Proving once again that the Nazis were Leftists

The Nazis had the basic principles of the Left, proving once and for all they were Leftists.

Most people would agree that the Conservative-Right has the basic principles of Limited government, Decentralized Economic Liberty, Property rights and maximum Freedom under the general philosophy of Individualism. This is contrasted with the Socialist-Left having contrary principles of Unlimited governmentCentralized Economic Control, Wealth redistribution, and minimal Liberty under the general philosophy of Collectivism.

Since that National Socialist German Workers’ Party [Nazis] had the same basic principles of the Socialist-Left, they were clearly on the Left side of the political spectrum. Somehow the Left still persists in perpetuating the lie that they were somehow ‘Far-Right’, despite this direct correlation. Therefore, we will outline these basic principles to prove the historically obvious fact that a socialist workers’ party belonged on the Left.

The basic principles of the Conservative-Right contrasted with the Socialist-Left.

In general terms, these are principles of the Conservative-Right contrasted with those of the Socialist-Left, finalizing the case that the Nazis were imbued with basic principles of the Left:

The basic principles of the Conservative-Right:

  • Limited government
  • Decentralized Economic Liberty
  • Property rights
  • Maximum Freedom
  • The general philosophy of Individualism

Contrast this with the basic principles of the Socialist-Left:

  • Unlimited government
  • Centralized Economic Control
  • Wealth redistribution
  • Minimal Liberty
  • The general philosophy of Collectivism.

Those trying to argue that the Nazis were somehow ‘far-right’ need to explain how the Nazis favored the principles of Limited government, Decentralized Economic Liberty, Property rights and Maximum Freedom of the Conservative-Right under the general philosophy of Individualism. While also factually explaining away their labeling as a socialist worker’s party as well as the admonition to Collectivist philosophy in the motto they put on their coinage: ’Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz’ which translates to Common Good Before Individual Good.

We could go into much deeper detail on this point – and perhaps we will at some future time – but it should be clear that in general terms, the Nazis shared the same basic principles as the national socialist Left, proving the point once and for all.

Once again proving that the Nazis were Leftists

We have previously eviscerated this Leftist mythology based on presumed correctness. With special emphasis on taking on the Socialist-Left’s more pernicious assertions. Such as the easily disproven rivalry talking point or that the Left doesn’t have a factual explanation for the Nazis having a Leftist moniker, that being a socialist worker’s party.

Whole books have been written debunking one of the biggest lies of the Socialist-Left and yet the myth still persists. We will set out why it’s important that this has to be proven repeatedly. Beginning with the fact that it was the prototypical construct of the ‘that wasn’t really socialism’ lie and that it purports to balance out the butcher’s bill of 100 million deliberately murdered by socialist national governments. With socialism is raising it’s ugly head once again while socialist nations are imploding, it is important that we set forth the basic facts in demolishing Leftist lies beginning with the source of the contagion.

Why is this important?

With the Conservative-Right in ascendancy around the world as reported in Bloomberg opinion: From Australia to Europe, the signs are multiplying that conservative populism is on the rise, exemplified by the win of the Liberal party in Australia. The nation’s Socialist-Left party is moving further Left and into moral and intellectual bankruptcy with a virtual civil war breaking out in their ranks. So with their fracturing and falling apart, they have reacted by lashing out at the Pro-Liberty Right. Casting anyone who ‘resists’ their precepts and principles as ‘right-wing’ with a barely veiled implication that they are somehow ‘Nazis’ or something. For example, admitted socialist Bernie Sanders tried to invoke the memory of Martin Niemöller. We are also witnessing the Leftists trying to cast the failed socialist nation of Venezuela as .. Wait for it.. ‘right wing’.

It is always important to remember the facts of history, since there are those of the Socialist-Left who try to continuously rewrite them, while projecting this on the Conservative-Right, such as those trying to perpetuate the ‘conversion therapy’ on the socialist nation of Venezuela. Even worse, there are ‘main stream’ news sources who are using this mythology to whitewash the blood soaked history of socialism.

