What is Conservatism? Well, in a nutshell, it's a belief in smaller government, free market economy, lower taxes, and freedom to make our own decisions. A government with more control over the lives of its constituents seldom bodes well for those constituents; tyrannies and dictatorships are a prime example of such things. The more power a government has, the fewer freedoms are allowed to the people. Higher taxes and greater regulation means less prosperity, both to the individual and to the country's economy. There are other aspects, such as religion, national security, and foreign policy, but I'm trying to keep this brief.

Liberalism, in contrast, favors larger government, a government-controlled economy, higher taxes, and more intrusion into the average person's life. Liberals believe that the government is the answer to all of life's ills. A business is failing? Government should step in. Can't find a job? Government should force someone to hire you. Tired of living in an apartment? Government should give you a house. Whether you've earned it or deserve it has nothing to do with it; Mama Government will nurture you and provide for you. And to do so, it will take the money from those who have earned and do deserve. You don't need all those pesky freedoms; if you are free, then you make decisions. If you make decisions, you might make a bad decision. Isn't better to have Mama Government take all that worry away? Why would anyone want all that responsibility?

The problem with the liberal mindset is that if government makes your decisions for you, what do you do if it makes a bad one? And folks, the government RARELY gets it right. Government took over the public schools, and now we're amongst the worst in the industrialized world. Government took over the Post Office, and made it a nightmare. Government gave us Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security; all of which are bankrupt and brimming with abuse and corruption. Government got involved in mortgage loans, via the Community Reinvestment Act, and it led to our current economic crisis. Government over-regulated the auto industry, and now only one of the Big Three is still actually in business. More than a trillion dollars in TARP and Stimulus packages, and what have we to show for it? Crippling debt and double-digit unemployment. If government was a business, it would be out of business.

Now, before I go too much further afield, let's look at Nazism. Let's all take a trip to Wiki, that bastion of Right-wing philosophy, and see what they have to say on the subject.

Nazism, known officially in German as National Socialism[1][2][3][4] (German: Nationalsozialismus), is the totalitarian ideology and practices of the Nazi Party or National Socialist German Workers’ Party under Adolf Hitler, and the policies adopted by the dictatorial government of Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945.[5][6][7][8] Nazism is often considered by scholars to be a form of fascism. While it incorporated elements from both left and right-wing politics, the Nazis formed most of their alliances on the right.[9] The Nazis were one of several historical groups that used the term National Socialism to describe themselves, and in the 1920s they became the largest such group. The Nazi Party presented its program in the 25 point National Socialist Program in 1920. Among the key elements of Nazism were anti-parliamentarism, Pan-Germanism, racism, collectivism,[10][11] eugenics, antisemitism, anti-communism, totalitarianism and opposition to economic liberalism and political liberalism.[11][12][13]

WHOA! It says right there that it incorporated some RIGHT wing politics! And it was opposed to economic and political liberalism! How can that possibly be compared to today's liberalism?

Well, it's a matter of definition. Who were the "Right" that the Nazis were aligning with? Again, Wiki:

In politics, right-wing, political right, rightist and the Right are terms used to describe a number of positions and ideologies. They are most commonly used to refer to support for preserving traditional or cultural values and customs or for maintaining some form of social hierarchy or private control of the means of production.[1][2][3][4] Nevertheless the terms have been used for different things in different countries. The phrase right-wing was coined during the French Revolution, referring to seating arrangements in parliament; those who sat on the right supported the monarchy, the aristocracy and the established church.[5][6][7][8] The concept of a distinct political Right developed after the second restoration of the French monarchy in 1815 with the Ultra-royalists. Today the term the Right is primarily used to refer to political groups that have a historical connection with the traditional Right, including conservatives, reactionaries, monarchists, aristocrats, fascists[2], religious fundamentalists, and some nationalists. But in modern times, the Right has also encompassed views supporting capitalism and free markets.

Hmm. American Conservatism DOES like tradition, capitalism, and free markets, but that's as far as the accuracy of this definition goes. We certainly don't care much for monarchies or fascists; American Conservatism is very much into the Constitution, which defies those two concepts. We fought the Revolution to get AWAY from a monarchy. We've fought several wars AGAINST fascism.

