Auschwitz was liberated 77 years ago

Such an ignorant comment. You might want to brush up on your history.

Well using the same logic, you could argue that the Communists had some right-wing policies, therefore the Soviet Union was a right-wing organisation.

Anyone with a) a brain and b) a book will reject both arguments as nonsense.

Isolated incidents of racist violence in America do not equate to state sanctioned killing, destruction of property, synagogues being burned and Jews being arrested to spend weeks in concentration camps as happened in November 1938 in Germany. That was just the prelude to what happened in Poland a year later and the virtual annihilation of all German Jews over the following few years.

Jews weren't being killed in pogroms, some were undoubtedly executed during the Stalinist terror as were other supposed traitors and sabatuers but actually Jews were quite prominent in the Soviet hirachy and the NKVD.

Interesting point. While the Americans and Soviets were classed as the "good guys" - they raped millions. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany

This world is mad. Nothing is ever clean cut black and white.

Bombing would have resulted in thousands of prisoner casualties.

It’s alway interesting to think of events as ‘peoples ago’. The nazi death camps were one people ago. As socially recent as Italia 90.

Picasso was a contemporary of both Charles Darwin and Eminem.

I know! It's such a foolish point to make when there's over 100 million victims of leftist socialism.

I see that this "the nazis were left wing" bollocks keeps coming up from certain posters.

They weren't.

Not even slightly.

As to why they were named Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei; the reason for this lay in Hitler's idea to try and pull current voters and potential voters away from actual left wing parties like the KPD and SPD which had been gaining ground steadily throughout the 20's and 30's. It was a particular bit of genius on behalf of the future Fuhrer to elongate Anton Drexler's original party name and create a rather confusing moniker that could be used as a potential smoke screen.

The fact of the matter, however, is that nothing the Nazis did could seriously be considered "left wing". Infrastructure and work programs aren't a left wing thing. Neither are roads like Autobahns. However, actual Nazi policy like banning trade unions and jailing left wingers is certainly the work of the far right. The first people through the gates of Dachau weren't Jews. They were Communists and Socialists which shows exactly where Hitler and the Nazis political direction lay.

The Nazis also got into bed with Conservative Germany straight from the off and Conservative Germany was willing to play along, in the belief that they would be able to control him in the long term. But once Paul Von Hindenburg (a Conservative) made Hitler Chancellor, the die was cast.

Outside of Germany, everywhere the Nazis went they hunted down the left and allied themselves with the right. In France, Norway, and many other nations they invaded, a right wing conservative of some description was placed in power and the left was destroyed.

Calling the Nazis "left" remains one of the most egregious, and in many cases deliberately so, misreadings of history that one can engage in.

Some of their economic policies were certainly left-wing by today's standard

They were very much for military keynesianism, that is increasing economic output and demand by flooding the country with money.

Free marketers and capitalists (one of the reasons they hated the Jews) they were not.

That's merely her opinion, though, and I don't think that it could be backed by any serious dive into the matter.

In any case, there was no way that the US were just going to show off their new weapon to the Japanese and "waste" it on a demonstration at sea, and any attempts by the likes of Leo Szilard and his group to persuade either Roosevelt or Truman into such an action fell upon deaf ears immediately. The Americans were dead set on using the bomb for a variety of reasons, not least of which were the test results that would be yielded by its use on a "virgin" urban areas like Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which proved absolutely invaluable to the future development of such weaponry.

Why stop at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you could start with the bombing of Warsaw, Rotterdam (neutral), London, Coventry, Hamburg, Berlin, Dresden (which wasn't as exceptional as some think), then you have the firebombing of Tokyo (probably more civilian deaths than H&N)?

Then there's cold blooded murder like what the Japanese did in China or the Germans in Poland and Russia. This was ordered from the top not isolated in 'the heat-of-battle' type.

But this is getting away from what this thread is supposedly about which is the Nazi racist killing machine as symbolized by Auschwitz.

It says nothing; just include them in the overall toll. They ase but a very small drop in a larage bucket

https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-two/civilian-casualties-of-world-war-two/

Their deaths are no more important or somehow worse and notable than the rest of the civillians killed in that war, the number of which was far too high. Those bombs prevented far more needless deaths than they caused.