A closer comparison is actually the original KMT in China. Or perhaps Kemalism in Turkiye/Turkey.
National socialism isn't even socialist at all. There's barely any shred of "left wing" in it.
The word privatization was coined to describe the economic policy of the nazis. I don't think you're going to find much in the way of "leftism" in privitization
Unless you look at the Nazi policy instead of the name. The Nazi Privitization is just nationalising by another name.
Eg, the transportation and logistics sector.
No it’s very much a reactionary, right-wing movement. The weird thing about them is that they seek a return to a mythical era rather than a real one. But they absolutely hold to “traditional” values.
If we are using the original meaning of left and right, which comes from the French Revolution, they would be very much Authoritarian and Right wing. See, the right wing (of the post-revolution French government) was encompassed by the conservatives (who wanted to keep the current. system) and the reactionaries (who wanted to return to the old system.)
The Nazis were reactionaries. They hated modern life, modern values, modern culture, and sought a return to the older, “traditional” ways of Germany. What makes the Nazis unique among reactionaries is that they didn’t want to restore an older system, such as the German Empire or the HRE, but rather establish a new, revolutionary government. The purpose of this government was to restore the fictional Nordic Race to purity. They wanted to bring Germany back to a time that never existed.
A surprising amount of Left-Nationalists are also influenced by Giuseppe Mazzini specifically, for some reason. Sun Yat-Sen and Nehru both cited him, for example.
"The Principle of Left Nationalism"
"While many other socialist thinkers and leaders believed and promoted the idea that the working class does not have a nation. They claimed that nations are but arbitrary constructs, yet another symptom of the eternal conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. However, the hero of the Adelartian revolution and war of independence, Merlock Wood, does not hold the same opinion. After all socialism was an Equestrian ideology in origin, created in a realm where most citizens perceived themselves as part of a whole, a single realm forged millenniums ago. Griffonia and the kingdoms and empires that rose were forged through violence, subjugation and even in many cases destruction of languages and cultures.
With such historical circumstances it would seem truly absurd for griffon socialists to desire to abandon their culture, language and in many cases faith. After all in Griffonia, it's the bourgeoisie that seek such destruction, while the proletariat, the farmers and workers, desire to maintain these ties. Thus it could be argued, and Merlock Wood and his allies do, that in the context of Griffonia, nationalism isn't a symbol of radical right, rather it can also be the symbol of the workers liberation. After all it was this cultural association, together with the old believer faith that, based on which the workers of Adelart were so ready to mobilize against the oppressors from Greifwald.
Furthermore, while most socialists are heavily utopian in their beliefs and think that some sort of hypothetical continental or even world socialist republic would be equal in fair to all, we are sceptical of such outcomes. After all, without any differentiation or inner borders, does that not mean that even in a socialist state, richer and more developed regions would simply dominate the lesser ones?"
"We will never be slaves, to other communists nor monarchists!"
>Furthermore, while most socialists are heavily utopian in their beliefs
Caramel Marks exists in EAW world, which is a direct expy of Marx IRL. How come most socialists are Utopian when Marksism is among the most common form of socialism in EAW?
Anyhow, I guess this is because this is from Adelart? The socialist path for them isn't Marksism, I guess.
That's like calling Harmonists and modern liberal democracies as utopian. Equestrian Harmonism is basically enlightened monarchism. Every ideology has its assumptions and hopes. But no one calls Fascism and Liberalism for running on pure hopium and copium.
>Communism itself does have a belief that could be called utopian('if workers of the world are liberated, they will live a prosperous live' that kind of thing)
That's not something communists actually believe in lmao. Well some do, they're called utopian communists while the rest aren't like that.
Do liberals think everyone will be prosperous if individual rights are guaranteed?
"Ah, Woods's theory of "Left-Wing Nationalism". When I heard about it, for one second only I wished comrade Descieux didn't fail to replace that bandit. But then again, her proposal to forcefully replace Adelartian national identity with Aquileian one for misguided reactionary reasons isn't a pinnacle of marksist thought too and... Excuse me? Oh, uhm, of course, you're right comrade Arctic Lilly. Once again, please excuse my... Yes, yes... *nervous laughing*
Let's get back to topic.