Fact Check Failures

There are two recent examples of this, one being of the ‘Fact Check’ variety from the Washington Post that shamelessly display its bias in the headline of the piece: Brazil’s president resurrects the zombie claim that Nazism was a leftist movement. One would expect that a ‘Fact Check’ would dwell in facts, but in this and other cases, one would be wrong. As usual, the piece was long on Leftist opinion and short on historical data.

Then there was the even more pernicious example, with Associated-Press casually pushing out this mythology in the middle of a news story entitled: Europe’s far-right parties hunt down the youth vote.

With this pithy little opinion buried deep in the story:

The far right has also succeeded at picking up on existing grievances and fears among young people and at using their language and cultural reference points, she said.

It’s a significant change from where the far right found itself in Europe’s postwar era: identified with the Nazis and a Holocaust that killed 6 million Jews, marginalized by governments and eclipsed by a unifying Europe.

[Our Emphasis]

Never mind that this opinion fails to correlate to the historic facts in the differentiation of the Conservative-Right and the Socialist-Left. This of course follows in the fine tradition of the Left in using presumption when sort on facts. Finally, there is the fact that the nation’s Socialist-Left is trying to keep up this incessant drumbeat that the Conservative-Right and Trump in particular are somehow ‘authoritarian’ without evidence so as to cast them as being ‘Nazis’ by extension.

Ray Fava made this point in this report: HBO’s Chernobyl was intended to compare Soviet Union to Trump (and failed).

The Chernobyl disaster was clearly a failure of socialism, but that isn’t going to stop the Left from trying to rewrite history to somehow make it a condemnation of President Trump and to a larger extent the Conservative-Right.

As the ideology of socialism crumbles before our very eyes, the Left is desperate to protect to protect it at any cost. This consists of efforts to propagandise any of its inevitable failures as ‘not really being socialism’. While falsely claiming non-socialist Scandinavian countries to be successful experiments in their base ideology. This was exemplified by the red herring/ad hoc rescue arguments applied to the Venezuela previously mentioned.

The Leftist game of rewriting history illustrates their intellectual and moral bankruptcy.

Leftists love to play the game of rewriting history – while at the same time accusing others of rewriting history. Each inevitable failure of socialism is gradually morphed into something else and then blamed on the Conservative-Right. Then they simply presume that their version of history is ‘politically correct’ as exemplified by the ‘zombie claim’ term used by the Washington Post repeating the lie until they think it’s the truth.

They never explain how a socialist national government of unlimited power was somehow of the limited variety of Decentralised Economic Liberty, Property Rights and Maximum Liberty. Perhaps they can try to explain this away as a function of the Gestapo when they weren’t arresting people and shipping them off to Auschwitz.

Leftists try to make the case with vague allusions to voting patterns or collusion between the government and industrialists while ignoring the historic facts that conclusively peg the Nazis as Leftists. A pitifully weak case such as that is part of the reason they like to begin the argument as though they are automatically correct. It also speaks volumes when most ‘debunking’ articles begin with ad hominem attacks at those who cite the facts of history.

The takeaway.

The fact that the Left shares the same general principles as the Nazis and other Collectivist organisations should settle the argument once and for all. But it won’t because they have vested interest in obscuring the facts of history. Continuing the fine Leftist tradition of claiming failed socialist regimes weren’t really socialist. They also like to pretend this is the case to balance out the butcher’s bill of their side of the political spectrum.

It is very important to remember that no matter what games the Left plays with historic facts in talk of ‘privatisation’, or ‘collusion’ of German businesses with the government or even vague and ultimately meaningless assertions on voting patterns. These pale in comparison to the correlation of Socialist-Left principles with the Nazis. The Left keeps on trying to play the ‘that wasn’t really socialism’ game with lies or ad hoc rescue admonitions, and this began with the denial of the obvious with a socialist worker’s party in Germany and continues to the present with Venezuela.

Socialism always fails to work, so the Left tries to rewrite history to absurdly claim it is ‘far-Right’ instead.

