National Socialism: What Was It?

National Socialism: What Was It?
  • 823
  • 188
  • 11

My Recent Posts

So, this is part two.  My focus in this article will only be on Germany itself.  This article will briefly detail the history of the Nazi Party, it's roots and what it did in power.

 

In narrowing this to Germany, one needs to look at the various nationalist movements that sprang up in 19th century Germany.  I go back to the gymnast  movements that sprang up in Prussia after the defeat of Napoleon.  Led by Friedrich Ludwig Jahn, this group espoused a unified Germany.  They also advocated for a healthy, active lifestyle and many of Jahn's followers participated in the failed 1848 Revolution.  Jahn himself wanted to create a constitutional monarchy.  A darker aspect was Jahn's antisemitism and his intolerant attitudes towards Poles and priests (he also disliked the French but this was understandable) and he even participated in a book burning.  His ideas influenced Richard Wagner and by extension, Hitler.  

 

This was the start of the Pan-Germanic movement.  The Brothers Grimm, Wagner, Jahn and others supported Pan-Germanism or the idea of uniting all Germanic people under one flag.  Originally this was under Austria but after the reunification of Germany in 1871 it shifted to the north.  The sources I read think that Hitler became exposed to these ideas while in Vienna, along with the antisemitic attitudes these groups espoused (though it seems that Hitler was hardly a hardcore antisemite while in Vienna.  He did business with Jews and seemed quite friendly with a few).  These Pan-Germanic  movements were antisemitic and highly nationalistic but mostly fringe parties.  Their interests aligned  with the growth of antisemitic parties in Germany before World War I.  They also remained on the fringe with some of their ideas incorporated into conservative parties.

 

The loss of the war sent shockwaves through German society and the terms later imposed via the Versailles Treaty poisoned the very beginnings of the Weimar Republic.  Far-right groups sprang up to contest the Republic from the very beginning.  One of these groups was called The German Worker's Party (In German Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or DAP).  Founded by Anton Drexler in 1919, it espoused nationalism but keyed towards workers.  It was both anti-Marxist but also anti-Capitalist.  It was antisemitic in outlook.  The DAP wanted to break Bavaria away from Germany and form a union with Austria.  This is the party that Adolf Hitler joined in 1919.

 

I will not go into Hitler's biography.  To say that Adolf Hitler is one of the most studied figures in history is an understatement.  He is certainly a fascinating figure but I feel this would be a tangent to this article.  Suffice to say that the end of the war shattered his world, just like it did for millions of Germans.  He remained in the army after the war ended because there was nothing in his life that would encourage him to leave.  He became an intelligence agent with his targets the various political parties that sprang up after the war.  The army was particularly concerned with political parties on the left after the various Communist uprisings that threatened the Weimar Republic.  Hitler's task was to identify which groups were a threat while simultaneously trying to influence workers away from Communism.  Hitler attended a DAP meeting in September of 1919.  While there Hitler argued with a professor who argued for Bavarian separation from Germany.  Drexler became impressed by hearing Hitler speak and encouraged him to join.  Hitler joined after receiving permission to do so from his commanding officer.  He quickly became a prominent member due to his beliefs and his skills as an orator.  In order to become more attractive to a wider section of the population the party changed its name to the Nationalist Socialist Workers Party on February 24th, 1920 (in German, Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP).  Hitler eventually supplanted Drexler and became the sole leader in July of 1921.

 

The NSDAP remained very much a fringe party and the butt of jokes after the failed Beer Hall Putsch in 1923.  The membership remained small and likely would have remained so if not for the Great Depression in 1929.  By the Summer of 1933 the NSDAP became the largest party in Germany though this support started to same somewhat that Fall.  Conservatives in Germany helped Hitler become Chancellor in January of 1934.

 

I realize I blew through whole chunks of history but I didn't want to get bogged down in it.  For those who want more details I can provide them in comments.  

 

So, what was National Socialism?  The party set forth a 25-point program that explained what it believed in:

NSDAP 25 Point Program

 

Much is made about its very socialist tone but the reality is that economics frankly bored Hitler.  Hitler even clarified  that the NSDAP respected private property:

 

 "Since the NSDAP stands on the platform of private ownership it happens that the passage" gratuitous expropriation concerns only the creation of legal opportunities to expropriate if necessary, land which has been illegally acquired or is not administered from the view-point of the national welfare. This is directed primarily against the Jewish land-speculation companies. "

 

Unlike Communists the state was not the primary employer, the primary employer remained private companies.  The state channeled resources to massive rearmament but private companies remained in charge of production research and development.  The NSDAP did channel money to public works in order to stimulate employment but those were planned for by previous administrations.  Hitler simply implemented them.

 

At its heart the NSDAP was expansionist and antisemitic.  Hitler wanted to unite Germans under Germany but also wanted to expand to give Germans more living space and access to resources like food and metals.  Hitler wanted this expansion to occur on European soil, he didn't want colonial empires like the British and French.  Hitler believed this expansion made most sense in the USSR because in his mind the Jews were responsible for the Communists taking control of the USSR.  He believed that this represented both an opportunity and a threat, an opportunity because Jews could only cause chaos making the USSR an easy target, a threat that this chaos would spill into Europe and help the Communists take over in Europe.  

 

The goals of the NSDAP started with overturning the Versailles Treaty, then uniting Germans under a greater Germany and finally expanding into Eastern Europe.  In Hitler's mind this left no room for Socialists, Communists or Jews.  Hitler showed some flexibility in working with Slavic nations as long as he remained the dominant partner but in instances where Slavs defied him like Poland or  Czechoslovakia the Germans sought to dominate and then replace.  Hitler generally kept other Fascist movements like the Arrow Cross in Hungary at arms length, preferring to operate with similar right-wing governments like his own.

 

National Socialism was the most successful of the various right-wing Fascist movements that sprang up in Europe during the early to middle part of the 20th century.  It's hard to say how it  would have evolved, Hitler's ambitions clashed with other powers that led to war and his downfall.

 

 

 

Comments

Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 5:42pm
See my previous article on Fascism for sources.  I also pulled a lot from Ian Kershaw's biography of Hitler, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by Shirer and the Coming of the Third Reich by Richard Evans.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 5:43pm
I also gotta say I'm glad I finally finished this one.....:)
James Travil Added Jul 23, 2018 - 6:54pm
Thumbs up for a very educational article Jeffrey! 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 7:07pm
Thanks, James.
John Minehan Added Jul 23, 2018 - 8:44pm
Very nicely written and informative. 
 
I did not know Hitler stayed in the Army.  His background as a Command Runner in the trenches seems odd for that, especially as a Counter Intel Agent. 
 
He obviously had initiative and could act autonomously but it strikes me he did not seem to have the social skills or the ability to provide unbiased reporting.
 
I guess the outcome indicates that particular aspect of the Heer's "Force Alignment Program" did  not work.   
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 8:49pm
Thanks, John.  The Versailles Treaty limited the German army to 100,000 men so the remainder were slotted where they were needed.  
The thing about Hitler was that after the war he felt lost and his CO found a use for him.  This CO also saw that Hitler willingly bought into the army's views on Jews, Communists and Socialists.  They saw his value.
I may do an article only on Hitler, might be useful.
John Minehan Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:01pm
I thought I remembered that Hitler's wartime Company Commander was Jewish and that Hitler admired the man and protected him and his family during the Shoah
 
If it is true, it seems like the kind of inconsistency that you often see in a lot of human interactions. 
John Minehan Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:02pm
Hitler did hold an Iron Cross, unusual for a junior NCO, so I guess it helped him get retained by the Heer.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:04pm
Hitler protected his mother's doctor.  He allowed him to leave with his family.  His CO I don't know but he received his Iron Cross First Class on the recommendation of a Jewish officer.
Ryan Messano Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:18pm
Ryan Messano Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:20pm
Great article, right on.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:22pm
Ryan, that article keeps sending me to Amazon.  I can’t read it.  What were the seven Marxists?
John Minehan Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:25pm
Let me guess, Hitler is on that list?
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:30pm
Never mind, I read it.  I think that the number for Stalin is way too high.  I think people are tossing in numbers from WW II and possibly from the Civil War.  The highest numbers came during the famines from the early 30’s and possibly from the late 40’s.  From what I’ve read it’s about 10 million total.  I think Mao is about 40 million total.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:31pm
Surprisingly no.  It’s very right-wing right now to label Hitler a Socialist.  All those people are dead wrong.
Ryan Messano Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:36pm
Yup, Hitler was definitely a socialist too.  Pretending he was a right wing Trump is totally bogus.  Hitler's Brown Shirts are almost exact clones of today's Antifa, right up to their homosexual leader, Ernst Rohm. 
Ryan Messano Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:38pm
I read the first two books Jeffrey, and they are instructive.  Shirer's I especially treasure, as he was there when Hitler ascended and attended the rallies.  Hitler is quite like today's disenchanted liberal.  He hated Jews, which most liberals hate Israel, he thought big government was a good thing, so does today's liberal, and there was no means he was not willing to use to attain and retain power.  That too is true of today's liberal. 
John Minehan Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:40pm
Just an opinion,  after Bismarck, most of Europe went in a more "Socialist" direction than either Europe or Asia.   There was more willingness to have government control (or at least intervene) in more areas than, say, the US would be comfortable with.
 
The Reich was no more (and, obviously, no less) socialist than Adenauer or Bismarck were.  You have to look at it in context.     
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:42pm
LOL, no, Ryan, he was not.  He loathed Communists and Socialists.  His Brownshirts attacked both in the streets. The Nazis tossed both into concentration camps as soon as Hitler became Chancellor.  In fact the first three years or so of his regime Communists and Socialists far outnumbered Jews in the camps.
 
Hitler murdered Roehm and the other homosexuals in the SA during the Night of the Long Knives in 1934.
John Minehan Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:44pm
I guess you could say that Marx's "Specter" is no longer "haunting Europe," it has to some degree, at least a limited one, possessed it.
James Travil Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:46pm
Lying Ryan doesn't do history, just revisionist fake "history" don't you know! 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:48pm
@Ryan Messano:
”I read the first two books Jeffrey, and they are instructive.”
 
I suggest you read them again.
 
“Shirer's I especially treasure, as he was there when Hitler ascended and attended the rallies.”
 
It’s out of date.  I recommend Richard Evans’ Third Reich Trilogy.  I still think it’s a classic worth reading but only as a starting point in studying this.
 
“Hitler is quite like today's disenchanted liberal.”
 
LOL, Hitler was anti-liberal and anti-democratic.  
 
“He hated Jews, which most liberals hate Israel,”
 
We do?  BTW the antisemitism that you accuse liberals of having was a right-wing conservative trait during Hitler’s time.  You can’t look back at that time and think terms and conditions were the same.  
 
“he thought big government was a good thing,”
 
He did?
 
“so does today's liberal, and there was no means he was not willing to use to attain and retain power.  That too is true of today's liberal.”
 
I think its funny when you talk about things you know very little about.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 9:50pm
@John Minehan:
”The Reich was no more (and, obviously, no less) socialist than Adenauer or Bismarck were.  You have to look at it in context.”
 