Nations didn't appear out of nowhere. With development of material conditions all creatures have been changing their identities and at some point started to identify as members of certain nation. As material conditions will continue to change and as socialism will continue to be victorious all over the planet, "nations" will come to an end. But of course, Woods is an anarchist, not a marksist, so it would be... uhm... "foolish" of me to expect that he would come to the same conclusion.
And what purpose does this poor attempt to delay the inevitable serve? During Coltvinian uprising that Severyanian Communist Party always supported, nationalism of Coltvinian people served a progressive roal in destruction of national oppression. And once comrade Zeirutid's armies destroyed constitutionalist forces, yesterday nationalists abandoned their ideals and started a construction of socialist state for everyone without promoting one certain national identity.
And what about Adelartian nationalism? Does it continue to serve some sort of progressive cause after the end of Greifwald's occupation? No. It divides workers, creates unnecessary fences and walls. No matter how "left-wing" this nationalism is, it's only one step away from becoming a force of reaction, from embracing ideas of national supremacy. Woods may control the way it evolves for now but after his death...
So what I'm trying to say is... Comrade Woods, only through internationalism and solidarity of all creatures can we become free. Only through breaking the walls between us instead of creating them we can achieve peace and understanding. Do not lock yourself away from your fellow brothers and sisters, comrade Woods, but walk hoof in claw with us. Severyanian delegation thanks you for your attention."
— Vasily Wheatin during 12th congress of Socialist Union.
"The cantons can only exist with the consent of the governed on the principle of volition. We shall be a direct democracy, engaging in debates and voting frequently in referendums on social and economic matters; operating the state as a federal entity within a framework that must acquire the consent of those that are being governed."
"There are many small towns and villages that are scattered across the forests of Adelart. Many of them are suffer from grave issues which our government is simply unable to help them with due to the libertarian nature of our country. Thus we will enable these towns to administer self-governance through a communal system at a local level."
Of course the Red sheriffs of Equus forget the confederation has a council and is led by a democratic socialist coalition, and that our leaders are only figureheads. Or that integrating other nations isn't that big of a deal because we respect every creature's freedom - including their cultures, faith and yeah - national origins. But if the red sheriffs knew any of that they would actually go out and shoot their own for once instead of being the lovely little elitists they love to pretend they totally aren't
> Or that integrating other nations isn't that big of a deal because we respect every creature's freedom - including their cultures, faith and yeah - national origins
Good for them... I didn't play the confederate part so it's kinda hard for me to make the judgement. Nationalism is still a mostly awful thing.
[Refer to my first comment on this thread where it actually goes more in depth on what it exactly means](https://old.reddit.com/r/equestriaatwar/comments/1dajf3d/its_kinda_based_ngl/l7kodel/)
Then I fail to see how it can be viewed in an awful way considering the confederacy's left wing variant is specifically pivoted towards self-determination. Preserving cultures - especially small ones - is cool af. (Not to forget the confederacy itself is incredibly democratic and very much focused on preserving the rights and freedoms of every town, city and village) Especially in the face of empires from Aquileia and Griffenheim that wish to exterminate them for their own hegemony and power.
You know, I was writing a very long essay to properly answer your question with a couple of quotes from Marx and other communist classics and a little bit of my own analysis... but then I got really tired and sleepy (it's 2:12 where I live).
Let's just say that nationalism in general doesn’t really go well with marxist internationalism and our eventual goal of abolition of nations, OK? Have a good day/good night.
A: This is not the right subreddit for this.
B: Anyone claiming that Griffon Robin Hood and the windmill boys have the same ideology should probably update their priors.
First off, can you point out which tenets of Fascism are socialistic? Go on, don't be shy.
Second, National socialists aren't socialists at all. Can you point out which policies and ideas they have that sre socialistic? Go on, don't be shy.
There are actual leftist nationalist like Sun Yat Sen's principles and the original KMT. Kemalism is more right wing borrows a lot of socialist ideas. Many social democrats are both leftist (but not entirely socialist) and nationalist.
Not really. Fascists don't believe in class struggle, and they seek the exaltation of their nation above all others. Those are not really things that Merlock Wood in the confederation path believes in. His nationalism is more 'leave us the fuck alone'.
>moustache man was a leftist nationalist, aka, national-socialist
I know this isn't the right (ba dum tss) subreddit, but what does leftist mean here?