The simple fact is, political ideologies are hard to define, and tend to differ from period to period, and from country to country. American Conservatism is vastly different from British Conservatism, which is different from Japanese Conservatism. Likewise, German Conservatism was not the same was what we have here in the States today:

Conservatories in Germany encompasses a large number of strains of the past three hundred years. While many of the Conservatory theorists are labelled "political romantics" (most notably by Carl Schmitt, himself Conservatory), at least four strains can be distinguished before 1945: Status-quo-ante-Conservatory and Romantic Conservatory, wanting to go back before the French Revolution and to restore the medieval order. Notable theorists are Novalis, Friedrich Schelling, Karl Ludwig von Haller and Adam Müller. Conservatory Journalism to defend the status quo of Metternichs System (the Restoration) and nationalistic Conservatism. Notable theorists include Friedrich von Gentz, Friedrich Schlegel and Ernst Moritz Arndt. Conservatory writing in defense of the (constitutional) Monarchy in Germany. Included are the late Hegel, Stein and Friedrich Julius Stahl. The Conservatory Revolution and pre-Nazi radicals, such as Arthur Moeller van den Bruck, Oswald Spengler (adding pessimism and cultural Conservatory) and Carl Schmitt. Also included are the anti-Enlightenment romanticism of Friedrich Nietzsche, the conservative realpolitik and statecraft of Otto von Bismarck and the anti-republican monarchism of the DNVP during the Weimar Republic. During the period of Nazi rule; all other political parties, including conservative, were outlawed. The "national revolution" of the national socialists had priority and the racist and social changes in German society were not allowed to be stopped by the conservative forces of "reaction" (Reaktion, see Horst-Wessel-Lied), like for instance the democratic Zentrum and the Prussian monarchists. Notable conservatives were - after a period of pacification in the Nazi Reich - involved in the German Resistance, most notably in the 20 July plot. In modern Germany, the post-World War II Christian Democratic conservatism claims to represent all forms of Conservatism, while there remain some marginal parties on the right of the Christian Democratic Union (dubbed National Conservatists to distinguish them from the far-right-parties), e.g. Die Republikaner. There also exist marginal movements to restore the German Monarchy, most notably Tradition und Leben. A notable modern conservative theorist is Arnold Gehlen.

So, German Conservatism was nationalistic and supported a return to pre-French Revolution monarchy. Again, not so much what we go for here in the US. Monarchy is much closer to socialism than Conservatism; government controls pretty much everything, the people have only what freedoms are granted by the government, and the people have little (if any) say on who is governing them. American Conservatism is in direct contrast to this: less government control, freedoms are inalienable and not granted by government, and the people vote for representatives in government, even up to our highest office. So I think it's safe to say that the Conservatism we have today in America is a totally different critter than what they had in Germany 80 years ago.

So how about that economic liberalism? Well, that also bears little resemblance to today's American liberalism:

Economic liberalism is the economic component of classical liberalism.[1] It is the political and economic philosophy that supports and promotes the economic system of capitalism, in the laissez-faire sense. Opposing government intervention in the economy, and supporting the maximum of free trade and competition, it contrasts with mercantilism, Keynesianism and socialism.[2]

Yeah, this is not remotely what passes for Liberalism in America today. The Obama Administration has been on the attack against the free market, capitalism, competition, and reduced government intervention since before the election. So let's see what Wiki has to say about Socialism:

Socialists inspired by the Soviet model of economic development have advocated the creation of centrally planned economies directed by a state that owns all the means of production. Others, including Yugoslavian, Hungarian, German and Chinese Communists in the 1970s and 1980s, instituted various forms of market socialism, combining co-operative and state ownership models with the free market exchange and free price system (but not free prices for the means of production).[8] Social democrats propose selective nationalisation of key national industries in mixed economies, while maintaining private ownership of capital and private business enterprise. Social democrats also promote tax-funded welfare programs and regulation of markets.

Good heavens, doesn't that sound familiar? Centrally planned economies, state-owned means of production, tax-funded welfare programs, regulation of markets...spreading the wealth, government take-over of businesses, government deciding how much a person can be paid, government-run health care....

The Liberalism we have in America today looks an awful lot like Socialism, doesn't it? So is there an argument that today's Liberalism has nothing to do with Socialism? Not really; consider the source. These socialist policies are not coming from Conservatives; this agenda is being pushed by the Left.

Which brings us back to Nazism.

I won't bore you with the details of anti-parliamentarianism, and Pan-Germanism is pretty self-explanatory, so let's look at the other hallmarks of these jokers.