Absolutely.  I find the problem current day liberals and conservatives have is that they think the same definitions for what they are today hold true 100 years ago.  Or 75.
Ryan Messano Added Jul 23, 2018 - 10:03pm
So, Jeffrey? Totalitarians don't like other totalitarians, that's why Hitler despised Communists.  He was a Socialist.  The Nazi Party stood for National Socialist German Workers Party.  It literally had the word Socialist in the name.  I like how you forgot the NAS socialist aspect and included only the DAP.  Very dishonest and deceitful of you.  That's why I don't trust liberals to tell history.  Hitler was likely homosexual himself, but he would have been toast if Germany found out about that, so he was a clever snake, like most homosexuals and put the effeminate homosexuals to death.  Rohm was plotting to take over the nation, so he had to be put to death.  He was married a few days before he died, and if you think he was living a celibate life before his death, you are mistaken.  Homosexuals have long been noted for brutal sadism, and the Sadism of the Nazi's can easily be explained by Hitler being one.  I recommend you also read Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". This will break down how the four worst emperors in Rome's history were all homosexual: Elagabulus, Nero, Commodus, and Caligula.   History keeps repeating itself if you know what to look for.  Sodom and Gomorrha wasn't a fairy tale, homosexuals do behave like those degenerates when they control things.  They are brute beasts.  They are a Trojan Horse, brought here to destroy America, just like all the other ideas of the Democrats.
 
How is it you don't recognize that Hitler favored big government?  You need to read those books again.  You have to be off your rocker to think Hitler wanted to shrink government. 
 
You just don't like your own ideas being exposed as being similar to Hitler's.  But they are.  Like Hitler, you are a totalitarian in waiting.  You simply don't have power.  When you have it, you'll ruthlessly wield it.  Never trust a Democrat or a liberal is a good way to go through life.
John Minehan Added Jul 23, 2018 - 10:09pm
Most of Europe (less Switzerland) thought Centralized state power was an improvement.  (Certainly France, Italy and Germany spent decades trying to unify into powerful states (Germany is nominally "Federal" but seems more of a Unitary state in practice).
 
The US was formed from Colonies that were more autonomous entities than part of one large colony.  We see ourselves as being Federal, but in practice, we have grown more unitary.
 
So, I would see Hitler and the Reich as being proponents of "big Government," as compared to what we would be comfortable (and beyond the more general European tradition, but not wholly outside of it).   
James Travil Added Jul 23, 2018 - 10:34pm
Ryan is so divorced from reality it's pathetic. Nazis liberals? RIGHT! That must be why EVERY SINGLE NAZI GROUP FROM UKRAINE TO THE USA IDENTIFYS AS RIGHT WING! ROTFLMFAO liberal Nazis your killing me! What's next Jewish Naxis or Satanists for Jesus? LOL! 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 10:38pm
@Ryan Messano:
”So, Jeffrey? Totalitarians don't like other totalitarians, that's why Hitler despised Communists.”
 
No, Hitler loathed both Communists and Socialists because of their link to Jews.
 
“He was a Socialist.”
 
LOL, no, he was not.  Hitler was a pure racist, he placed Germans at the top of this racial hierarchy.  To Hitler any German man or woman was a “Socialist” in the sense that they deserved to rule and have the best of everything.  Hitler’s use of the term was very fluid.
 
 
“The Nazi Party stood for National Socialist German Workers Party.  It literally had the word Socialist in the name.  I like how you forgot the NAS socialist aspect and included only the DAP.  Very dishonest and deceitful of you.”
 
Read it again, Ryan.  It’s right there in the article.  I gave the German and English translation of the term.
 
 
“That's why I don't trust liberals to tell history.”
 
Because you know this liberal knows more than you?
 
target="_blank">Hitler was likely homosexual himself,
 
LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL....I literally had an aneurysm laughing so loud......my wife gave me a weird look....LOL
 
No, Ryan....Hitler was not a homosexual. He liked women but was very awkward socially.  Also certain philosophical beliefs of his led him to adopt celibacy early in life though I think that was more about his social awkwardness than anything else....Holy shit that’s like you!!!!!  
 
He did have some relationships as he got older, the most famous being Eva Braun and his half niece.  The relationship with his half niece was a bit murky, no one is sure if they were intimate or not.  Regardless she is the one person he seems to have loved deeply and he mourned her death all of his life.  He was definitely intimate with Eva Braun.
 
“but he would have been toast if Germany found out about that, so he was a clever snake, like most homosexuals and put the effeminate homosexuals to death.”
 
No, it was more about eliminating a potential rival, stripping the SA of its power to mollify the German generals and putting an end to the talk of a “second revolution.
 
“Rohm was plotting to take over the nation, so he had to be put to death.”
 
Doubtful.  Right before his death Roehm sent the SA on Summer leave and went on vacation.
 
“He was married a few days before he died, and if you think he was living a celibate life before his death, you are mistaken.”
 
No, he was banging Eva Braun.  Christ, Ryan, read a history book.
 
“Homosexuals have long been noted for brutal sadism, and the Sadism of the Nazi's can easily be explained by Hitler being one.”
 
Ryan, do you just make shit up as you go along?  Is that how it works with you?
 
 
“I recommend you also read Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire".
 
I did.  Decades ago.
 
“How is it you don't recognize that Hitler favored big government? “
 
Is that why he nationalized everything and collectivized German agriculture?
 
Oh, wait.  He didn’t.
 
Ryan, economics bored Hitler to death.  He didn’t care how things got done he simply wanted them done.  When there were squabbles over resources he came down on the side of rearmament but other than that he didn’t care.
 
“You need to read those books again.  You have to be off your rocker to think Hitler wanted to shrink government.”
 
What Hitler wanted was to put Germans back to work and build loud things that went boom.  How it happened didn’t matter to him.  In a sense he did what other desperate governments did in Europe at that time.
 
“You just don't like your own ideas being exposed as being similar to Hitler's.  But they are.”
 
I always enjoy being told what I believe in.  The person telling me what I believe is generally wrong so I don’t mind.  I particularly enjoy it when the person doing it exposes how much they don’t know about history.
 
“Like Hitler, you are a totalitarian in waiting.”
 
I am?  I’m no Republican.......
The last time I checked you are the one who doesn’t want certain people to vote or write.  You are the totalitarian, not me.
 
“You simply don't have power.  When you have it, you'll ruthlessly wield it.  Never trust
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 10:39pm
Ryan, I can’t think of a bigger nightmare than you having power.  That thought scares the shit out of me.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 10:40pm
@James Travil:
LOL
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 23, 2018 - 10:40pm
John, thanks for being a voice for sanity.
 
 
James Travil Added Jul 23, 2018 - 10:55pm
Ryan is just jealous because Hitler was a better Christian than him. And everyone knows that right wingers are naturally sadast, examples are everywhere, just look at the Trump regime's war on the poor, disabled, and elderly. That's screams pure evil and sadism. Again, facts bother Ryan, and yes he does just make shit up as he goes. What a sad and deranged little man-child. 
John Minehan Added Jul 23, 2018 - 10:56pm
Mr. Kelly:
 
I have always favored sanity.  On the other hand, I have not always necessarily practiced it.
Ryan Messano Added Jul 23, 2018 - 11:29pm
You have a marvelous ability to mangle truth, Jeffrey.  But you see as you are.  Fitting that you and the Satanist agree.
James Travil Added Jul 23, 2018 - 11:43pm
Hilarious lying Ryan talking about the truth, a topic that he wouldn't recognize if it bit him on the ass. 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 12:01am
Ryan, I'm willing to bet I know far more about Hitler, the Third Reich and the Holocaust than you will ever know.
Dave Dubya Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:15am
Seems Ryan never read 5 biographies of Nazi leaders. Too busy reading about homosexuals?
Ryan Messano Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:52am
Not a chance, Jeffrey, I’ll smoke you in World War 2 history, easily.  From the causes, to the nations, to the characters, I’ve extensively studied it.  You don’t stand a chance because I never wasted a minute with drugs fewer than average with hellivision, and intense and undivided concentration is necessary to master these topics.  ‘Genius is an infinite capacity to take pains’.  Carlyle. 
 
 
Hitler, Eichmann, Rommel, Himmler, and Goering, DD.  
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 6:12am
Great piece!
 
I find it difficult to argue that the nationalist movement was particularly anti-semitic. It operated in an overall anti-semitic culture. The socialist groups were not different.
 
One should also know that nationalists were on the political left back then. Monarchist purists were on the political right. I understand the argument that forming an identity can lead to exclusion of people who are different and that nationalism intensified the overall antisemitism. It is also obvious that leading figures were antisemitic. As for Hitler's personal development I don't see that nationalism was the ingredient that made him more antisemitic. He grew up with antisemitism and he ran on a whole lot of conspiracy theories. The traumatic war and the Bolshevik crimes pushed it to a violent level. I think one big problem of the time was that outside SPD, Zentrum and NSDAP, too few distanced themselves from the Bolsheviks. Hitler was using that very effectively. By 1933, gulags and intentional mass starvations were well known and the Nazis advertised themselves as a counterpoint to these crimes.
https://youtu.be/Af44Slin7lg
 
People were frustrated about the track record of SPD, but I don't understand why Zentrum did not attract more people. They were Catholics and maybe the anti-religious attitude played a part in this.
Dave Dubya Added Jul 24, 2018 - 8:50am
Hitler, Eichmann, Rommel, Himmler, and Goering, DD
 
Socialists like Bernie? LOL!  Only a fool believes Hitler's ideology wanted labor rights, public safety nets, health care, and education for all. 
 
Totalitarians don't like other totalitarians, that's why Hitler despised Communists.  He was a Socialist.
 
And Kim Jong Un is the leader of a "democratic republic" of North Korea. 
 
He was a NATIONAL socialist.  A nationalist as in white nationalist. A racist and bigot. A man who "made Germany great again". 
 
Our history professor forgot Tojo and Mussolini were totalitarians too. 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 9:57am
@Ryan Messano:
”Not a chance, Jeffrey, I’ll smoke you in World War 2 history, easily.”
 
 
LOL, Ryan, you think Hitler is gay because of some shit article you googled up.
 
You are hysterically delusional.
 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 9:59am
@Dave Dubya:
LOL, yeah, Ryan needs to go back and read biographies of the top five national socialists.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 10:13am
@Benjamin Goldstein:
”I find it difficult to argue that the nationalist movement was particularly anti-semitic. It operated in an overall anti-semitic culture. The socialist groups were not different.”
 
Benjamin, the nationalists wanted pure societies only for their ethnic group.  Jews were the outsider.  Socialists (theoretically) embraced everyone though there were antisemites among them.
 
“One should also know that nationalists were on the political left back then.”
 
I don’t know where you get this stuff.  They were solidly right-wing.  Refer back to my article on Fascism.
 
“Monarchist purists were on the political right.”
 
The right encompassed many groups, not just monarchists.  Just like today.  Same with the left.
 
