"Is the far-right totalitarian socio-political ideology and practices associated with Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party (NSDAP) in Germany.[1][2][3] During Hitler's rise to power in 1930s Europe, it was frequently referred to as Hitler Fascism (German: Hitlerfaschismus) and Hitlerism (German: Hitlerismus). The later related term "neo-Nazism" is applied to other far-right groups with similar ideas which formed after the Second World War and therefore after the Third Reich collapsed.
Nazism is a form of fascism,[4][5][6][7] with disdain for liberal democracy and the parliamentary system. Its beliefs include support for dictatorship,[3] fervent antisemitism, anti-communism, anti-Slavism,[8] anti-Romani sentiment, scientific racism, white supremacy, Nordicism, social Darwinism, homophobia, ableism, and the use of eugenics. The extreme nationalism of the Nazis originated in pan-Germanism and the ethno-nationalist Völkisch movement which had been a prominent aspect of German ultranationalism since the late 19th century.
Nazism was strongly influenced by the Freikorps paramilitary groups that emerged after Germany's defeat in World War I, from which came the party's underlying "cult of violence".[9] It subscribed to pseudo-scientific theories of a racial hierarchy,[10] identifying ethnic Germans as part of what the Nazis regarded as an Aryan or Nordic master race.[11] Nazism sought to overcome social divisions and create a homogeneous German society based on racial purity which represented a people's community (Volksgemeinschaft).
The Nazis aimed to unite all Germans living in historically German territory, as well as gain additional lands for German expansion under the doctrine of Lebensraum and exclude those whom they deemed either Community Aliens or "inferior" races (Untermenschen)...
From Wikipedia
To give you a quicker, more modern, and simpler definition of what's called National Conservatism today:
The modern version of what Germany was doing in the 1930s and 40s, is this big government, social culture war, where they want the national government to enforce their way of life onto everyone else in the country, through government force and where the rule of law and Constitution doesn't apply to them.
And on economic policy, a mixture of national socialism when it comes to tariffs and raising taxes on individuals, private news organizations, and business's, whose politics they don't like. And they combine that with an oligarchic economic policy that's dominated by millionaires and billionaires and leaves the middle class out of the picture.
This might sound like class warfare to some people. But that's what they impose on anyone who tries to speak out against them. They don't believe in the "free market". I'm not sure they even believe in a private market. They want a national market that's ideologically in bed with the national government.
So if you are a Libertarian today and you are seeing MAGA people trying to get you on board to what they're doing and they'll pitch that by basically saying:
"It's the Left and the real Conservatives and Liberals who oppose you and want to interfere with your way of life and obstruct you. The real enemy is the Left, as well as Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. Not us. We need to eliminate the Left (at all costs) even if that means using illiberal, anti-conservative, anti-libertarian, policies and practices, to accomplish our goal of eliminating the Left and creating a real free society."
If you actually are a Libertarian, you might say:
"No way. Your brand of fascism completely goes against my libertarian ideals. I'm not a Libertarian to take out people I simply disagree with, through government force, or using violence."
But that's not always the case when it comes to Libertarians and how they view MAGA. From Reason Magazine:
"His (meaning Donald Trump) appeal to some who use the libertarian label is perplexing, then—except in that he's not Vice President Kamala Harris. Harris is also someone no libertarian could affirmatively wish to be president—except that she's not Trump.
Libertarians should have the courage of their claimed convictions to radically oppose the U.S. government status quo (which in the past eight years has been managed or represented by both Trump and Harris) and feel no obligation to positively affirm that either unlibertarian choice should reign. Not voting or promoting either is an appropriate option. Voting for or promoting Libertarian Party candidate Chase Oliver is an option as well.
Even on specific issues that seem to animate the more right-leaning corners of the libertarian world, Trump is either terrible or not clearly exceptional: He ruled as an inflationist and intends to continue to; he has no real concrete ideas for shrinking spending or government's size and reach, and certainly didn't do so in his first term, while vaguely and improbably promising Elon Musk will take care of it in a second; Trump can be expected to expand government spending and control in the name of allegedly pro-worker industrial policy that will likely have no better effect on America's fortunes than past industrial policy efforts...
From Reason Magazine
And from Libertarian author Yaron Brook:
"I'm not willing to give up in the name of fighting the Left my liberty over here in order to fight... I have 2 parties over here that are trying to take away my liberty. I get to choose? Maybe you guys over here want to take away less of my liberty than the Left. But I'm not willing to give up any of my liberty. And I'm willing to fight to preserve it. So we should have this discussion and debate and I should be in a position to at least try to convince you to leave me alone.
Leave the individual to be free to pursue his own life. And don't impose your values on him. And as long as you do that, I don't care what values you pursue, I don't care what traditions you follow, you can follow any traditions you want. As long as you don't force me to follow the traditions that you think are appropriate."
More from Yaron Brook on this subject: "When National Conservatives Echo Socialists...
I think Libertarian blogger Tom Mullen had a great line about how Libertarians should try to deal with Donald Trump and MAGA:
"He's (meaning Donald Trump) like a machine gun on a swivel with no one at the controls, spraying bullets in all directions. Sometimes he hits something you want hit, sometimes he hits something you don't want hit. The key is to applaud the good things, criticize the bad things, and above all know when to duck."
A meme with a related sentiment has been going around that still makes me chuckle when I see it...
The Libertarian argument against Donald Trump and MAGA, against the American Nationalists, or the Anglo-Saxon-American Nationalists... I think is very simple: he's not 1 of you. And that should explain the other reasons why you shouldn't support him. Sure, he wants lower (if not zero taxation on corporations) and would like to eliminate certain Federal departments and agencies. But, if you are a Libertarian, you also believe in the U.S. Constitution. And you don't want an American dictator in this country being able to do whatever he wants, simply because you like some of the things that he's done.
And once America has a dictator, he could literally do everything that he wants. Including taking people out (not just the Left) simply for opposing what he's doing. Which could include Libertarians as well.
You can also see this post on WordPress.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All relevant comments about the posts you are commenting on are welcome but spam and personal comments are not.