhere near the only ones.
Hitler and other later fascists (including the ones currently in charge of the US government) basically built their own variant of the same basic recipe
All three are (were in the case of Hitler and hopefully all of them soon) fascists, just different flavors.
Basically, nazism is fascism with fervent antisemitism and "scientific racism".
I agree to it all except hitler wasn't a pure fascist because he couldn't take over the german companies and so on. It's nitpicking ofc. but as evil as they both were there are differences.
Again, that's not how fascism works. It doesn't have to be a carbon copy of the original Mussolini fascism in order to be fascism.
Yes, but the similarities are such that they still both fit into the basic category of fascism.
That, and a misunderstanding of what constitutes fascism.
It fits todays definition of fashism.
Not the one in the 1920-30-40, that was why I said "historically".
I don't disagree with you.
They were absolutely considered, and often called, fascists back then. Especially during the war.
He wasnt a fascist either though. He was a right wing populist. While they share similarities, they are not the same thing.
Fascism is a totalitarian ideology that seeks to create a unified national community under an authoritarian leader, abolishing liberal democracy and subordinating all aspects of life to the state. It is revolutionary in nature, aiming to replace existing institutions with a new, militarised order grounded in mythic nationalism and the glorification of violence.
Right-wing populism operates within, and often manipulates, democratic systems rather than abolishing them. It claims to defend “the people” against “the elites” but usually through electoral means and rhetorical warfare rather than institutional annihilation. Its nationalism is defensive and nostalgic rather than expansionist or revolutionary.
Good morning, we might be witnessing the gradient from right wing populism to fascism in the next years.
How the fuck do you think Nazi Germany started?
The German Workers Party was also far right fascists.
The reason that Hitler and Nazis were able to gain power was because the allies put all the weight of world war 1 onto Germany, and that, together was taking on debt that they expected to pay by winning the war, destroyed their economy. Then they took already well established hatred of Jewish people, and incorporated it into the Nazi party. It would be a mistake to assume that hate for Jewish people started with Nazis. It did not. It started 2000 years before that, and prevailed ever since by Christian groups who blamed "The Jews" for the death of Christ. Need I continue with the history lesson?
Being a right wing populist doesnt lead into Nazism naturally. And the wording of Kirk was never about killing anyone. It was about preserving culture and opposing multiculturalism. So you can still call him a cunt, and you would still be right. You dont need the popular buzzwords to make it so. What he was, was bad enough.