 
“People were frustrated about the track record of SPD, but I don't understand why Zentrum did not attract more people.”
 
The times pushed Germans to extremes and this cost the Zentrum votes.
opher goodwin Added Jul 24, 2018 - 10:54am
It was as far removed from socialism as you can get wasn't it? A form of nationalism based on Mussolini's fascist movement.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 11:15am
Yes, Opher, it was.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 12:13pm
“One should also know that nationalists were on the political left back then.”
I don’t know where you get this stuff.
It is a fact. Sorry. Historian Frank Engehausen, a leftist himself, has written a book about the 1848/48 revolution and says that the nationalists were left-wingers. I like them and would take credit for it, but truth is truth. They saw themselves as left-wing. Nationalism can be just as inclusive as socialism. The idea was to create a political unit out of the German-language regions. It did not mean much more. During the Hambacher Fest(ival) they had French guest speakers (who of course did not side with their government) and expressed their welcoming for refugees from Poland.
 
Here a source. Run it through the google translator.
https://www.rnz.de/politik/suedwest_artikel,-neues-hambacher-fest-protest-unterm-schloss-_arid,356301.html
 
You somehow have to live with the fact that I know Germany better than you.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 12:17pm
And of course the Nazis were also socialist. Not every socialist is the same and I don't liken Bernie Sanders to Hitler. That's ludicrous.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 12:26pm
I shouldn't send a string of comments in one row, but the thinking in ethnicities is rather something new. Germany was not a colonial power. What German identity was based on was LANGUAGE. This is still a very strong factor. If you ask Germans what immigrants shoud do, they don't say "accept democracy" or "change their faith." You will always hear "learn the language." Until 1871 there was no Germany. It was formed on basis of a shared language that would ease the cooperation in a common political entity, the nation. To some extend it is a similar reasoning to the EU apologists, but the nationalists had a democratic purpose.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 12:49pm
I want to find out more about how the right wing views on history are developed, spread from person to person. I want to know how they end up being constructed on the firm basis of circular reasoning that is impervious to new facts and simplifies and condenses history. I want to learn above all how, operating this way, the right wing approach generates such enthusiasm and militancy among its proponents.  
 
I want to know the same about the left.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 12:54pm
@Benjamin Goldstein:
”It is a fact. Sorry. Historian Frank Engehausen, a leftist himself, has written a book about the 1848/48 revolution and says that the nationalists were left-wingers.”
 
More appropriate to say “liberal” in the sense of classical liberalism.  Not all of them, of course.  A very mixed bag, those revolutionaries.
 
“I like them and would take credit for it, but truth is truth. They saw themselves as left-wing.”
 
Yet not Socialists.  Your problem is you think you can lump all of those on the left as the same.  They were not.  We are not.
 
“Nationalism can be just as inclusive as socialism.”
 
Generally not.
 
“The idea was to create a political unit out of the German-language regions. It did not mean much more.”
 
That’s what you mean by inclusive?
 
 
“During the Hambacher Fest(ival) they had French guest speakers (who of course did not side with their government) and expressed their welcoming for refugees from Poland.”
 
That’s nice.  After Germany reunified that all stopped.  It certainly was not true of the right during Weimar or the Third Reich.
 
 
 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 12:55pm
@Benjamin Goldstein:
“And of course the Nazis were also socialist. Not every socialist is the same and I don't liken Bernie Sanders to Hitler. That's ludicrous.”
 
So is the idea that they were Socialists.
Dave Dubya Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:07pm
TJM,
 
At first is was pamphlets and meetings and rallies that bound the extremists.
 
Then came radio, TV, and the internet. Right wing disinformation is now a thriving industry in mass media.
 
They tighten the bond by claiming to be "of the people", and they share the same heritage and values.
 
"Trump digs coal". His "favorite book" is, of course, the Bible.  Religion and patriotism are fused into Nationalism, their vehicle and road to power. "Make America great again". 
 
On October 10, 1936 Heinrich Himmler created the Reich Central Office for Combating Homosexuality and Abortion, or Special Office (II S), a sub-department of Executive Department II of the Gestapo.
 
"The National Government will regard it as its first and foremost duty to revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation. It will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life." - Adolph Hitler "My New World Order" - Proclamation to the German Nation, Berlin, February 1, 1933

“What good fortune for those in power that people do not think.” – Adolph Hitler
 
It is important for authoritarian/totalitarian leaders to convince their followers that the world is against them. They need to indoctrinate them into trusting ONLY their approved propaganda.
 
They NEED to identify and demonize enemies and scapegoats. Blame and accusation go along with promoting a deep sense of victimization of their group.
 
"Those evil 'others' are destroying our Fatherland/Homeland."
 
This is their formula to incite resentment, anger, and hate.
 
Once this is accomplished, their followers are putty in their hands.
 
 
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:09pm
There was little about the Nazis that were socialist in practice. Some of the theory as stated in the initial 25 pt manifesto is of a socialist flavor. To be completely honest about it the Nazi system, vis-a-vis government/industry? Really not that much different from the MIC here in the US today.
 
The socialists aspect of the title I think was more as an enticement to the "workers". These people, not just Hitler, fancied themselves as some sort of disenfranchised intellectual class - a believe the term bohemian with a sword was bandied about
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:10pm
at the root of it all it just needs to be understood that regardless the ideology the participants were just deranged people
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:11pm
That’s nice.  After Germany reunified that all stopped.  It certainly was not true of the right during Weimar or the Third Reich.
France attacked Germany in 1870!!!! How would you feel?
 
Yet not Socialists.  Your problem is you think you can lump all of those on the left as the same.  They were not.  We are not.
Please, scroll up to read that I distinguished between left-wing nationalists and socialists. I did not say that they were the same. I said the OPPOSITE. Could you please read better? It is really embarrassing if you cannot read properly.
 
“Nationalism can be just as inclusive as socialism.”
Generally not.
This is a none-statement. "Generally". We are talking here about the German nationist movement of the 19th century and to what extend it may have inspired the Nazis. We know that the national SOCIALIST WORKERS' party was not inclusive. But this is different from the nationalists before them.
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:11pm
If I kill you because you are a Jew, or because you are Catholic, or yes even a (gulp) socialist.....you are no less dead in any intance
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:16pm
I guess MIC is a kind of corporate welfare, so in that sense I guess its socialism
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:18pm
Yes, Burghal.  I agree.
 
The only thing I disagree with is the idea of being “deranged.”  People do horrible things out of conviction.
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:23pm
No doubt.....conviction to the point of being deranged. See it all the time
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:23pm
@TJM:
”I want to find out more about how the right wing views on history are developed, spread from person to person. I want to know how they end up being constructed on the firm basis of circular reasoning that is impervious to new facts and simplifies and condenses history. I want to learn above all how, operating this way, the right wing approach generates such enthusiasm and militancy among its proponents.”
 
Not all right-wing is the same.  You have your extremists but you have that on the left as well.
Both extremes appeal to the worst in people by preying on their fears.
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:23pm
We have a good example prowling the halls right here on WB :)
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:26pm
Both on the left and right, Burghal.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:26pm
Hidage is wrong on every count and Dubya does not even know how to spell Adolf. Just saying....
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:28pm
Indeed :) No need to name names :) I know who they are. I piss everyone off at least once. 
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:32pm
Been wrong before. You can disagree Ben. its your right
Dave Dubya Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:49pm
Goldstein,
 
Ya got me there. Thanks for noting my careless c&p. And thanks for not saying I'm "wrong on every count".
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 1:51pm
@Benjamin Goldstein:
That’s nice.  After Germany reunified that all stopped.  It certainly was not true of the right during Weimar or the Third Reich.
France attacked Germany in 1870!!!! How would you feel?”
 
Oh, come on.  Bismarck instigated that. Napoleon was a fool.
 
“Yet not Socialists.  Your problem is you think you can lump all of those on the left as the same.  They were not.  We are not.
Please, scroll up to read that I distinguished between left-wing nationalists and socialists. I did not say that they were the same. I said the OPPOSITE. Could you please read better? It is really embarrassing if you cannot read properly.”
 
I can read fine.  I distinguish between classical liberals and nationalists.  Some of those revolutionaries were liberals in the sense, some were not.  They were a mixed bag.  Like I said.
 
“Nationalism can be just as inclusive as socialism.”
Generally not.
This is a none-statement. "Generally".
 
“We are talking here about the German nationist movement of the 19th century and to what extend it may have inspired the Nazis.”
 
German nationalists changed after reunification.  It became about Pan-Germanism, Germany for Germans.  Minorities had no place there.
 
“We know that the national SOCIALIST WORKERS' party”
 
How’d that work out for workers after the National SOCIALIST WORKER’s Party after Hitler became Chancellor?  I’ll tell you.  Those that represented them, the union leaders, were tossed into prisons or concentration camps.  The National SOCIALIST WORKER’s Party stripped them of their right to collectively bargain or strike.  They made their employers the master again.  Some WORKER’s party.  I do get a big kick out of those on the right always emphasizing the SOCIALIST WORKER’s bit without saying what happened to WORKERS after the so-called SOCIALISTS took over.
 
“was not inclusive. But this is different from the nationalists before them.”
 
So, did nationalism just stop evolving after 1848?
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 2:10pm
Oh, come on.  Bismarck instigated that. Napoleon was a fool.
No Napoleon instigated it and Bismarck was a fool.
 
I don't even want to talk about classical liberals at this point because it is an English concept. The nationalists did indeed hold many of their viewpoints. The nationalists were for the most part on the political left, inspired by the Jacobins of the French Revolution who coined the term "left-wing" in the first place. The political right back then were the MONARCHISTS.
 
It became about Pan-Germanism, Germany for Germans.  Minorities had no place there.
Minorities had no place before either. Gay pride was not yet fashionable. I don't see how this movement was more hostile to minorities than the general public. I would need to see some evidence to substantiate that.
 
Pan-Germanism should give a clue that it wasn't about uniformity. Germans are very diverse. Like Wales is culturally different from Scotland and from Ireland. To create a shared nation was an act of tolerance and inclusion first. The attitude towards minorities within did not change in my  estimation, but some sources might convince me otherwise. It should be some substantial evidence though. Like number of crimes against minorities committed by member of parties and a per capita breakdown over the timeline. No secondary "Prof X opines" stuff.
 
Can you tell me ONE SOCIALIST country that does not strip the workers of their rights and that does not dissolve labor unions? How did the labor unions protest in the soviet union? How are the workers treated in North Korean concentration camps. What a silly argument.
Doug Plumb Added Jul 24, 2018 - 2:22pm
Lets not forget in all this detail, that it is Jews that hate National Socialism, not the other way around. It was Judaism that first declared war on National Socialism, through a boycott of German made goods, which would have been a certain death for this industrial society.
The word National Socialist invokes a Pavlovian response, and this should make us skeptical regarding any conventional views held. It is very much part of this propaganda matrix.
Doug Plumb Added Jul 24, 2018 - 2:28pm
re "Hitler believed this expansion made most sense in the USSR because in his mind the Jews were responsible for the Communists taking control of the USSR. "
 
That is pretty much accepted fact Jeffrey.
 
