Why is nazism thought so much worse than communism?

Stalinism disliked the church because it was harder to make a pawn.

 

Nazism is viewed worse simply because they lost the war. Winners write history.

 

The reason Naziism is vilified and Communism gets a free pass is that the Upper West Side (of Manhattan) - where the MSM works - favors the communists.

Walter Duranty's employer (the NYT) gave Stalin a free pass during the worst of the gulag years, but thundered against the Nazis and the camp-free fascists.

 

Oh yes they did. The commies weren't much different then the nazis in that they burned Christian churches down to the ground while the nazis burned jew temples down to the ground--with both leftist regimes going on to slaughter those peoples who once worshiped in their respective countries.

 

I think that is the big difference. No matter how committed to Nazi ideals and the Nazi agenda, if you were Jewish Gypsies or a number of other sub groups, you died. For all the faults of Stalin's Communism, you at least had a chance of surviving if you happened to have the wrong last name

 

"The Poles started slaughtering Germans first who were our allies". If you want this to mean that the Poles were our allies it should read, 'The Poles, who were our allies, started slaughtering Germans first'. Not Kool-Aid but grammar.
Any 'negotiating' done by Hitler was not to be trusted. He would do and say anything to get what he wanted, and Barbarossa was recklessness in the extreme. Opening a second front with the Soviet Union virtually guaranteed his defeat from that point.

 

big difference between burning churches and christians

- - - Updated - - -

yep...

 

Of course Communists have tortured and killed people because they were Christians!

League of Militant Atheists

Chinese Police Proudly Record Their Torture of Christians

New Reports Tell of Executions, Torture of Christians in North Korea
New reports from former North Korean eye-witnesses indicate that the totalitarian government tortures, executes Christians and people related to the faith.

50,000 Christians tortured and abused in North Korean prisons

 

The answer is easy. Any defeated system that has been defeated becomes the great satan. And in the case of Nazism, it was peculiar to one German regime. But having said that, there's not anything peculiar to Nazism that couldn't be creditied to any system. It's a sub-heading that falls under the term 'fascism'.

All systems of government can lay claim to brutality and mass killing and so the distinction is only in the numbers. Some regimes will remain relatively guilt free only because they weren't the vanquished. So if one goes back in history one will find mass slaughter by the Dutch, the British, the Soviets, and more recently by the Americans. The American particularly during the Vietnam war, the Iraq war, and since 1900 in many smaller wars where the slaughter was on a smaller scale.

Only the defeated and the vanquished will remain in our history books as the evils. If you look at the example of the Vietnam war where it could be imagined that 'communism' fought against 'capitalism', you find no evil side that everyone can agree upon. Indeed, the people of Vietnam become the victors and gained their freedom as well as reuniting their country, which was their only goal. But the US is not considered the evil party and therefore no brand of evil is applied to capitalism. However, that is not true in the eyes of 'some' of the world, as it is equally not true in the eyes of some of the world that communism is evil.

 

its not a tenet of communism. catholics and protestants have murdered more Christians than anyone

 

You couldn't say the same thing about US capitalism or Nazism or British colonialism so I think you have to be careful of saying it about communism. While it's obviously true that religion has been responsible for the lion's share of slaughters throughout history, that doesn't leave communism blameless.

 

I don't think anyone is seeing communism as blameless - However to induce the no true Scotsman argument, there really has never been a true communist state. With National Socialism, they did achieve exactly the sort of society and political system they desired. In theory, and I do stress theory, the sort of mass murder conducted by Stalin Mao and others has no place in a communist state

 

Sure it does, I refrain from blaming it, therefore it is blameless.

 

Because in the United States we fought an actual war, and Americans died, fighting the nazi's.

Stalin and Mao's communism was certainly bad. But they were never our official 'enemies' like the Nazi's were.

If you want to say that Stalin was just as bad as Hitler- go for it.

If you want to say that Hitler was not such a bad guy because Stalin was worse- that I have a problem with.