 Originally published on the NOQ Report


The Top 5 ‘assault weapon’ technologies that existed BEFORE the Constitution was written

Just a sample of some of the repeating firepower that existed long before the 2nd amendment.

Leftist lore has it that the only guns in existence at the time of the writing of the 2nd amendment were muskets that took 5 minutes to reload. This being exemplified by the New York Times in using an image of a musket contrasted with an assault rifle in an article on their usual obsession with gun confiscation. Or from a commercial from a liberty grabber group depicting the long, drawn out reloading of a musket. As is usually the case with leftist lore, this is a complete fabrication.

The fact is that multishot or repeating firearms existed long before the affirmation of the common sense human right of self-preservation in the US Constitution. We’ve already highlighted some of these technologies that predate the Constitution. However, for the sake of completeness, we shall fill out the list with the other fine examples.

Since there is no set definition of the term ‘assault weapon’ or ‘weapons of war’ or what ever farcical term the liberty grabber left has come up with to demonize ordinary firearms, we bestowed this term to these technology as some of the first ‘Assault Weapons’.

Repeating rifles of the early 1600s, predating the Constitution by 160 years

The Encyclopedia Britannica has a very informative article on this subject with this excerpt detailing the most important point:

The first effective breech-loading and repeating flintlock firearms were developed in the early 1600s. One early magazine repeater has been attributed to Michele Lorenzoni, a Florentine gunmaker. In the same period, the faster and safer Kalthoff system—designed by a family of German gunmakers—introduced a ball magazine located under the barrel and a powder magazine in the butt. By the 18th century the Cookson repeating rifle was in use in North America, having separate tubular magazines in the stock for balls and powder and a lever-activated breech mechanism that selected and loaded a ball and a charge, also priming the flash pan and setting the gun on half cock.

[Our Emphasis]

Please note that these multishot or repeating firearms existed almost 2 centuries before the writing of the Constitution, eviscerating the ‘Muskets only’ lie of the national socialist Left. For those who are numerically as well a factually challenged, this was also 370 years before the 21st Century.

The Lorenzoni repeating flintlock: Portable firepower that predated the Constitution by over 100 years

Our first video from the venerable website Forgotten weapons is of two London-Made Lorenzonis Repeating Flintlocks. This was a repeating flintlock developed in the early 1600’s that was able to fire multiple shots 160 years before the writing of the Constitution.

 London-Made Lorenzonis Repeating Flintlocks

Early development of revolving cylinder firearms, predating the Constitution by over 109 years

Next on the Pre-constitutional timeline, we have One of the Earliest Six-shot Revolvers from the collection of the Royal Armory that we profiled in a previous article. The Curator of Firearms, Jonathan Ferguson notes that this wasn’t one of the earliest revolvers along with pointing out how the technology has ‘evolved’ over time.

This also brings up an important point, that arms and other weapons of self-defense were vitally important, a matter of life or death. Every living being is in a battle for survival, in the case of human society, these technologies determined its survivability. Thus it is a constant competition with these technologies constantly changing and evolving over time. Something that would have been known by the learned men that wrote the founding documents.

The Puckle or Defense Gun from 1718, was predating the Constitution by over 70 years

We have previously detailed the Puckle or Defense Gun invented in 1718 and demonstrated early ‘automatic weapon’ fire in 1721:

The Puckle Gun, or Defense Gun as it was also known, was invented and patented in 1718 by the London lawyer James Puckle.
This was an early ‘automatic weapon’ was capable of firing 63 shots in 7 minutes in 1721.

For those following along this missed the mark of being a 21st Century weapon by almost 300 years.

The multishot Girardoni Air Gun that predated the Constitution by 9 years.

This is another multishot weapon of war that existed before the Constitution.

Jover and Belton Flintlock Repeating Musket – 1786, this also predates the Constitution

Our last video of multishot or repeating firearms that predated the Constitution is the Jover and Belton Flintlock Repeating Musket from 1786. We’re trying to keep this as short as possible, thus we have left off other examples such as the Ribauldequin, Duckfoot or Nock gun.