The problem with history is (1) What the author did not see or did not know can turns things around 180 degrees once it is known. (2) The author writes along the lines of his existing world view, which he cannot avoid. You use the word anti-semite seven times in this article. Intentional or not it equates antisemitism to National Socialism in a way that is actually opposite to what is know regarding historical truths.
Doug Plumb Added Jul 24, 2018 - 2:44pm
re "I find the problem current day liberals and conservatives have is that they think the same definitions for what they are today hold true 100 years ago.  Or 75.  "
 
That should tell us that we are under a spell. Screwing around with words was Winston's job in Nineteen Eighty Four.
Doug Plumb Added Jul 24, 2018 - 2:48pm
re "I want to find out more about how the right wing views on history are developed, spread from person to person. I want to know how they end up being constructed on the firm basis of circular reasoning that is impervious to new facts and simplifies and condenses history. I want to learn above all how, operating this way, the right wing approach generates such enthusiasm and militancy among its proponents. "
 
Let me know when you find out. The same thing applies to the left. If one uses a horse to carry grain to the market, he uses a horse to plow his fields.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 3:02pm
@Benjamin Goldstein:
Oh, come on.  Bismarck instigated that. Napoleon was a fool.
No Napoleon instigated it and Bismarck was a fool.”
 
What, Bismarck didn’t alter a Telegram to inflame French passions?  
 
Come now.  Bismarck was a smart man.  I give him a great deal of credit.
 
“I don't even want to talk about classical liberals at this point because it is an English concept.”
 
It is?  I explained classical liberalism in my article on Fascism.  
 
“The nationalists did indeed hold many of their viewpoints. The nationalists were for the most part on the political left, inspired by the Jacobins of the French Revolution who coined the term "left-wing" in the first place.”
 
Oh, FFS.  Benjamin, it didn’t matter what they believed.  Nationalism changed over the years after reunification.  It shifted to the right (if it didn’t start there from the first place).
 
“The political right back then were the MONARCHISTS.”
 
Great!!!!  The nationalists supported the monarchy!!!!!  That’s entirely true.  That didn’t necessarily stay the same after the war.  But even if it did the right willingly brought Hitler into the fold to stop the shift towards Communism.  They willingly made their peace with Hitler because their goals coincided.
 
“It became about Pan-Germanism, Germany for Germans.  Minorities had no place there.
Minorities had no place before either.”
 
Actually the Prussians willingly used Poles for labor.  They didn’t mind that they were there.  But after reunification attitudes hardened.
 
“Gay pride was not yet fashionable.”
 
WTF does that have to do with anything?
 
“I don't see how this movement was more hostile to minorities than the general public. I would need to see some evidence to substantiate that.”
 
Okey dokey.  Do you want my next article to be about that?  Comment sections are really clumsy.
 
“Pan-Germanism should give a clue that it wasn't about uniformity. Germans are very diverse.”
 
As long as it's Germans only.
 

 
“Can you tell me ONE SOCIALIST country that does not strip the workers of their rights and that does not dissolve labor unions?”
 
 
Sure.  The Weimar Republic.  Any current Social Democrat country.  But totalitarian countries on the right and left do this.  In this case the right-wing National Socialists.
 
“How did the labor unions protest in the soviet union? How are the workers treated in North Korean concentration camps. What a silly argument.”
 
Your problem is that you think everything on the left is essentially evil.  It is not.  But your sad little bias makes you incapable of seeing that or that the right is capable of evil.  On the other hand I know that this is a human problem, not a left or right problem.  Because of that I don’t take this personally.  You do.
John Minehan Added Jul 24, 2018 - 3:02pm
"People were frustrated about the track record of SPD, but I don't understand why Zentrum did not attract more people. They were Catholics and maybe the anti-religious attitude played a part in this."
 
After the  Reichskonkordat, I'm not sure the Center Party could do all that much. 
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 3:34pm
I just reread the Emser Depeche and Bismarck did not in any way change its meaning. Not a bit. I hear this claim again and again. The Kaiser declined to ever support a man of the House of Hohenzoller to ask for the Spanish throne. The full message, including that THIS time no Hohenzoller will become Spanish king IS INCLUDED prominently as first thing. FRANCE was the sole aggressor in this war. Also the Telegraf had to be shortened it was collequial language. I would have done the same.
 
Oh, FFS.  Benjamin, it didn’t matter what they believed.
If you want to discuss what political movements believed, it matters what they believed.
 
They willingly made their peace with Hitler because their goals coincided.
Are you aware that even the communists voted for the Ermaechtigungsgesetz that handed all powers to Hitler? The only party that did not do this were the Social democrats. All others, left and right, supported Hitler at some point and believed he wouldn't turn out as bad as he appeared.
 
But after reunification attitudes hardened.
Was that particularly prominent in the nationalist movement or did some other groups, monarchists or other left-wing groups, also change their attitude?
 
The nationalists wanted to cut back the power of the monarch. Come on, do I really have to spell out everything. I referred to "monarchist purists" before to describe the right. Can you follow?
 
Sometimes u drive me nuts. First, check out that gay pride thing. It is either sloppiness or an IQ on your part. Just..sometimes just scroll back. You also argue that the Nazis were not socialists and then you come up with social democratic countries to proof that trade unions can coexist. I also don't want to point to the logical madness here. It is either an IQ thing or sloppiness.
 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 4:14pm
@Benjamin Goldstein 
 
“ just reread the Emser Depeche and Bismarck did not in any way change its meaning. Not a bit. I hear this claim again and again. The Kaiser declined to ever support a man of the House of Hohenzoller to ask for the Spanish throne. The full message, including that THIS time no Hohenzoller will become Spanish king IS INCLUDED prominently as first thing. FRANCE was the sole aggressor in this war. Also the Telegraf had to be shortened it was collequial language. I would have done the same.”
 
I know you would have.  Bismarck really was a sweet little lamb.  It certainly did not benefit Prussia in any way.  They were just trying to defend themselves.
 
“Oh, FFS.  Benjamin, it didn’t matter what they believed.
If you want to discuss what political movements believed, it matters what they believed.”
 
You apparently think that political movements don’t change over time.  If it will help you with your confirmation bias I guess we’ll go with that.
 
“They willingly made their peace with Hitler because their goals coincided.
Are you aware that even the communists voted for the Ermaechtigungsgesetz that handed all powers to Hitler?”
 
LOL, how’d they do that????  The Nazis banned the Communists after the fucking Reichstag Fire.  They were in hiding, in prison or in concentration camps.  Jesus, Benjamin, don’t you know your own history???????  Do I need to do an article on the basics just for you???  I though I needed to do one just for Leroy and rycK.
 
 
“The only party that did not do this were the Social democrats.”
 
WHAT??????  The Social Democrats did something right??????
 
“All others, left and right, supported Hitler at some point and believed he wouldn't turn out as bad as he appeared.”
 
Yet it was the RIGHT that hoisted him into power for their own gain.  Ironically they did this as the power of the NSDAP started to decline and the party was starting to run out of money.
 
But after reunification attitudes hardened.
“Was that particularly prominent in the nationalist movement or did some other groups, monarchists or other left-wing groups, also change their attitude?”
 
The nationalists and antisemites were on the RIGHT, they supported the Kaiser.  The CONSERVATIVE parties adopted some of the antisemitic policies of the antisemitic parties.  
 
“The nationalists wanted to cut back the power of the monarch.”
 
LOL, the fuck they did.  It was the liberals and the Socialists that wanted to reign in the powers of the Kaiser.
OK, let’s take a step back.  I’m not going to say ALL conservatives or liberals wanted the same thing.  They didn’t.  Not all liberals wanted a constitutional government and not all conservatives wanted an unlimited monarchy.  I’m not falling into a “this or that” stance.  I’m not you.
 
“Sometimes u drive me nuts.”
 
U do the same.  You persist in this limited thinking.
 
“First, check out that gay pride thing.”
 
Why?  “Gay pride” is a new phenomenon.  Homosexuality was against the law in Imperial Germany and the Third Reich.
 
“You also argue that the Nazis were not socialists”
 
They weren’t.  The true “Socialists” in the NSDAP were purged from the party, either before 1933 or during the Night of the Long Knives.
 
“and then you come up with social democratic countries to proof that trade unions can coexist. I also don't want to point to the logical madness here.”
 
Uh, yeah.  You said they couldn’t...FFS, do you even read what you write?????  The word you should’ve used is “Communist.”
 
 
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 4:49pm
They were in hiding, in prison or in concentration camps. 
Could you please tell us the locations of these Weimar Republic concentration camps where the communists were kept?
 
You are right about the absence of the communists. They were indeed in prison. Could you maybe also conced your errors? This is not a one way street. There were no Weimar Republic concentration camps, France was the sole aggressor of 1870 and .... there are too many. You don't believe that the socialist movement is different from the communist movement, do you? It doesn't even matter. Your point was already thwarted with me giving a single example of a socialist country that does not allow trade unions. North Korea is a socialist country. There has never been a communist country that wasn't also socialist. If you keep your argument about the Nazis, you must claim that North Korea was not socialist because it does not allow strikes and stuff. Silly.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 5:38pm
@Benjamin Goldstein:
They were in hiding, in prison or in concentration camps. 
Could you please tell us the locations of these Weimar Republic concentration camps where the communists were kept?”
 
Benjamin, you said the Communists voted for the enabling act that gave Hitler power.  There were no Communists in the Reichstag the day the Enabling Act was passed.
Good grief.
 
“You are right about the absence of the communists. They were indeed in prison.”
 
There see?  Not hard.
 
“Could you maybe also conced your errors?”
 
When I make one I will.
 
“This is not a one way street. There were no Weimar Republic concentration camps,”
 
Yep.
 
“France was the sole aggressor of 1870 and .... “
 
LOL, yeah, Bismarck was a lamb.
 
“You don't believe that the socialist movement is different from the communist movement, do you?”
 
Yes I do.  The Socialists stopped advocating revolution.  They cooperated in coalitions with governments in power.
 
“It doesn't even matter. Your point was already thwarted with me giving a single example of a socialist country that does not allow trade unions. North Korea is a socialist country.”
 
Actually they are a Communist country founded on the principles of Stalinism.   Fail on your part.
 
“There has never been a communist country that wasn't also socialist.”
 
Yet there are Social Democracies that aren’t Communist...Christ, sometimes it’s like talking to Tom.....
 
 
“If you keep your argument about the Nazis, you must claim that North Korea was not socialist because it does not allow strikes and stuff. Silly.”
 
No, again, it’s because I realize that there are no absolutes.  What’s silly is your insistence in thinking there are.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 5:48pm
Kelly, this is so ... I don't know if this is an IQ thing.
 
-They were in hiding, in prison or in concentration camps. 
- When I make one [an error] I will.
-There were no Weimar Republic concentration camps,” Yep.
 