 

No, communism isn't blameless but gabriel definitely suggested that when he blamed religion. In both the Soviet communist regime and the US capitalist regime, religion wasn't the prime motivator. In the Soviet it was nearly non-existent as a motivator by my understanding and in the US capitalist regime of the Vietnam war years it would be only slightly more of a motivator. Other justifications for that war are much more important. (the dominoes)

We could say a lot about the Nazis achieving the political system they desired but in no way could I agree that they achieve the social system they desired. To think that would give credence to the Nazi social state they created during the war years and which the German people were not in agreement with because of good people being unaware.

The only other point I need to make is that in no way was Nazism similar to socialism. That is only an assertion being made by the right in the US in order to demonize socialism. Socialism not being communism but merely 'social responsibility' as it pertains to Canada's slightly leaning socially responsible capitalist government.

 

blamed religion?? lol.

 

Sure Nazism wass similar to socialism. Nazism had social services.

 

It's very different. Communism isn't controversial at all, and nobody cares about people saying that they're communists, going around with commie symbols, and even having a little lenin's corner in a library. I'm serious the last example is true, sadly enough.. And nazis are hated, as they should be. But a problem is that nazi is used to mean other things than it's original meaning, I'm sure you have this problem in the US too. currently it means something along the lines of non-communist or atleast right-of-centre. annoying as hell.

Yes it's all due to the histories of the countries in question but then I wonder, since Sweden wasn't invaded by either the nazis of commies how come one is hated and the other is actually seen positively? Hell we have this party called the left party which was previously called the communist party, and they supported the USSR until it's fall, which is when they changed name also. It's got about 7% now and you wont hear any "oh, we won't work with bloody communists for christ sake!!" from the other parties like they are doing with our only nationalist party. And they're not even nazis, but the others a genuine communists.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, that's probably it I think, that you never actually went to war with them.

I say neither; I just say Stalin was worse than hitler.

 

So killing 16 because of some racial reasons is worse than killing 80 just because?

 

one could also say that in a perfect nazi state there would be any jews that had to be.. taken care of.. to begin with. but I do get your point though.

 

The far left wrote and rewrites history until they get it ideologicaly correct.

 

This is why I became an Absolute Monarchist/Francoist/Falangist. I can be far right-wing without being attacked, or killed.

 

I've never been to Sweden, but as far as I've read, your country has actually shifted more towards capitalism in recent years. Isn't that true?

For example, I've read that the welfare state has been scaled back a bit as compared with the 80s and 90s. I've also read that trade policies have become more open than before.

Given all this, I would assume that Communism only has a marginal influence in your system.

 

China is now a classical fascist state

"China is one of your socialist brothers, Mr. Mulcair!", says Mr. Eckardt. China today is not socialist in any respect. The words "socialist", "communist", and "Marxist" are often used to describe present day China. All are completely inaccurate and irrelevant in the context of China. China today is governed by a fascist party; it has retained the name "Communist Party of China ('CCP')", but that name is meaningless as a description of the political system it imposes on the people of China.

If the Party/State in China were ever Communist, that was in the distant past. It long ago morphed into a classical fascist state, run by a patently fascist political party. If Mr. Eckardt seeks political comparisons with the present day Chinese Party/State, he should look to Italy under Mussolini and the Third Reich in Germany.

Unfortunately, the word "fascism" has become so overworked in political discourse that for many it ceases to convey any meaning except for a vague sense of disapproval. People on the left in western politics have a tendency to label anyone to their political right as "fascists".

But there is in fact such a thing as fascism, and it can be defined politically. Fascism refers to a state governed by a triumvirate composed of the military establishment, big industry, and a single monopolistic political party which prohibits the existence of any other political party. This triumvirate ruthlessly suppresses dissent or opposition of any kind and violently tramples upon civil liberties and human rights. It is totalitarian in that it exercises tight control over every agency or organization in the country, including courts and police. For example, the "People's Courts" in China today function precisely as did the "People's Courts" established by the German Third Reich.
http://www.canada.com/China+classical+fascist+state/7774938/story.html

 

Not really. Most historical accounts in the West don't give Communism a favorable assessment.

American accounts are usually more conservative than the rest of the West, so that's hardly "far left."