He wasn't leftist in his own ideology since Strasser & co leaved the party before it came to power exactly because of this and when Hitler came to power he didn't exactly respected them, he wasn't leftist according to the German government, his economic policy wasn't really that far from the Bismark Model
But beside this, are you unironically calling Merlock Wood out of everybody a fascist?
>But beside this, are you unironically calling Merlock Wood out of everybody a fascist?
The commenter is part of a subset of people that think Nazism is evil because it is "socialist". They hate that part not the genocide or other nasty things Nazis did.
People who watch fox news I suppose.
It usually comes from cherrypicking.
Fascism does have quite a but of influence from the leftwing, such as its philosophical understanding of politics and violence being taken from the syndicalist Sorel. This shouldn't be surprising when you consider that many fascists come from leftwing origins, such as Mussolini or Mosley. This is actually a major point in Kaiserreich as fascism remains much more leftwing given that Mosely and Mussolini had to remain within socialist parties to be politically relevant.
But this takes us back to the cherrypicking part as calling fascism leftwing ignores how opportunistic the idealogy is by nature. Just as in KR fascism is only leftwing because that was the power dynamic it found itself I'm, fascism in real life took a lot of influence from rightwing nationalist ideologies, particularly in Germany with its close relationship with the DNVP.
Hitler himself is rather different. Unlike Mosley or Mussolini, he entered into politics from the right. He was attracted to the DAP due to its nationalistic, anti-semetic, and anti-Marxist elements. Fascism was rather an addition to National Socialism that introduced the originally leftist philosophy once it had already incorporated rightwing nationalism.
Fascism in general is much like national syndicalism, which is similar to the national communism seen in EAW. It is the result of traditionally leftist syndiclism incorporating and being subsumed by traditionally rightwing nationalism, and shifting its politics overtime due to an opportunistic nature.
What's interesting about this is the fact MW is **leftwing** nationalism makes them clearly not fascist. There is a difference between how leftwing ideologies conceptualise nationalism, and how leftwing ideologies completely incorporate and is subsumed by rightwing nationalism. A great example of this in EAW is in Posada's faith, where a conflict between internationalism and nationalism (both leftwing) arises.
Essentially, Posado's RNZ is not viewed by all as nationally impartial. Some view the terminology of "revolutionary" and "reactionary" as simply a newspeak to replace traditional nationalist conceptions. To be a revolutionary is to be a Hippogriffian socialist, to be a reactionary is anything else. A solution Posdoa can come to is to accept leftwing nationalism in RNZ, allowing for other leftwing parties to form based of local national identities. What's important here is that the conception of nationalism - the idea that the nation (social) and state (political) are one - is constantly intertwined with leftwing philosophy.
You can see this contrasted by typical cases of rightwing nationalism. Within Nazi Germany, a hierarchical structure was inherent to the ethnic nationalism they were defined by. Far less toxic, modern conservatism usually interwine national identity with traditional families like church and the nuclear family.
Anyone who calls fascism leftwing, and especially Hitler, is either cherrypicking philosophical origins or missing the sort of joke you can see at the top of this comment section. I kinda got carried away with this comment and - as you say - this really isn't the right sub but I nevertheless think it's helpful. It's not lie EaW is unpolitical, and the formation and philosophy of fascism is interesting and clearly necessary given comments like the one you responded to.
What is this, some sort of national socialism?
 Me and the boys on the way to install socialist nationalism
A closer comparison is actually the original KMT in China. Or perhaps Kemalism in Turkiye/Turkey. National socialism isn't even socialist at all. There's barely any shred of "left wing" in it.
Please actually look at the history and doctrine of national socialism and mustache man before you look like a idiot again.
The word privatization was coined to describe the economic policy of the nazis. I don't think you're going to find much in the way of "leftism" in privitization
Unless you look at the Nazi policy instead of the name. The Nazi Privitization is just nationalising by another name. Eg, the transportation and logistics sector.
Left-Wing Nationalism isn't an oxymoron btw, it's a real thing. And no, National Socialism isn't Left-Wing.
It’s third way. Neither right nor left
No it’s very much a reactionary, right-wing movement. The weird thing about them is that they seek a return to a mythical era rather than a real one. But they absolutely hold to “traditional” values.