This is an IQ thing. I will just unsubscribe now. For the rest: Socialists = Communists. The Social Democrats like Labor in the UK, the SPD in Germany or the US Democrats are not socialists.
Dave Dubya Added Jul 24, 2018 - 5:49pm
Can you tell me ONE SOCIALIST country that does not strip the workers of their rights and that does not dissolve labor unions?
 
Realizing the difficulty some people have in understanding the difference between socialism and communism, I'll just say this.
 
Norway, Sweden and Finland all have large numbers of union workers.  They are democratic socialist nations.
 
North Korea and China have no labor unions. They are communist dictatorships. 
Benjamin Goldstein Added Jul 24, 2018 - 6:04pm
Dubya. You are a complete moron. I don't even want to foot around like with Kelly. So now I unsub.
Dave Dubya Added Jul 24, 2018 - 6:09pm
Benji,
Thanks for running from reality. It suits you.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 24, 2018 - 6:09pm
And Benjamin runs off cause he’s beaten....like always....
James Travil Added Jul 24, 2018 - 6:14pm
I was educated at a liberal college and a conservative Baptist Christian high school, I find it impossible to believe that they both agree that the Nazi movement of the 1930's was a Right-Wing phenomenon. Of course back then conservatives weren't fascists in disquise that pretended that any and all forms of Right-Wing ideology, even extremism, were all right. Now fascists pretend to be conservatives and pretend Nazis are liberals to further hide who they are from the world. Must be why Nazis are included in the alt RIGHT not left! 
Dave Dubya Added Jul 24, 2018 - 6:15pm
At least Benji didn't call me a complete "moran". He gets credit for that much. 
 
The Trump Cult, like their leader, are a sensitive, delicate lot. Their fragile egos react so emotionally, and they  get upset so easily. Sort of like...what's the term....snowflakes.
Dave Dubya Added Jul 24, 2018 - 6:18pm
James,
Now fascists pretend to be conservatives and pretend Nazis are liberals to further hide who they are from the world. Must be why Nazis are included in the alt RIGHT not left! 
 
When you're right, you're right. 
Johnny Fever Added Jul 25, 2018 - 9:06am
Thank you for that trip down memory lane.  In the modern era, Socialism is far more aligned with the left-wing.  Bernie Sanders is proof #1, would you like some more proofs or do you already agree?
Dave Dubya Added Jul 25, 2018 - 9:19am
If you children of the Cult wonder what totalitarianism looks like from the sane perspective, here it is:
 
“What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.”
 
 
Michael B. Added Jul 25, 2018 - 9:29pm
Interesting post Jeffrey. As far as I know, many early Nazis gravitated toward the "left wing" and espoused the "socialism" of National Socialism as articulated by the Gregor Strasser faction. Goebbels, who early on was a supporter of Strasser, actually once called out for Hitler to be expelled from the party. Hitler obviously overlooked that, lol. As far as "private ownership" goes, the Nazis allowed that to only a certain few who played ball and essentially let the Nazis have their way with them, as if they had a choice; many of the industrialists who supported the Nazis eventually wound up in concentration camps or house arrest at a minimum.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 25, 2018 - 9:35pm
@Johnny Fever:
”Thank you for that trip down memory lane.”
 
Any time.
 
“In the modern era, Socialism is far more aligned with the left-wing.  Bernie Sanders is proof #1,”
 
Socialist?  Sure.  National Socialist?  No.
Please re-read the article.  Sanders sits on the left, the Nazis were right-wing.
 
 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 25, 2018 - 9:44pm
@Michael B.
”Interesting post Jeffrey. As far as I know, many early Nazis gravitated toward the "left wing" and espoused the "socialism" of National Socialism as articulated by the Gregor Strasser faction. Goebbels, who early on was a supporter of Strasser, actually once called out for Hitler to be expelled from the party.”
 
Thanks, Michael.  I agree, many of the early Nazis were “Socialist” in what I think of as socialism in the classic sense. They were eventually ousted.  Goebbels hung on because he toed the line and he was a good propagandist and Hitler appreciated that.  Goeebels also worshipped Hitler.  I think he was as close to Hitler as anyone could be, Albert Speer being another confidante.  
 
I may do something on Hitler.  The man is fascinating but such an enigma.
 
“Hitler obviously overlooked that, lol. As far as "private ownership" goes, the Nazis allowed that to only a certain few who played ball and essentially let the Nazis have their way with them, as if they had a choice; many of the industrialists who supported the Nazis eventually wound up in concentration camps or house arrest at a minimum.”
 
Hhhhhhhmmmm, Michael, on this I have to disagree.  Private ownership continued into the Nazi era and capitalism was alive and well.  Did you know (and I may do something on this as well) that something like 30 companies bid for contracts on the crematorium in Auschwitz?  The first one that was built actually had multiple companies work on and perfect the design.  Oddly enough when the Kremas broke down they were covered under a warranty!!!  
Michael B. Added Jul 25, 2018 - 10:08pm
Yes Jeffrey, they allowed a "free market", but once again, on their (usually strict) terms. For example, all labor was controlled by the Labor Front; all hirings and firings went through them. It was essentially the polar opposite of a trade union, all of which were abolished under the Nazis. I thought about writing a post on the various firms that either thrived under the Nazis and/or were destroyed by them. A Tale of Two Hugos springs to mind: Hugo Boss is a high-end brand these days, but back then, rabid Party Member Hugo Boss designed and/or produced most of those snazzy Nazi uniforms. On the other hand, anti-Nazi pacifist Hugo Junkers, of Junkers aircraft and motor fame, first had his controlling share in Lufthansa and then his vast industrial empire taken away from him; he was probably lucky in being allowed to die of a heart attack while under house arrest.
William Stockton Added Jul 26, 2018 - 1:44am
Nazi's were alt-right.  Ok.  It took you that long to wrap history up into a neat bundle and call it "right-wing".  LOL
 
What modern, politically motivated, arm-chair historians miss is the obvious motivation for Hitler and Nazi movement.
Hitler was 100% motivated by the humiliating loss of WWI.  He was mortally bound to the theory that Germany's loss was because everyone who was not a German national (in blood and nationality) was instrumental in German's loss and they were evil -- and he was going to right that wrong.  He never thought that German's loss was fabricated by their own leaders . . . just to repeat it all again in WWII.
 
His ideology is more representative with the Democratic party today and their recent election loss. 
Their loss couldn't have been because they became arrogant, antisocial, and aristocratic that they would put up a candidate who was completely incompetent for POTUS.  Then after the loss, blame the loss on everyone else.   Geez.  Complete idiots.  Same as Hitler.
But what do you expect from the cult-left who champion an ideology for the Tyranny of the Weak and Stupid?
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 6:35am
Hey, William?  Read it again.  Here.  I’ll help you:
 
”The loss of the war sent shockwaves through German society and the terms later imposed via the Versailles Treaty poisoned the very beginnings of the Weimar Republic.  Far-right groups sprang up to contest the Republic from the very beginning.  One of these groups was called The German Worker's Party (In German Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or DAP).  Founded by Anton Drexler in 1919, it espoused nationalism but keyed towards workers.  It was both anti-Marxist but also anti-Capitalist.  It was antisemitic in outlook.  The DAP wanted to break Bavaria away from Germany and form a union with Austria.  This is the party that Adolf Hitler joined in 1919.
 
I will not go into Hitler's biography.  To say that Adolf Hitler is one of the most studied figures in history is an understatement.  He is certainly a fascinating figure but I feel this would be a tangent to this article.  Suffice to say that the end of the war shattered his world, just like it did for millions of Germans.  He remained in the army after the war ended because there was nothing in his life that would encourage him to leave.”
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 6:39am
BTW, William, that’s the dumbest attempt I’ve ever seen to twist the Nazi Party into a party on the left.  Bravo.  You actually made Doug Plumb look intelligent and coherent.
Johnny Fever Added Jul 26, 2018 - 9:38am
So are you really saying your article has no relevance to today?  I ask the question because barring Nazis, the article doesn’t target any political leader / philosophy that exists today.  Or does it?
 
I’m not about to call Sanders a Nazi, but he is pro-American, supports trade tariffs and doesn’t think ICE should be abolished.  I also imagine he supports our troops wherever they may be fighting.  We know how he feels about socialism…it appears to me like he’s a National Socialist. 
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 26, 2018 - 9:57am
Jeffrey, Good article. 
 
But Fascism and Nazism are of the Left. Konrad Heiden, in Der Fuhrer reports that "They occasionally referred to their party as a 'party of the Left." (pg 94)
 
"Socialist" is core character of Fascism/Nazism. "Nazism" is an abbreviaton of the German phrase "National Socialist". All Socialists are Idealists and hence Leftist. Who labels their party "Workers Party"? Leftists. 
 
Hitler and his party hated clergy and the German monarchies and aristocracy. Hatred of hierarchy is the signature characteristic of Leftism.  The foundation of the DAP party in Bohemia was German Liberals. Liberals are leftists. 
 
Hitler was not raised anti-semitic. He got that way because the Jews were going around Vienna engaging in deracinist activities. Marxism is a genocidal ideology. Moreover, Adolf Hitler had to flee his job on two construction sites because of the violent anti-nationalism of the Jewish led workers unions in Vienna. Hitler suffered just like many here in America by Jews and their followers who attack and fire nationalists. Hitler and many other Germans recognized the Jewish Genocide going on against the German people. In his second book, Hitler gives the reason for the killing the Masons and the Jews. Did you know that Hitler closed all the Masonic lodges?  And he sent all Masons except for two lodges into the gas chambers.  And why is that? Because Masonry is a jewish sect of gentiles with the same deracinating agenda. Mussolini and Hitler both formed an Anti-Communist league. Why? To fight the internationalist agenda of Marxism and Liberalism. 
William Stockton Added Jul 26, 2018 - 10:14am
BTW, William, that’s the dumbest attempt I’ve ever seen to twist the Nazi Party into a party on the left. 
 
I didn't twist anything.  I made a comparison of the left today to the same arrogant Germans who couldn't fathom that their own ideologies lead to losing consequences. 
 
See, you are a simpleton that over exaggerates, oversimplifies history and, as well, people's statements here, to make juvenile arguments.  One can read that arrogance in your reply to me.  But I understand people like you.  They need life to be simple, digestible, in a form that fits their beliefs.
What a person as yourself fails to see is that there were no "right" and "left" positions in the Nazi world.  It was simply nationalism and revenge that brought about the Third Reich.  Yet, you are a simpleton and think as in current political terms -- right vs left.  LOL 
And like most intellectual lightweights, you misinterpret history with a modern context.  
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 10:41am
@Johnny Fever:
”So are you really saying your article has no relevance to today?  I ask the question because barring Nazis, the article doesn’t target any political leader / philosophy that exists today.  Or does it?”
 
I do think it is relevant for today because we have extremists on both the left and right that are becoming visible.  I’m thinking on the right with the white nationalists and Neo-Nazis and on the left with the Antifa.  I wrote this in response to some misconceptions I see on Writer’s Beat (and other places).
 

