Which side has caused the most actual (hands on) violence,. The Political Right,. or The Political Left ?

you're both wrong - i don't usually use wikipedia as a source but in this case it succinctly wraps the case so that i don't have to post a gazillion sources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

" It was a unique variety of fascism that incorporated biological racism and antisemitism.[8] Nazism presented itself as politically syncretic, incorporating policies, tactics and philosophies from right- and left-wing ideologies, though a majority of scholars hold it to be a far right form of politics."

"The Nazis claimed that Jews were the greatest threat to the Aryan race and the German nation. They considered Jews a parasitic race that attached itself to various ideologies and movements to secure its self-preservation, such as: the Enlightenment, liberalism, democracy, parliamentary politics, capitalism, industrialisation, Marxism and trade unionism.[12]"

third reich (third position) was specifically designed to thwart both communism and capitalism
"The Nazis accused communism and capitalism of being associated with Jewish influences and interests.[15] They declared support for a nationalist form of socialism that was to provide for the Aryan race and the German nation economic security, social welfare programs for workers, a just wage, honour for workers' importance to the nation, and protection from capitalist exploitation.[16] Nazism supported private property rights and a mixed economy, though it did not consider the market to be a perfect mechanism and supported the subordination of the economy to be to the goals of the political leadership of the state.[17]"

i did use facts.

"I don't care what a majority of leftist scholars say" i love how you pull out the teeniest piece of what i posted and focus on that. mostly what i love about it is how i knew you would. i could have left that out of my quote but i wanted to see if i was right :) because other than that teeny piece - it is all fact.

"Karl Marx said; said that socialism is a transition period between Capitalism and Communism. Hitler said he didn't like capitalism or communism which would make him a socialist."
that is a logical fallacy. you have said if not a or b then therefore c but there are a number of other options. someone who doesn't like capitalism or communism could for instance be an anarchist.

hitler was also in direct opposition to the democratic party so i guess if we are simply looking at words without regard for their historical meanings then you would agree democrats are not socialists.



but - okee dokee - i'll use *your* facts
from the site that you provided - despit that you conveniently left off at the formation of the nazi party - which was before hitler took it over and transformed it. (but the omission is not surprising - there are some glaring absences from your 25 points too)

first - why did hitler change the name?
"He appealed to all classes of Germans. The name of the Nazi Party itself was deliberately all inclusive – the National Socialist German Workers' Party."
http://www.historyplace.com/w...

re: a threat from within
"The greatest challenge to Hitler's survival during the early years of the Third Reich came from his own brown-shirted storm troopers, the SA (Sturmabteilung) led by Chief of Staff, Ernst Röhm.
.....
Many of the working-class men who made up the SA truly believed in the 'socialism' of National Socialism and wanted to grab their share of Germany's wealth, at the expense of someone else, and if necessary by force. This Second Revolution was what they had been fighting for all along, or so they believed.
...." and then of course rohm is killed and with him the whole socialist hope http://www.historyplace.com/w...


best for last (emphasis mine)
re - goebbels
"But this 'love' was tempered by ideological differences. Goebbels belonged to the Nazi faction led by Gregor Strasser ///////that actually believed in the 'socialism' of National Socialism and had sympathy for Marxism, a sentiment totally unacceptable to Hitler./////////"
http://www.historyplace.com/w...




the fact is that hitler and the nazi party was an entity to itself. it cannot be seen as part of anything but itself.

you want to tag your 25 points but as i said you leave some out like say
"24. We demand freedom for all religious faiths in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of the Germanic race.

The party as such represents the point of view of a positive Christianity without binding itself to any one particular confession. It fights against the Jewish materialist spirit within and without, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our folk can only come about from within on the pinciple:"

but as i've already pointed out those were long before hitler had power - before he even had power within the party.

what came after he was in power were the nuremberg laws and THOSE are his true purpose.

you also seem to put a lot of stock in the expressed purpose of a sociopath. you say that because he said socialist - he was a socialist. when he laid out his thirteen points he said that germany didn't want war

but thanks for the site.

You said; i love how you pull out the teeniest piece of what i posted and focus on that mostly what i love about it is how i knew you would.
Answer: ”I focused on you basing your entire opinion on leftist scholars opinions.".

You said; “that is a logical fallacy. you have said if not a or b then therefore c but there are a number of other options. someone who doesn't like capitalism or communism could for instance be an anarchist.”
Answer; “Name the fallacy, you can’t. Anarchist is not an economical system but support Communism which is one of the two economic systems . You have a break down in logic.
“Anarchism is often considered to be a radical left-wing ideology,[9][10] and much of anarchist economics and anarchist legal philosophy reflect anti-statist interpretations of communism,”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

You said; “hitler was also in direct opposition to the democratic party.”
Answer: Democracy and a dictatorship are not economical systems, they are a political system. It is another one of your break downs in your logic.