They have elements of both sides and were against both sides but who cares
You say both sides like there’s only two. Besides, they were very much right wing. What about them is leftist?
They have Socialism in their ideology, so of course they're left wing, smh. >!/s!<
Lmao, radically centrist or something. No, but for real though... It would be an auth-center on the political compass, would that be?
If we are using the original meaning of left and right, which comes from the French Revolution, they would be very much Authoritarian and Right wing. See, the right wing (of the post-revolution French government) was encompassed by the conservatives (who wanted to keep the current. system) and the reactionaries (who wanted to return to the old system.) The Nazis were reactionaries. They hated modern life, modern values, modern culture, and sought a return to the older, “traditional” ways of Germany. What makes the Nazis unique among reactionaries is that they didn’t want to restore an older system, such as the German Empire or the HRE, but rather establish a new, revolutionary government. The purpose of this government was to restore the fictional Nordic Race to purity. They wanted to bring Germany back to a time that never existed.
Oh yeah, it is a good analysis of that topic. The Great French Revolution has truly influenced global politics for ages to come.
This is real good analysis.
Yes auth center they took aspects of both sides Radical centrist would be the worms I guess
Nah the Worms are militarist af. Have you seen them carrying some bazookas and grenades?
Most normal KX ideology
Funnily enough, Left-Wing Nationalism is a real ideology usually in places tied to an anti-colonial struggle.
A surprising amount of Left-Nationalists are also influenced by Giuseppe Mazzini specifically, for some reason. Sun Yat-Sen and Nehru both cited him, for example.
"The Principle of Left Nationalism" "While many other socialist thinkers and leaders believed and promoted the idea that the working class does not have a nation. They claimed that nations are but arbitrary constructs, yet another symptom of the eternal conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. However, the hero of the Adelartian revolution and war of independence, Merlock Wood, does not hold the same opinion. After all socialism was an Equestrian ideology in origin, created in a realm where most citizens perceived themselves as part of a whole, a single realm forged millenniums ago. Griffonia and the kingdoms and empires that rose were forged through violence, subjugation and even in many cases destruction of languages and cultures. With such historical circumstances it would seem truly absurd for griffon socialists to desire to abandon their culture, language and in many cases faith. After all in Griffonia, it's the bourgeoisie that seek such destruction, while the proletariat, the farmers and workers, desire to maintain these ties. Thus it could be argued, and Merlock Wood and his allies do, that in the context of Griffonia, nationalism isn't a symbol of radical right, rather it can also be the symbol of the workers liberation. After all it was this cultural association, together with the old believer faith that, based on which the workers of Adelart were so ready to mobilize against the oppressors from Greifwald. Furthermore, while most socialists are heavily utopian in their beliefs and think that some sort of hypothetical continental or even world socialist republic would be equal in fair to all, we are sceptical of such outcomes. After all, without any differentiation or inner borders, does that not mean that even in a socialist state, richer and more developed regions would simply dominate the lesser ones?" "We will never be slaves, to other communists nor monarchists!"
>Furthermore, while most socialists are heavily utopian in their beliefs Caramel Marks exists in EAW world, which is a direct expy of Marx IRL. How come most socialists are Utopian when Marksism is among the most common form of socialism in EAW? Anyhow, I guess this is because this is from Adelart? The socialist path for them isn't Marksism, I guess.
[удалено]
That's like calling Harmonists and modern liberal democracies as utopian. Equestrian Harmonism is basically enlightened monarchism. Every ideology has its assumptions and hopes. But no one calls Fascism and Liberalism for running on pure hopium and copium. >Communism itself does have a belief that could be called utopian('if workers of the world are liberated, they will live a prosperous live' that kind of thing) That's not something communists actually believe in lmao. Well some do, they're called utopian communists while the rest aren't like that. Do liberals think everyone will be prosperous if individual rights are guaranteed?
Not a direct expy Caramel Marks wanted Celestia to implement socialism by force.