 
“I’m not about to call Sanders a Nazi, but he is pro-American, supports trade tariffs and doesn’t think ICE should be abolished.  I also imagine he supports our troops wherever they may be fighting.  We know how he feels about socialism…it appears to me like he’s a National Socialist.”
 
National Socialism was a race-based ideology that espoused expansion.  Sanders is a Social Democrat.  No, I wouldn’t call him that.
Mustafa Kemal Added Jul 26, 2018 - 11:03am
Jeffrey, I finally got around to reading your interesting article. Thanks so much. 
 
BTW, I was thinking about Hitler's experience in Vienna and  its possible relationship to his anti-semitism.
 
I went to Cornell University in the  70s as a poor scholarship student. For the whole time there it was very clear to me that I was  a second class citizen. 
Now, whether this comes from the large number of Jews (~1/4) there or the large number of children of the affluent, i would not be able to answer. But it is clear it could cause one to have a grudge. And that is just socially. I can imagine if this feeling is associated with your inability to make a living, it could make you nasty.
 
 
 
 
 
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 26, 2018 - 11:08am
I created a saying that encapsulates the truth of that era:
 
"If there was No International Socialism---There would have No National Socialism". 
 
Socialism is just Idealism. National Socialism came out of German Idealism of Kant and Hegel. Hegel was into Masonry and the Kabbala. The Kabbala was central to creating German Idealism. WWII was a war between International Socialists and National Socialists. America was International Socialist as was the Fabian Society of Britain in which Churchill was once a member. America was full of Masons. Roosevelt was  a Mason. The Internationalists won. 
Doug Plumb Added Jul 26, 2018 - 11:15am
I think you are right about saying that Lindsay.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 26, 2018 - 11:38am
In his book, "The Birth of Fascist Ideology", the Israeli prof. Zeev Sternhell writes, "Fascism is a revision of Marxism". (pg 5) 
 
Notice that Wikipedia and other sources never use the phrase "International Socialism". Part of Truth is Context. Notice how no one uses context in regards with Fascism and the Holocaust. Communism and Marxism (and even Liberalism) is International Socialism. International Socialism is about rebuilding the Tower of Babel. 
 
 
Doug Plumb Added Jul 26, 2018 - 2:05pm
Fascism just means that government wants everyone to share the same beliefs. Its actually necessary. What is important is the ideologies that shape these beliefs and the beliefs that could occur in the future. Under the Internationalist view, 95% of the people, or more, must be killed. Both religious and economic reasoning under false ideologies will support this under sovietization, which is exactly what is happening.
Few people are aware of the extent to which their thoughts are created or "nudged" in certain directions, its a dialectic created by Talmudic Judaism, as Michael Hoffman explains.
The way that we can avoid this problem is to read old books and become better acquainted with reason as well as the kind of thinking that created the West.
Few, if any lefties understand the ideologies that created the West, and it wasn't pure capitalism, which is as much part of the dialectic as Marxism.
Doug Plumb Added Jul 26, 2018 - 2:05pm
re "International Socialism is about rebuilding the Tower of Babel."
 
I've said the same thing too many times to count.
Doug Plumb Added Jul 26, 2018 - 2:09pm
re "I will not go into Hitler's biography.  To say that Adolf Hitler is one of the most studied figures in history is an understatement."
 
I would say that: " To say that Adolf Hitler is one of the most "studied" figures in history is an understatement."
 
Nothing gets "studied" any more. Its propaganda that gets created.
Katharine Otto Added Jul 26, 2018 - 3:25pm
Jeffry,
I thought you made a good case for the idea of uniting Germany under one flag, but I also liked Benjamin Goldstein's idea of a common language.  I wondered if Adolf Hitler's anti-semitism, whether it was a personal hatred or if he was playing it as a political card, since so many Germans blamed Jews for profiting from the hyperinflation of the Wiemar Republic.  I admit to knowing very little about that era and defer to those of you who do. 
 
However, once the thread devolved into hair-splitting over terminology, I lost interest.  It occurs to me that the common thread of all the "isms" is that they use government to further their ends, with government--no matter how it defines itself--the primary power in all permutations thereof.  And probably all governments are ultimately controlled by their military forces, because the military can make or break the governments. 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 3:44pm
@William Stockton:
BTW, William, that’s the dumbest attempt I’ve ever seen to twist the Nazi Party into a party on the left. 
 
“I didn't twist anything.  I made a comparison of the left today to the same arrogant Germans who couldn't fathom that their own ideologies lead to losing consequences.”
 
No, William, you did no such thing.  You made some kind of half-assed comparison that made no sense.

“See, you are a simpleton”
 
Gee, William, that would hurt if I cared.
 
“that over exaggerates, oversimplifies history and, as well, people's statements here, to make juvenile arguments.”
 
I’m not writing a term paper, William.  I’m trying to write something that people can read and digest fairly easily.  
My thinking is if people have questions I can add more detail in comments geared towards a specific questions or comments.  
 
“One can read that arrogance in your reply to me.”
 
That’s what comes with knowledge, William.  I read my first book on Nazi Germany when I was 12.  I’m willing to bet I’ve forgotten more than you will ever know about the subject.  Well, besides what you can quickly Google.
 
“But I understand people like you.”
 
I’m sure you don’t.

“What a person as yourself fails to see is that there were no "right" and "left" positions in the Nazi world.  It was simply nationalism and revenge that brought about the Third Reich.”
 
Except that the National Socialists aligned with the right as it existed in Germany at that time.  The right was antisemitic to varying degrees, anti-Socialist/Marxist, anti-Democratic (in varying degrees) and interested in expansion.  The only thing both left and right had in common was their distaste of the Versailles Treaty.  
Now, the radical left, the Communists, were interested in revolution but the Social Democrats were not, neither was the center.  The radical right in the form of the Nazis changed from a revolutionary movement to one willing to work within democratic constraints if got them their goal.  Once they came to power legally they used legal measures to circumvent the Weimar Constitution until only they existed.
 
“Yet, you are a simpleton and think as in currentpolitical terms -- right vs left.  LOL”
 
Actually, no, William, I understand that what we consider “left” and “right” have morphed over the centuries.  I defined them in my article on Fascism.
 

“And like most intellectual lightweights, you misinterpret history with a modern context.”
 
Actually I find those that know nothing about Nazi Germany make those mistakes, for example, overemphasizing the “Socialist” in the NSDAP.
 
 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 3:56pm
@Katherine Otto:
” I wondered if Adolf Hitler's anti-semitism, whether it was a personal hatred or if he was playing it as a political card, since so many Germans blamed Jews for profiting from the hyperinflation of the Wiemar Republic.  I admit to knowing very little about that era and defer to those of you who do.”
 
It grew into a personal hatred, Katherine.    To Hitler Jews were agents of chaos.
 

 
“It occurs to me that the common thread of all the "isms" is that they use government to further their ends, with government--no matter how it defines itself--the primary power in all permutations thereof.”
 
I think that however things start out, either Hitler’s desire for a racial empire in the East or Marx/Lenin’s desire for a worker’s paradise, eventually things get consumed by a desire for power and thinking the means (however horrifying) justify the desired end.  There is always the vision of a bright future to keep the faithful going.  Hitler thought he could solve Germany’s ills by creating a living space in the East and driving out (or killing) the undesirables.  Instead he overreached and wound up destroying Europe.
 
“And probably all governments are ultimately controlled by their military forces, because the military can make or break the governments.”
 
Actually Hitler very successfully controlled his military.  He gave them what they wanted in the beginning and later the military realized they no longer had any choice.  The one major attempt to assassinate Hitler failed and those responsible punished so severely that it never happened again.
 
William Stockton Added Jul 26, 2018 - 5:06pm
Except that the National Socialists aligned with the right as it existed in Germany at that time.
 
Ok, Jeffery.  Define what you mean by the "right".  
 
Here's some history for you about "right" & "left" which was defined by France politics:
"By 1914, the Left half of the legislature in France was composed of Unified Socialists, Republican Socialists, and Socialist Radicals, while the parties that were called "Left" now sat on the right side. The use of the words Left and Right spread from France to other countries and came to be applied to a large number of political parties worldwide, which often differed in their political beliefs."
 
At best, the term "right" and "left" at that time just meant opposing political forces and had little meaning beyond as you incorrectly claim.
John Minehan Added Jul 26, 2018 - 5:16pm
Perhaps this is irrelevant, but I'm not sure "Left" or "Right" is as relevant as "Totalitarian."
 
The Scandinavian social democracies are fairly far from the former Soviet Union in terms of political culture even though they are also run as a kind of Socialist polity.  One of the major differences is the degree of local control they allow, both economically and politically.
 
The Reich and the USSR were mortally enemies, but each saw centralized control as imperative.  
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 26, 2018 - 5:17pm
Jeffrey Kelly, you insist on calling the Nazis rightists. 
 
Do you know history? The word origin of the word "rightist"?
 
The term "right" was coined during the French Revolution where the Monarchists sat on the right in Parliament! Monarchists are Rightists. The Traditional Catholics and the Monarchists are Rightists. 
 
One of the main principles of philosophy is the doctrine of non-contradiction. 
 
The Nazis hated the Catholic Church, Monarchy and Aristocracy.  If they hated the  Right---how can the Nazis be rightists?  If Nazis are rightists--what are Monarchists?
 
I'm a Monarchist. I'm a rightist.  If you oppose Marxism that makes one a "rightist"?  Did not the Bolsheviks war against the Mensheviks?  Do not leftists war between themselves? The Leftist National Socialists warred against the Leftist International Socialists. Just because Leftists war between themselves doesn't make the other side "right". 
 
Jeffrey, a study of word origins shows that you don't have a case whatsoever. Yours is just propaganda. Only Monarchists can be rightists. There is NO Right in America. Everyone who says "racism is evil" is a Leftist. Trump, Limbaugh, Hannity, Alex Jones are all Leftists. You are all leftists. 
 
I'm tied to true Western Culture and Civilization, to Christendom. Christendom is Rightist. All of you are Leftists. The true Rightists and Conservatives of America were the Loyalists driven out of America after the American Revolution. There is probably 300 Rightists, i.e. Monarchists in all of America. The Nazis, the Fascists, the Marxists, the Democratic Socialists, democrats and modern republicans---are ALL Leftist. 
John Minehan Added Jul 26, 2018 - 5:23pm
"The one major attempt to assassinate Hitler failed and those responsible punished so severely that it never happened again."
 
Although, in fairness, that occurred on 20 July 1944 and given the degenerating strategic situation I think it is hard to tell if the reprisals alone were what prevented another attempt. 
William Stockton Added Jul 26, 2018 - 5:30pm
Jeffrey Kelly, you insist on calling the Nazis rightists. 
 