Very much like the previous example, the Belton Flintlock Repeating Musket was known to the founding fathers because he corresponded with Congress on this weapon in 1777 [Again, before the drafting of the Constitution]. For those keeping score at home, 1786 is still is not of the 21st Century.

Leftist lies on this subject depends on a number of improbable fallacies and assumptions. The founding fathers would have known the history of technological developments and they would have expected those developments to continue. Thus rendering the fallacy that they could not have foreseen that weapons technologies wouldn’t of continued on to the point of absurdity.

The Takeaway

Unfortunately for the Liberty Grabber Left, firearms tend to be valuable historical artifacts, these videos show that multishot or repeating firearms existed well before the Constitution. Thus we have eviscerated the ‘musket myth’. It should also be evident that the violence problem hasn’t been caused by the ‘easy’ availability of guns or repeating firearms.

As is the case with most Leftist lies and prevarication’s, they depend on a lack knowledge of the subject to succeed. This is why is extremely important that everyone of the Pro-Liberty Right be apprised of these facts in engaging those of the Left who have little care for logic, science or truth. The fact that multishot or repeating firearms existed centuries ago should make it clear that the Left is lying about the subject of self-defense from beginning to end.

 Originally published on the NOQ Report

Proving a far-left National Socialist Workers’ Party was a far-left National Socialist Workers’ Party – Part I

Recent events have illustrated the need to once again eviscerate a favorite myth of the left’s socialist national agenda.

Some leftist lies refuse to die. One of their perennial favorites is the bizarre habit of claiming socialist nations are somehow ‘right wing’ or ‘conservative’ while in the throes of their inevitable collapse. The latest example is of course the socialist nation of Venezuela, but this scheme reaches back to the WWII era nation of Germany and a certain national socialist worker’s party.

Repeating a lie doesn’t make it the truth

Much like mythical zombies of the undead that arise again and again, this lie crops up in the news with tiresome regularity. The latest example being Robert Francis O’Rourke compares Trump to Nazis. Or the headline dripping with incredulity from the Daily Mail: Brazil’s President Bolsonaro says there is ‘no doubt’ Nazism was a leftist movement after visiting Holocaust museum in Israel.

Those are just from recent days with the nation’s socialist media fervently espousing far-left talking points last week with regard to Republican Congressman Mo Brooks daring to have the effrontery to reference historical facts. Ever the ones for irony, each of these sources reported on this story because the good Representative talked about left’s use of the ‘Big Lie’. This is the presumption that as socialist Vladimir Lenin once quipped: ‘A lie told often enough becomes the truth.’ Alternatively, as stated by another infamous socialist, Adolf Hitler: ‘If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.’ It’s not just a coincidence that leftists all use the same tried and true tactics of deception.

While it should be easy to prove that a far-left, National Socialist Worker’s party was, in fact, a far-left National Socialist Worker’s party. The left has decided that their opinion should overcome any facts on the matter. For what better way to deflect the horrid results of their base ideology than to distract with similar results of what is supposedly not their base ideology. The left is trying this with the socialist nation of Venezuela, but it reaches back decades to the aforementioned example.

Thus in another example of having to once again eviscerate this perennial lie from the nation’s socialist-left we will present some of the pertinent facts of the matter. Part II will discuss some of the left’s talking points on the matter for the purpose of trying to finally put this to rest.

The facts of the case

The Oxford English dictionary definition of Left:

‘2 (often the Left) [treated as singular or plural] A group or party favoring radical, reforming, or socialist views.

Origin Old English lyft, left ‘weak’ (the left-hand side being regarded as the weaker side of the body), of West Germanic origin.’

[Our Emphasis]

The Oxford English dictionary definition of Nazi:

‘noun (plural Nazis)

1 historical A member of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party.

Origin German, abbreviation representing the pronunciation of Nati- in Nationalsozialist’ national socialist’, probably by analogy with Sozi, from Sozialist ‘socialist’.’