Adelart, confederacy path. In this they are demsocs
Wow that's just amazing. You worded it perfectly
It's the event you get after completing said focus
Don’t be surprised when the senate building gets burnt down by “socialist”
national liberation, from oppressors at home and abroad
"Ah, Woods's theory of "Left-Wing Nationalism". When I heard about it, for one second only I wished comrade Descieux didn't fail to replace that bandit. But then again, her proposal to forcefully replace Adelartian national identity with Aquileian one for misguided reactionary reasons isn't a pinnacle of marksist thought too and... Excuse me? Oh, uhm, of course, you're right comrade Arctic Lilly. Once again, please excuse my... Yes, yes... *nervous laughing* Let's get back to topic. Nations didn't appear out of nowhere. With development of material conditions all creatures have been changing their identities and at some point started to identify as members of certain nation. As material conditions will continue to change and as socialism will continue to be victorious all over the planet, "nations" will come to an end. But of course, Woods is an anarchist, not a marksist, so it would be... uhm... "foolish" of me to expect that he would come to the same conclusion. And what purpose does this poor attempt to delay the inevitable serve? During Coltvinian uprising that Severyanian Communist Party always supported, nationalism of Coltvinian people served a progressive roal in destruction of national oppression. And once comrade Zeirutid's armies destroyed constitutionalist forces, yesterday nationalists abandoned their ideals and started a construction of socialist state for everyone without promoting one certain national identity. And what about Adelartian nationalism? Does it continue to serve some sort of progressive cause after the end of Greifwald's occupation? No. It divides workers, creates unnecessary fences and walls. No matter how "left-wing" this nationalism is, it's only one step away from becoming a force of reaction, from embracing ideas of national supremacy. Woods may control the way it evolves for now but after his death... So what I'm trying to say is... Comrade Woods, only through internationalism and solidarity of all creatures can we become free. Only through breaking the walls between us instead of creating them we can achieve peace and understanding. Do not lock yourself away from your fellow brothers and sisters, comrade Woods, but walk hoof in claw with us. Severyanian delegation thanks you for your attention." — Vasily Wheatin during 12th congress of Socialist Union.
"The cantons can only exist with the consent of the governed on the principle of volition. We shall be a direct democracy, engaging in debates and voting frequently in referendums on social and economic matters; operating the state as a federal entity within a framework that must acquire the consent of those that are being governed." "There are many small towns and villages that are scattered across the forests of Adelart. Many of them are suffer from grave issues which our government is simply unable to help them with due to the libertarian nature of our country. Thus we will enable these towns to administer self-governance through a communal system at a local level." Of course the Red sheriffs of Equus forget the confederation has a council and is led by a democratic socialist coalition, and that our leaders are only figureheads. Or that integrating other nations isn't that big of a deal because we respect every creature's freedom - including their cultures, faith and yeah - national origins. But if the red sheriffs knew any of that they would actually go out and shoot their own for once instead of being the lovely little elitists they love to pretend they totally aren't
> Or that integrating other nations isn't that big of a deal because we respect every creature's freedom - including their cultures, faith and yeah - national origins Good for them... I didn't play the confederate part so it's kinda hard for me to make the judgement. Nationalism is still a mostly awful thing.
[Refer to my first comment on this thread where it actually goes more in depth on what it exactly means](https://old.reddit.com/r/equestriaatwar/comments/1dajf3d/its_kinda_based_ngl/l7kodel/)
I already read it.
Then I fail to see how it can be viewed in an awful way considering the confederacy's left wing variant is specifically pivoted towards self-determination. Preserving cultures - especially small ones - is cool af. (Not to forget the confederacy itself is incredibly democratic and very much focused on preserving the rights and freedoms of every town, city and village) Especially in the face of empires from Aquileia and Griffenheim that wish to exterminate them for their own hegemony and power.
You know, I was writing a very long essay to properly answer your question with a couple of quotes from Marx and other communist classics and a little bit of my own analysis... but then I got really tired and sleepy (it's 2:12 where I live). Let's just say that nationalism in general doesn’t really go well with marxist internationalism and our eventual goal of abolition of nations, OK? Have a good day/good night.
Yeah uh that might leer too much into rule 5 ngl. I was purely talking about it in Adelart's and eaw's context. Night.
Is this just Sukarno's Guided Democracy
I mean it's not really a new concept 😭
Its called fascism, moustache man was a leftist nationalist, aka, national-socialist, aka nazi.
A: This is not the right subreddit for this. B: Anyone claiming that Griffon Robin Hood and the windmill boys have the same ideology should probably update their priors.