Lindsay, Jeffrey is just trying to equate the modern right with Nazis.  That is all this dumbass, lefty moron is intending to do here.  He has no clue what "right" or "left" meant in the early 20th century because he never bothered to research the terms.
Doug Plumb Added Jul 26, 2018 - 7:24pm
@ Lindsay re "Everyone who says "racism is evil" is a Leftist. Trump, Limbaugh, Hannity, Alex Jones are all Leftists. You are all leftists."
 
I think you are wrong about that.
 
I think the controllers create the idea about races to obfuscate the fact that what we are experiencing is a religious and ideological war. Not understanding where the lines are is a great way to confuse the enemy.
In the end, skin color doesn't matter. Only religion matters and people with different religions should not be living together.
 
Doug Plumb Added Jul 26, 2018 - 7:25pm
Actually the idea that people with different ideas wrt what is right and wrong sounds either ridiculous, or bloody.
James Travil Added Jul 26, 2018 - 7:30pm
"Jeffrey Kelly, you insist on calling the Nazis rightists. "
So do I, why? Well besides the fact that is what I was taught in the Baptist school I went to in the 80's, it's what actual Nazis call themselves! But I guess you know them better than they know themselves. 
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 26, 2018 - 7:38pm
In Psalm 85, Septuagint numbering, Masoretic text different number, it says, "all the nations whom thou hast created". In the book of Ecclesiaticus 36:11 "In much knowledge the Lord hath
divided them and made their ways diverse".
 
God created the races/nations of the earth. It is Ex Uno Plures. Out of one (adam), many. It is a natural law. 
 
What Marxism, International Socialism attempts to do is rebuild the Tower of Babel, that is why the hatred of nationalism. That is why Masonic America has for its motto, E pluribus unum. 
 
One of the two only doctrines of both branches of Freemasonry, the religious and atheist branch, is the doctrine of the "Brotherhood of Man". All men are one. 
 
Race/nation is particularity. The hatred of particularity is Gnosticism. The Left is Gnostic. 
 
In his book, The Jewish Ethic and the Spirit of Socialism, Weisberger elaborates further on the Jewish idea:
 
“Messianism envisions human existence as a three-part process, consisting of an original unity, a middle period in which man has "fallen" into history, and an eschatological final period. Messianism sees history as destined for the restoration of the original unity broken by the sin of Adam. The Jewish discontent with the present is rooted in the feeling of loss of this original harmony and the deep desire for its return. Jewish messianism understands the restoration of the original unity as a public, communal event which occurs on the stage of history. It is here that Jewish and Christian messianism has parted company.”
 
Masonry, Marxism, International Socialism, Democratic Socialism, all are about bringing the "unity of mankind", the Brotherhood of man. Nationalism prevents that. 
 
Racism is a synonym for Nationalism. If God created nation/race---then we are to be for our nation/race. Political Correctness is Cultural Marxism. Cultural Marxism is taught in all our schools and colleges. 
 
Races and Nations are the Old Order. America is a Novus Ordo; that is on the seal of the US. I am a upholder of the Old Order. I reject and condemn Jewish messianism. That is the central core of International Socialism. 
Michael B. Added Jul 26, 2018 - 7:55pm
@ John M. - "Perhaps this is irrelevant, but I'm not sure "Left" or "Right" is as relevant as "Totalitarian."
 
There is definitely something to that...it's usually called absolute power, lol. One has to look at the case of Heinrich "Gestapo" Mueller. Brutal as he was, he apparently wasn't very affected by ideology; a report written about him on the eve of WW2 wondered aloud how such a non-Nazi wound up in such a high-ranking Nazi position. The report stated that although Mueller fought the Left with great efficiency and enthusiasm, it was felt that had he been directed against the Right, he would have performed in a similar manner.
 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 8:29pm
@William Stockton:
Except that the National Socialists aligned with the right as it existed in Germany at that time.
 
Ok, Jeffery.  Define what you mean by the "right".”
 
I already did.  I left it simple for you.

 
“Here's some history for you about "right" & "left" which was defined by France politics:”
 
Too bad we’re talking about early 20th Century German politics.

"By 1914, the Left half of the legislature in France was composed of Unified Socialists, Republican Socialists, and Socialist Radicals, while the parties that were called "Left" now sat on the right side. The use of the words Left and Right spread from France to other countries and came to be applied to a large number of political parties worldwide, which often differed in their political beliefs."


 
Hey!!!!  Look what Google boy turned up!!!!
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 8:36pm
@William Stockton:
”Lindsay, Jeffrey is just trying to equate the modern right with Nazis.”
 
Why would I do that?  They have completely different goals except for far-right extremists.  Even those people wouldn’t go so far...well, maybe a small minority would.
 
That reality exists on the far left.  Those extremists scare the shit out of me almost as much as the far-right.
 
“That is all this dumbass, lefty moron is intending to do here.”
 
Hey, now!!!!!  
 
“He has no clue what "right" or "left" meant in the early 20th century because he never bothered to research the terms.”
 
 
I like the fact you did a quick google search on left and right so you wouldn’t look so stupid, William.  It doesn’t make you any less stupid for mouthing off about things you don’t understand.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 8:39pm
@John Minehan:
”Although, in fairness, that occurred on 20 July 1944 and given the degenerating strategic situation I think it is hard to tell if the reprisals alone were what prevented another attempt.“
 
There’s something to be said for that.  But the Nazis turned on their people in the last few months of the war, John.  I think that and what Hitler did to those involved in the July plot was enough to stop any further attempts.
 
 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 8:48pm
@John Minehan:
”Perhaps this is irrelevant, but I'm not sure "Left" or "Right" is as relevant as "Totalitarian."
 
I think the initial goals determine where on the political spectrum the party that takes control lies.  But as I mention above over time that becomes to a degree irrelevant.
 
 
“The Reich and the USSR were mortally enemies, but each saw centralized control as imperative.”
 
In the political sense yes, in the economic, no.  Hitler always worried about German morale, it was something else that separated him from Stalin.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 8:50pm
Cont.....consumer goods remained a high priority for Hitler, as did making sure they always had enough to eat.  
Michael B. Added Jul 26, 2018 - 9:52pm
Jeffrey K., you are obviously quite a student of this! I remember Albert Speer saying something like he was amazed that authoritarian Nazi Germany was so slow in getting on a full war footing (they didn't really do so until 1943, right after Stalingrad), while the liberal democracies instantly went into full wartime mode from the get-go, with respect to things like rationing food and strategic materials and introducing women into the workforce on a large scale.
 
Regarding the plots against Hitler, when I was 11 or 12 years old, I read a book called To Kill the Devil by Herbert Malloy Mason. There were actually quite a few of them, and the July 20, 1944 attempt was essentially a re-hash of a similar plot that hatched in 1938 during the Czech Crisis; many of the figures in the 1938 plot were active in the 1944 attempt, of course we know the rest from there. My favorite one involved one Georg Elser, who executed an extremely meticulous plan, and like many others, came within a hair's breadth of succeeding.
William Stockton Added Jul 26, 2018 - 10:30pm
This article will briefly detail the history of the Nazi Party
 
This article is full of errors like this one.  Either you are going to be brief without details or detailed and not brief.  Which one Jeffrey?
 
It's your logic, man.  Words matter.  It was pretty easy to pick apart your summary that concluded in saying the Nazis were righties.
The entire premise and conclusion of the article are false with tidbits of history embedded between.  Whether you dug these tidbits up from Google is irrelevant.  More power to you if you did.
 
 I blew through whole chunks of history but I didn't want to get bogged down in it.
 
That statement made me laugh.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 11:14pm
@William Stockton:
”This article is full of errors like this one.  Either you are going to be brief without details or detailed and not brief.  Which one Jeffrey?”
 
Is this what you go to when you finally say fuck it and get tired of Googling?
 
“It's your logic, man.  Words matter.  It was pretty easy to pick apart your summary that concluded in saying the Nazis were righties.”
 
You did?  You basically said some stupid shit and then ran off to google stuff so you wouldn’t look so stupid.
 
Didn’t work.  But enjoy Wikipedia.

“The entire premise and conclusion of the article are false with tidbits of history embedded between.”
 
I’m sure someone as ignorant of the subject as you would think so.  Maybe you should take some time away and go read up on the subject.  Don’t use google, go to your local library.  I recommend “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.”  Then read “The Third Reich Trilogy.”  I mentioned some books on Fascism in my previous article, read those.  Then read Alan Bullock’s “Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives.”  If you can work it in read “Mein Kampf” and figure out what Hitler actually meant when he talked about Socialism.  
 
Then you can come back and discuss this in an intelligent manner.  Well, doubtful but at least it will keep you busy for awhile.
 
  “Whether you dug these tidbits up from Google is irrelevant.  More power to you if you did.”
 
No, I read books about the subject.  See above.  BTW that’s just a fraction of what I’ve read on the subject.  There’s more, I’ve only read about this for over thirty years.
 
 I blew through whole chunks of history but I didn't want to get bogged down in it.
 
“That statement made me laugh.”
 
Like a nervous titter?  I don’t blame you, it’s hard to step up to that plate and realize you don’t have a bat.
 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 26, 2018 - 11:19pm
@Michael B.
”Jeffrey K., you are obviously quite a student of this!”
 
Thanks!  William apparently doesn’t think so but he’s an ignorant twat.
 
 
“I remember Albert Speer saying something like he was amazed that authoritarian Nazi Germany was so slow in getting on a full war footing (they didn't really do so until 1943, right after Stalingrad), while the liberal democracies instantly went into full wartime mode from the get-go, with respect to things like rationing food and strategic materials and introducing women into the workforce on a large scale.”
 
German efficiency in action.... :)
 
The Germans did start rationing early, in fact there was rationing in the 1930’s with the drive for rearmament sucking up a lot of resources.  The Germans lacked foreign currency reserves and goods to trade so they were forced to ration a lot.  This always concerned the Nazi brass from Hitler on down.  The pressures of this made Hitler’s need for expansion even more urgent.
William Stockton Added Jul 26, 2018 - 11:25pm
William apparently doesn’t think so but he’s an ignorant twat.
 
oh, ouch!!
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 27, 2018 - 12:04am
Hi, William, still here?
I have an app called Overdrive that links to my local library.  I suggest you do that so you can start your studies.
Michael B. Added Jul 27, 2018 - 12:35am
Jeffrey, there is one thing that comes home every time I eat something. The first time I sat down to eat a meal with a German farm family, after we were finished, my plate was still full of sauce and uneaten leftovers, while the other plates looked like they were literally licked clean. It was immediately impressed upon me that these people knew very, very hard times, and that food was sacred and not to be wasted.
 
I'm sorry to see you and William S. duking it out; we certainly have our differences, but to call him an ignorant twat is pretty fucked up, especially considering the fact that there are a bunch of bona-fide IGNORANT TWATS that deserve our worse! All Dudes Unite!!!! Down With Women!!!! LOOOOL!
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 27, 2018 - 12:44am
I call it is I see it, Michael.
:)
Michael B. Added Jul 27, 2018 - 12:51am
Dude, I wouldn't expect anything more or less!
Ken Added Jul 27, 2018 - 1:50am
two posts aren't that necessary to explain it.  National socialism is easily explained.  It is communism as all socialism is.  Both are based on Marx.
 