[Our Emphasis]

In addition to this we have the following stated in the Encyclopedia Britannica entry for Left.

Ending with this succinct phrase:

‘Socialism is the standard leftist ideology in most countries of the world; communism is a more radical leftist ideology.’

[Our Emphasis]

Thus the definitional facts prove that a Far-Left National Socialist Workers’ Party is a Far-Left National Socialist Workers’ Party, QED!

We also have the last part of the Translator’s introduction to the English edition of Mein Kampf by James Murphy:

‘Finally, I would point out that the term Social Democracy may be misleading in English, as it has not a democratic connotation in our sense. It was the name given to the Socialist Party in Germany. And that Party was purely Marxist; but it adopted the name Social Democrat in order to appeal to the democratic sections of the German people.’

Abbots Langley, February, 1939

[Our Emphasis]

Coining a phrase

The words and phrases placed on the currency of a nation are of profound importance. They are emblematic of a country’s national character and a constant reminder of what it holds as significant.

In the states we have the American Trinity as Dennis Prager terms it. These are E Pluribus Unum, Liberty, In God We Trust. These are American values emblazoned on every coin that remind everyone who we are and what we believe.

Political ideologies are based on the two fundamental philosophies of Individualism and Collectivism. Those who favor individual rights and liberties are of the pro-liberty right and are obviously of the philosophy of individualism. Those favoring collective rights and collectivism are of the socialist-left and are obviously of the philosophy of Collectivism.

This provides the last and strongest data points in our discussion proving a socialist worker’s party was a socialist worker’s party.

Consider this image from Time of Adolf Hitler’s 1920 Political Platform [Courtesy of]

Image courtesy of

Note the last part of the 25 point program of the Nationalsozialistischen Deutschen Arbeiterpartei with the words in BOLD: Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz

The original German version being:

Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz

Translated as:


From Yale Law school and the Lillian Goldman Law Library

‘Common Good Before Individual Good’ Could there be any more succinct assertion of collectivism over Individualism? This wasn’t just a BOLD declaration in the party program of a socialist worker’s party. This phrase was literally ‘coined’ in the money of that socialist nation.

The final data point proving the Nazis were of the far-left

Take note of line 25 of the Program of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party [from the same sources] Translated as:

25. In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.

Leftists will quite often like to parrot the lie that the Nazi were ‘right-wing’ such as the case of Robert Francis O’Rourke , while failing to explain why this is the case. Very much like the meaning of common words, the political spectrum must have some basis in fact. Simply saying that one ideological group belongs somewhere without a factual basis is a meaningless statement.

Any decent model of the political spectrum will have one scale with the proper metric of governmental power as its standard of measurement. This enables someone to quickly and easily determine where they are situated on the scale instead of making the determination more opaque. That being said, it should be clear that by the ideological definitions, the proponents of limited or no government belong on the right or the minimal government side of the scale. While proponents of authoritarian or totalitarian government belong on the left.

Thus, that part of the Nazi program should be the final nail in the coffin of the ‘Nazis were right-wing’ lie, since it is obvious that they were proponents of a ‘strong central authority in the State’. But let us consider this given that ‘right-wing’ essentially equates to conservative, with one of its central tenets being of limited government, that is clearly at odds to that stated in the Nazi program.

There is the absurd contention that somehow the Nazis were further off to the right, but as detailed in the case for the linear political spectrum, this makes no sense since it would require a mathematical discontinuity with regard to the measurement of political power. Thus the Nazis belong on the far left no matter the self-serving protestations of the left.

Concluding remarks

Thus we have presented the definitional facts of the case proving the Nazi party of Adolf Hitler was indeed a Far-Left National Socialist Worker’s party. This was bolstered by several other data points, including the words setting forth the Nazi’s authoritarian mindset in their 25 point program. As well as they’re coining of a phrase of their collectivist philosophy. Other publications listed here have also proven this point, Left still tries to persist in this very convenient lie.

Other references:

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian

Obama, Hitler, And Exploding The Biggest Lie In History


 Originally published on the NOQ Report