You said; “despit that you conveniently left off at the formation of the nazi party.”
Answer: List them and explain why they are glaring examples!

You said; “Many of the working-class men who made up the SA truly believed in the 'socialism' of National Socialism and wanted to grab their share of Germany's wealth,”
Answer: Yes, that is what socialist do. They line their own pockets. Look at Liberals and Obama, $4.3 trillion dollars of public debt by the end of 2011 according to OMB.

You said; "But this 'love' was tempered by ideological differences. Goebbels belonged to the Nazi faction led by Gregor Strasser ///////that actually believed in the 'socialism' of National Socialism and had sympathy for Marxism, a sentiment totally unacceptable to Hitler./////////"
Answer: Yes Gobbels was a Commie, Hitler was a socialist.

I am sorry it is so long but you made so many accusations and wrote a book. Once I can again produce fact that provide evience that capitalists like Rommel and Van Staffenburg didn't supportt the Nazi's like the socialist did.

When are you going to produce facts that Hitler was right wing and not a sociaslist? I will tell you when, never.

”I focused on you basing your entire opinion on leftist scholars opinions.".

except i didn't do that

"“Name the fallacy, you can’t."
it's a false trichotomy. yes, i know the official term is false dichotomy but the principle holds - you've presented as if there were only three options

"Anarchist is not an economical system but support Communism which is one of the two economic systems . You have a break down in logic. "

who was talking of economical systems - we were talking forms of government. but since you want to talk economical systems - here's wiki list of them - i'm sure (since it's wiki) that at least some of them are bunk but it still leaves a number of actual systems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

"Democracy and a dictatorship are not economical systems, they are a political system. It is another one of your break downs in your logic. "
first off -again i was talking forms of government but secondly you can not divorce that from the rest of the statement - my point was that there is an action piece to words - and they change and are shaped by events.

"You said; “despit that you conveniently left off at the formation of the nazi party.”
Answer: List them and explain why they are glaring examples! "

your answer is actually to a piece that you haven't quoted. i do list one of them later in my post. but the comment about leaving off at the formation of the party was to point out that these were not in fact hitler's design .. . but you knew that

"Answer: Yes, that is what socialist do. They line their own pockets. "
yes, and the people who wanted to do that were in direct oppositon to hitler

"Answer: Yes Gobbels was a Commie, Hitler was a socialist. "
no no no my friend - i used your site - YOUR authoritative source said that goebbels was a socialist. you wanted to school me so there you have it.

"Once I can again produce fact that provide evience that capitalists like Rommel and Van Staffenburg didn't supportt the Nazi's like the socialist did."
good gravy man - i provided evidence from your source that socialists didn't support the nazis - that the socialist part of nazi was used only to reel them in and then abandoned.

"When are you going to produce facts that Hitler was right wing and not a sociaslist? I will tell you when, never."
you really aren't paying attention are you - i've never set out to prove that hitler was right wing. i, in fact, said all along he was neither right nor left wing. i've restated it in so many ways that i'm simply flabbergasted . .. okay, i'm not really flabbergasted because you have seem to live inside of a false dichotomy. you are convinced all things falls either over here or over there.

there are more things in heaven and earth kiosk than are dreamt of in your philosophy

you're both wrong - i don't usually use wikipedia as a source but in this case it succinctly wraps the case so that i don't have to post a gazillion sources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

" It was a unique variety of fascism that incorporated biological racism and antisemitism.[8] Nazism presented itself as politically syncretic, incorporating policies, tactics and philosophies from right- and left-wing ideologies, though a majority of scholars hold it to be a far right form of politics."

"The Nazis claimed that Jews were the greatest threat to the Aryan race and the German nation. They considered Jews a parasitic race that attached itself to various ideologies and movements to secure its self-preservation, such as: the Enlightenment, liberalism, democracy, parliamentary politics, capitalism, industrialisation, Marxism and trade unionism.[12]"

third reich (third position) was specifically designed to thwart both communism and capitalism
"The Nazis accused communism and capitalism of being associated with Jewish influences and interests.[15] They declared support for a nationalist form of socialism that was to provide for the Aryan race and the German nation economic security, social welfare programs for workers, a just wage, honour for workers' importance to the nation, and protection from capitalist exploitation.[16] Nazism supported private property rights and a mixed economy, though it did not consider the market to be a perfect mechanism and supported the subordination of the economy to be to the goals of the political leadership of the state.[17]"