Racism and eugenics-if you weren't Hitler's idea of perfection, you had no right to live. Except, perhaps as slave labor. The Aryan ideal of the blue-eyed and blond-haired being the pinnacle of human perfection, or the Ubermensch, is among the most notable aspects of Nazism. It was this ideal that sent several million Jews to their deaths. So, which side of the aisle here in America holds closer to such ideas?

Conservatism believes that what a person does now is more important than his ancestry. As Martin Luther King, Jr. once prayed for, we prefer to judge a man by the content of his character, rather than the color of his skin. Eugenicist, Progressive, and founder of Planned Parenthood Margaret Sanger took a slightly different approach; she advocated the forced sterilization and abortion of any "weed" people; anyone who was not smart enough, rich enough, or white enough for her liking did not deserve to the privilege of reproduction. Today, Planned Parenthood and its offshoot, NARAL, is at the center of the Democrat party. Our current President, Vice President, Secretary of State, Speaker of the House, and Senate Leader all have 100 percent compliance ratings from NARAL, meaning that their policies most reflect that group's agenda. And just to put a finer point on the subject, Hitler took a large portion of his philosophy from the American Progressive movement that later evolved into today's Liberalism.

Anti-Semitism, Anti-Communism, Totalitarianism-The Jew-hating is pretty obvious, so no need to rehash that, except to point out that an uncomfortably large number of Obama's supporters, czars, cabinet, and other appointees are on record as being extremely anti-Semitic. I have no problem with anti-Communism; Communism is just a more modern version of feudalism, which is the antithesis of the core principles that founded our country. But as demonstrated by our look at socialism, Communism has far more in common with the goals of Liberalism than Conservatism; how many self-avowed Communists are in the Administration right now? ONE is far too many. Likewise totalitarianism; a system of government that has the government in charge of virtually every aspect of existence? This is hardly something freedom-loving Conservatives would tolerate, let alone promote.

So let's look at a few of Hitler's other policies. He was an advocate for gun control; one of the first things he did when he came into power was confiscate privately owned firearms, for the public safety. Sound familiar? Which political group fights to nullify our 2nd Amendment? That would be the members of the Left, as I recall.

Hitler also took over several industries, including the automotive industry. This is why we have Volkswagen (the People's Car). And Reagan, as we all know, took control of two of the three major auto companies. Wait. No, I'm sorry, that was Obama, wasn't it?

Hitler outlawed all political opposition. No other parties were allowed. Of course, this is similar to what W. did to the Democrats here in the US...oops! Sorry! It's the Obama Administration and the Democrats that are refusing to even admit that Republicans have any alternative to ObamaCare (over THIRTY alternatives, at last count), and trying to remove Fox News from the Press Pool, and silence talk radio, and accusing Tea Party protesters of racism, and setting up snitch hotlines, and refusing to allow any debate of the so-called science of AGW. Just to name a few of the attempts at removing all political opposition. Sure, Conservatives would be a lot happier if Liberals would just shut the hell up, get out of the way, and let the grown-ups get this country back on track to prosperity, but we aren't trying to change laws to silence them.

Hitler created a civilian army. He trained children to snitch on their parents. I wonder how many men and women went to prison (or worse) because they didn't feel that their Little Klaus was quite ready for a puppy. Quiz Time! Which US Presidential candidate said the following: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." "People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve.... I will set a goal for all American middle and high school students to perform 50 hours of service a year, and for all college students to perform 100 hours of service a year...." Hint: He got elected President in 2008.

So to that little pinhead that babbled about how Nazism was Conservative: sorry, Charlie. Your argument is dust, and I even used a left-of-center information website to defeat it. The idiotic "Reich-wing" insult is based only in your own wishful thinking. It has no place in a factual argument.

Disagree? Feel free. But I have a few demands. First off, as I used a left-wing site to prove my case, you have to use a RIGHT wing site to refute it. And it has to be an ACTUAL American Conservative source; Aryan Nation is not Conservative. The KKK are not Conservative. Sites that advocate hatred, violence, and illegal actions are not Conservative.

None of this "everybody knows" crap, either. You make a claim, you back it up with actual data, not your opinion or your perception of the opinion of others in your echo chamber.

Despite the Left's insistence that anyone who disagrees with Obama is a Nazi, history and REALITY says different. The fact of the matter is, Nazism has far, far more in common with today's American Liberalism than today's American Conservatism. Obama is pushing forth a Socialist agenda that easily rivals (and in many ways has already surpassed) FDR.

Crossposted at JBYP