Talk:Nazism/FAQ

Below are answers to frequently asked questions about the corresponding page Nazism. They address concerns, questions, and misconceptions which have repeatedly arisen on the talk page. Please update this material when needed.

Why does this article say that the Nazis were right-wing?

Because that is the consensus of reliable sources, in this case historians and political scientists.

But the word "socialist" is right in their name!

Many political entities have names that can be misleading. Consider, for example, the Holy Roman Empire (a confederation of mainly German territories during the Middle Ages and the early modern period) and North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (a totalitarian dictatorship). The usage of the word "socialism" by the Nazis is different from the common usage of the term "socialism" to refer to an economic philosophy involving advocacy for social ownership of the means of production. The phrase "national socialist" was a nationalist response to the rise of socialism in Europe by offering a redefinition of "socialism" to refer to the promotion of the interests of the nation, as opposed to ideas of individual self-interest. But there was no policy of social ownership of the means of production. The Nazis did talk about capitalism being bad, but they defined it as a Jewish-originated economic philosophy based on individualism that promoted plutocracy in the interest of the Jews, at the expense of non-Jewish nations and races. This was put in contrast to the Nazis' conception of socialism, which was done in order to win over people attracted to anti-capitalist and socialist ideas to their cause. They rejected ideas of equality and working class solidarity, instead advocating for social hierarchy and national strength. This article sums it up well.

I made an offhand comment about it and somebody just came along and deleted it! What should I do?

Nothing. See this discussion where the community came to a consensus that we have entertained the numerous questions and claims about the Nazis being left-wing enough, and that continued engagement with people pushing this line of reasoning is not helpful to the article.

That doesn't seem very fair. Don't Wikipedia policies require editors to assume good faith? What if somebody posts that position here with a really good argument?

See the following links, all of which are to discussions about this very question over time. Any argument someone thinks is novel has already been made, been responded to, and failed to convince anyone. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28]

But what if I find a large number of very reliable sources all claiming that Nazism is left-wing?

Then you will be more than welcome to show them to us, so that we can see that they are very reliable and that they assert that Nazism is a left-wing ideology. If they are, then we will change the article.

Right-wing or far-right (rfc)

Please consider joining the feedback request service.

An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following list:

Politics, government, and law

When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

In this FAQ page and on the related template seen in use here where it says "Nazism is a right-wing ideology", should we instead say that Nazism is a far-right ideology? Helper201 (talk) 09:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Far-right. We specify and distinguish on political parties Wikipedia pages whether they are right-wing or far-right. The page for Nazism also specifically calls it a "far-right totalitarian" ideology. So, it would be in keeping and consistent to label the ideology in this way. Helper201 (talk) 09:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far-right per Helper201. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 13:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far-right as it's unambiguous. "Right-wing" is broader and encompasses many other ideologies that have no relation or connection to Nazism. We describe Nazism as being far-right very clearly elsewhere, so there's no reason why we shouldn't do the same here. — Czello ^(music) 12:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far-right. Slatersteven (talk) 12:32, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far-right. Nazism is right wing, but it's more precise to say it's far-right. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 12:45, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far-right. I added content quoting two former European royals, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany and Otto von Hapsburg and Austria, who were definitely ideologically right-wing, condemn Nazism. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 13:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far-right. Everyone else has said what I could've, it should be described as such for the sake of precision and/or pedantry. Docktuh (talk) 21:55, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far-right. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:18, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far-right per Helper301 and Czello. HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 00:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously Nazism is part of the far-right, but these templates do not exist to summarize the entire topic in broad terms, they exist to answer specific recurring issues with editors. They were created in response to a group of editors trying to change right-wing to left-wing. As far as I know, there has not been a similar problem with editors posting to say that Nazism is right-wing but isn't far-right. If that is an issue, we should adjust to FAQ to address that directly. Grayfell (talk) 01:09, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have any evidence of that being an issue, e.g. among parties confused into thinking "far-right" means "the far right I am familiar with in my country in 2024"? The condition "editors [frequently] posting to say that Nazism is right-wing but isn't far-right" being met isn't a prerequisite for us using consistent wording to describe the subject; the consistency is sufficient in itself. And making the FAQ's language usage consistent on this point with the articles will actually help preclude that hypothetical condition arising in first place. But we already have an internal content fork with two competing FAQ pages that are each over-long and need to be combined and condensed, so should not add another concern to either of them unless were are convinced it's needed to address an actual frequently asked question (or frequently asserted error, frequently demanded but inappropriate edit request). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 04:01, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]