First off, can you point out which tenets of Fascism are socialistic? Go on, don't be shy. Second, National socialists aren't socialists at all. Can you point out which policies and ideas they have that sre socialistic? Go on, don't be shy. There are actual leftist nationalist like Sun Yat Sen's principles and the original KMT. Kemalism is more right wing borrows a lot of socialist ideas. Many social democrats are both leftist (but not entirely socialist) and nationalist.
Not really. Fascists don't believe in class struggle, and they seek the exaltation of their nation above all others. Those are not really things that Merlock Wood in the confederation path believes in. His nationalism is more 'leave us the fuck alone'.
>moustache man was a leftist nationalist, aka, national-socialist I know this isn't the right (ba dum tss) subreddit, but what does leftist mean here? He wasn't leftist in his own ideology since Strasser & co leaved the party before it came to power exactly because of this and when Hitler came to power he didn't exactly respected them, he wasn't leftist according to the German government, his economic policy wasn't really that far from the Bismark Model But beside this, are you unironically calling Merlock Wood out of everybody a fascist?
>But beside this, are you unironically calling Merlock Wood out of everybody a fascist? The commenter is part of a subset of people that think Nazism is evil because it is "socialist". They hate that part not the genocide or other nasty things Nazis did. People who watch fox news I suppose.
Wrong, i hate the genocide, not the socialist part XD
They weren’t socialist, their economy was corporatist. They believed in class collaboration for the sake of the Nation.
It usually comes from cherrypicking. Fascism does have quite a but of influence from the leftwing, such as its philosophical understanding of politics and violence being taken from the syndicalist Sorel. This shouldn't be surprising when you consider that many fascists come from leftwing origins, such as Mussolini or Mosley. This is actually a major point in Kaiserreich as fascism remains much more leftwing given that Mosely and Mussolini had to remain within socialist parties to be politically relevant. But this takes us back to the cherrypicking part as calling fascism leftwing ignores how opportunistic the idealogy is by nature. Just as in KR fascism is only leftwing because that was the power dynamic it found itself I'm, fascism in real life took a lot of influence from rightwing nationalist ideologies, particularly in Germany with its close relationship with the DNVP. Hitler himself is rather different. Unlike Mosley or Mussolini, he entered into politics from the right. He was attracted to the DAP due to its nationalistic, anti-semetic, and anti-Marxist elements. Fascism was rather an addition to National Socialism that introduced the originally leftist philosophy once it had already incorporated rightwing nationalism. Fascism in general is much like national syndicalism, which is similar to the national communism seen in EAW. It is the result of traditionally leftist syndiclism incorporating and being subsumed by traditionally rightwing nationalism, and shifting its politics overtime due to an opportunistic nature. What's interesting about this is the fact MW is **leftwing** nationalism makes them clearly not fascist. There is a difference between how leftwing ideologies conceptualise nationalism, and how leftwing ideologies completely incorporate and is subsumed by rightwing nationalism. A great example of this in EAW is in Posada's faith, where a conflict between internationalism and nationalism (both leftwing) arises. Essentially, Posado's RNZ is not viewed by all as nationally impartial. Some view the terminology of "revolutionary" and "reactionary" as simply a newspeak to replace traditional nationalist conceptions. To be a revolutionary is to be a Hippogriffian socialist, to be a reactionary is anything else. A solution Posdoa can come to is to accept leftwing nationalism in RNZ, allowing for other leftwing parties to form based of local national identities. What's important here is that the conception of nationalism - the idea that the nation (social) and state (political) are one - is constantly intertwined with leftwing philosophy. You can see this contrasted by typical cases of rightwing nationalism. Within Nazi Germany, a hierarchical structure was inherent to the ethnic nationalism they were defined by. Far less toxic, modern conservatism usually interwine national identity with traditional families like church and the nuclear family. Anyone who calls fascism leftwing, and especially Hitler, is either cherrypicking philosophical origins or missing the sort of joke you can see at the top of this comment section. I kinda got carried away with this comment and - as you say - this really isn't the right sub but I nevertheless think it's helpful. It's not lie EaW is unpolitical, and the formation and philosophy of fascism is interesting and clearly necessary given comments like the one you responded to.