The Left is not Hitler: It’s Still Marx

There’s been a trend of calling Leftists “Nazi’s” and “Hitler” or “Goebbels.” Particularly among younger Conservatives, it’s become a meme that the Left “resembles Nazi’s.” This isn’t entirely incorrect, but it is inexact. The Left is, as it has been for a very long time, a movement of Leninist Boshevists, and they should be accurately labeled as such.

Last night, this trend of Hitler tagging Leftists leapt back onto the stage (literally) when Jack Posobiec and Laura Loomer disrupted a rendition of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar in New York City featuring a Trumpesque Caesar’s assassination. Posobiec screamed “this is Goebbels- you are all Goebbels” at the crowd booing his colleague off stage. 1 While I’ll admit this was pretty amusing to see, it was also a little bit cringe inducing. If he’d said “this is Stalin. This is Beria. This is Brezhnev,” I’d have appreciated his comments more thoroughly.

In my opinion, many on the Right can be forgiven for conflating Nazis and Bolsheviks. After all, Marxism and Nazism share the same roots and many of the same beliefs. They were spawned in the same region, in a similar environment. They both attacked perceived deficiencies in a capitalistic industrial society from similar perspectives, using similar (sometimes identical) rhetorical devices.

Bolshevism and  Nazism are not identical, however. Nazis were, after all, responding to generations of Marxist discourse as well as centuries of capitalism. Nazism took Socialism and said “yes, Socialism is desirable, but not for everyone.” Where Marxism typically privileged the Proletariate in its Socialist aims, Nazism privileged a specific race and ideology to the exclusion of all others.  Just look at Goebbels’ quote on Socialism:

We are against the political bourgeoisie, and for genuine nationalism! We are against Marxism, but for true socialism! We are for the first German national state of a socialist nature! We are for the National Socialist German Workers’ Party! 2

The “true socialism” cited by Goebbels above refers to the so-called “‘socialism of the strong.” This paradoxical application of socialist ideas is as different from Bolshevism as it is confused. I say confused and paradoxical because the question is begged here: if this group is so “strong,” why does it need socialism? Can this group not provide for its own welfare without plundering and subjugating others? The truth is, Bolshevists are no more in agreement with these Nazi sentiments than I am. It doesn’t make sense to conflate these ideologies.

These Nazi sentiments are still alive in this country. “Welfare for White Babies” is precisely the kind of policy Goebbels really meant in his “socialism for the strong” rhetoric. Just recently, a popular YouTube radio show host associated with the Alt-Right suggested that white women in their 20’s should start taking full advantage- indeed, abuse- of the welfare system to “preserve the future of our white race.” I suggest it is intellectually dishonest to suggest the current Leftist insurgents are “Nazis” when there are many on the current Right who are actively proliferating Nazi ideology.

I’d hate to think that Alt-Light personalities like Jack Posobiec are resorting to calling Leftists “Nazis” out of the feeling that calling them Communists, Marxists, and Bolshevists is inadequately slanderous. To me, Marxism and Fascism are identically poisonous. I don’t have a preference for either, and I don’t find any reason to judge either as worse, per se, than the other. Neither has produced a functional, sustainable alternative society that provides for the people it purports to champion. Granted that both of these twain ideologies are equally dangerous, why not name the current opposition by its most accurate label?

If we label the rising Hard Left in America what it truly is- Bolshevik- we invite them to distance themselves from their own ideology, or not. They can reject political violence and insurrectionist Socialism, or they have to expose themselves as no less dangerous to our civilization than Stalin and his cohorts. They can reject the aims of abolishing our natural Rights and economic freedoms, or they can publicly embrace authoritarian Marxian statism much as Bernie Sanders has done. 3

In conclusion, we might get a laugh out of seeing confused Marxians called their mortal enemies, it will ultimately fail to stick. It isn’t as efficient as simply calling them what they truly are. When something as corrupt as what these people represent is readily available, why waste time muddying the waters?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s