The only difference is that national socialism is internal.  Communism is based on world domination.  National Socialism is based on Government control of all industry within the country.  This is why Hitler broke the treaty with Stalin.  He knew communism was based on international domination.  He wouldn't leave Germany open to occupation and communism.  While the government philosphy was similar, there was a big difference between being a national socialist within your country and a communist who believed that the entire world should be communist
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 27, 2018 - 6:46am
@Ken:
”two posts aren't that necessary to explain it.  National socialism is easily explained.  It is communism as all socialism is.  Both are based on Marx.”
 
National Socialism is based on Marx?
 
“The only difference is that national socialism is internal.”
 
Actually I think a better way to put that is National Socialism is exclusive while Socialism/Communism is inclusive...theoretically.
 
“Communism is based on world domination.  National Socialism is based on Government control of all industry within the country.”
 
Hitler nationalized industry in Germany? When did he do that?  
 
“This is why Hitler broke the treaty with Stalin.  He knew communism was based on international domination.  He wouldn't leave Germany open to occupation and communism.”
 
Were those his only motivations?
 
Ken Added Jul 27, 2018 - 1:59pm
Hitler nationalized industry in Germany? When did he do that?  
 
Very early on.  If you weren't an elite member of the Nazi party, you didn't get to own.  Many business and especially factories were taken over by the Nazis for the Nazis.
 
Were those his only motivations?
 
No, he despised them in general, but he also feared the communist doctrine of world domination, so he went after them before they would come after him. 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 27, 2018 - 2:28pm
@Ken:
Hitler nationalized industry in Germany? When did he do that?  


 
Very early on.  If you weren't an elite member of the Nazi party, you didn't get to own.  Many business and especially factories were taken over by the Nazis for the Nazis.”
 
Which ones?
 
“Were those his only motivations?
 
No, he despised them in general, but he also feared the communist doctrine of world domination, so he went after them before they would come after him.”
 
 
I’ll just help you with this one, Ken.
 
Hitler considered the Soviet Union as a perfect place to build his empire and give his people enough space to live.  The USSR had the natural resources Hitler coveted, resources he believed would make Germany truly independent.  He understood that unlike the naval empires of the French and British he lacked the ability to defend far flung colonies.  As such he wanted his empire in Europe.
 
He also feared the Bolsheviks (like you said) and moreover equated the Bolsheviks with Jews, who he loathed.  He thought that by destroying the USSR it would eliminate this threat.
 
The above gives the ideological reasons why Hitler invaded the USSR.
 
The other reason tends towards the practical.  Hitler believed that if he eliminated the USSR it would remove the last threat to him on the continent and thereby eliminate the hope of the British that the Soviets would save them.  Hitler was wrong, the British actually looked to the US for assistance.
 
I hope this helps.  Let me know which companies the Nazis took over.


 
 
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 27, 2018 - 2:37pm
Hitler said, "We are the full counterpart of the French Revolution". The French Revolution, along with the American Revolution, was Leftist. 
 
I point to the books of Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, Liberty or Equality, Leftism, and Leftism Revisited. They all have over 900 footnotes apiece. Von Kuehnelt-Leddihn was an Austrian polyglot and so he knew Europe inside and out. He clearly points out that Facism/Nazism was Leftist and he goes thru the intellectual history of this movement. 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 27, 2018 - 2:43pm
Sorry, it was right-wing.  It was antisemitic, anti-Marxist, anti-Socialist, anti-Democratic, it linked itself to conservative/right-wing doctrine of expansion to the East and anti-worker.  So much for “Socialist Worker.....”
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 27, 2018 - 3:34pm
Mr. Kelly, you just gave the reason why you posted this article in the first place:  to link this to President Trump and conservatives and call all them Nazis. I get it. See, I quote from the Horse's mouth and you deny it. 
 
I posted this on my Wikipedia page about this very type of situation:
 
Josef Pfitzner, a Sudetenland German Nazi author, wrote that "the synthesis of the two great dynamic powers of the century, of the socialist and national idea, had been perfected in the German borderlands which thus were far ahead of their motherland." (2)WHEELER 21:23, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Gee if he says it it must be true. WHEELER, you have to stop relying on quotations as *facts*. This is a reply from a contributor.
 
This is a classic tale of the lack of Intellectual honesty. Let me tell you what this is saying. "SHUT UP WHEELER, Joseph Pfitzner doesn't know what he is talking about, let me tell you what to think, to hell with what an actual Nazi does say. But we need to all rely and bow down to North American Academia to please **INTERPRET** what he actually said." See Joseph Pfitzer an actual Nazi living in Nazi Germany doesn't know really what he is saying, because Mr. Pfitzer contradicts American Academia Propaganda and GROUPSpeak, we must all listen while they re-interpret and explain to us how Mr. Pftizer is really a flaming rightwing fanatic. Neither Fascism nor Nazism had anything to do with socialism. Wheeler.
 
As in the words of another person, "For crissakes" the damn party even had in it the adjective that is was "socialist" and yet we all want to sit around and say that there was no socialism at all in Nazism or Fascism.
 
There is NO Intellectual honesty or integrity in the Left to boot!
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 27, 2018 - 6:19pm
@Lindsay Wheeler:
”Mr. Kelly, you just gave the reason why you posted this article in the first place:  to link this to President Trump and conservatives and call all them Nazis. I get it.”
 
Actually no.  Don’t be ridiculous.  The conservatives of today more closely align with classic liberalism.  Trump is a buffoon but hardly a Nazi.  
 
 
James Travil Added Jul 27, 2018 - 6:35pm
I still haven't heard one person explain why if Nazis are leftwing, literally every single Nazi group self-identifies as rightwing, including Ukrainian Nazi groups like Right Sector which have existed since WWII and fought alongside the German Nazis of the Third Reich? 
Ken Added Jul 27, 2018 - 7:03pm
You have to understand, left wing and right wing in europe are defined very differently than left wing and right wing in america.  I suspect a lot is getting lost in translation
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 27, 2018 - 7:15pm
James, every single Nazi group self-identifies as rightwing because they believe in Leftist propaganda. Does one follow the masses into error? People also assume all sorts of titles without integrity. 
 
The terms "right" and "left" were created as political statements of characterization at the French Revolution. One has to follow those strictures---or one is changing history. 
 
The end of the Roman Republic occurred the same way; it was between the Optimi and the Populares. Cicero, who wanted to conserve the Roman Republic was an Optimi. The revolutionaries were Populares. 
 
 
Jeff Michka Added Jul 27, 2018 - 8:17pm
Willy Stockpot wants the Nazis associated with leftists to further his "leftists are the scourge of mankind."  Horrors if Nazis are associated with rightists...horrors, people might think badly of rightists.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 27, 2018 - 10:38pm
@Ken:
”You have to understand, left wing and right wing in europe are defined very differently than left wing and right wing in america.  I suspect a lot is getting lost in translation”
 
I think that is what you are doing.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 27, 2018 - 10:41pm
@Lindsay Wheeler:
”The terms "right" and "left" were created as political statements of characterization at the French Revolution. One has to follow those strictures---or one is changing history.“
 
The terms are fluid and always have been.  The right in Hitler’s time in Germany were exactly how I described them...both here and in my article on Fascism.  
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 28, 2018 - 7:48am
Here is an atheist, a Ph.D., Prof. John J. Ray who writes a very exhaustive article with copious amounts of quotes and excerpts that "Hitler was a socialist". Prof. Ray also points out that some of what Hitler said--was said by Marx and Engels! Furthermore, what Hitler advocated was normal for the socialists of their day. 
 
Marxists will do anything to further their movement of Internationalism. Because Hitler was such a bogeyman, he has to be made into the Marxist bogeyman of the Right. But as Prof. Ray points out Mussolini was much more a socialist and a Leftist. Study of Mussolini and the term "Fascist", shows that this movement was of the Left. Fascism is defined as "Socialism + Nationalism = Fascism". 
 
From Prof Ray's article:
 
John Ray's Documents<link href="http://www.blogger.com/dyn-css/authorization.css?targetBlogID=33578376&amp;zx=5f855fe5-4510-4f89-a985-16f8d66202f6" target="_blank">rel='stylesheet'/>














Modern day Leftists of course hate it when you point out to them that Hitler was one of them. They deny it furiously -- even though in Hitler's own day both the orthodox Leftists who represented the German labor unions (the SPD) and the Communists (KPD) voted WITH the Nazis in the Reichstag (German Parliament) on various important occasions -- though not on all occasions. They were after all political rivals. It was only at the last gasp -- the passage of the "Enabling Act" that gave Hitler absolute power -- that the SPD opposed the Nazis resolutely. They knew from introspection where that would lead, even if others were deceived.












 
 
Dave Dubya Added Jul 28, 2018 - 9:52am
Fascism is defined as "Socialism + Nationalism = Fascism". 
 
No. it isn't.  The Right thinks they can unilaterally define terms. How authoritarian of them!
 
Hitler didn't campaign on expanded public health care and education. He was more a "Make Germany Great Again" type.
 
Hitler didn't promote worker rights and labor unions. He banned them. 
 
Only people who believe Trump think Hitler was a socialist. That tells us something right there.
 
Nazi-ism's "National socialism" is NOT socialism. Period.
 
"Jews will not replace us!"
 
Just what all tiki torch parading socialists say, amirite? Why wasn't Bernie marching with his fellow "socialists"?
 
Sheer idiocy!
 
The fanatics of the Right aren't happy calling liberals commies, they want to call them nazis too.  They call us every damn pejorative term their hateful ignorant minds can latch on to.
 
Just because "socialism" was in the NAZI acronym, they want to say it was a socialist movement, It was not, it was a NATIONALIST movement. And a very special white nationalism at that.
 
It's no different than Kim Jong Un saying he is a democratic republican in the Democratic Republic of North Korea.
 
But what else can we expect from a cult who can't even see Trump is a liar?
   
"Ignorance is strength."
John Minehan Added Jul 28, 2018 - 10:20am
Something that has stuck in my mind since high school, "Fascism is a post- industrial and post-democratic form of government that glorifies one race and one nation." 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 28, 2018 - 12:01pm
I think that summarizes Fascism rather nicely, John.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 28, 2018 - 12:13pm
I think what Lindsay’s problem is he has confirmation bias, i.e. he desperately wants something he’s hunting down anything to confirm it.
 
So, how did Adolf Hitler define a “Socialist?”
 
From a speech in 1922:
”Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of the nation; whoever has understood our great national anthem, “Deutschland ueber Alles,” to mean that nothing in the wide world surpasses in his eyes this Germany, people and land — that man is a Socialist.”
 
Hitler was a hyper nationalist, to him the nation was all.  Hitler never concerned himself with economics because the subject bored him.  As such to Hitler any Germany who stood with him was a “Socialist.”
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 28, 2018 - 4:31pm
To find out what is a Socialist, lets go to info written before the rise of Fascism since the bogeyman Hitler for the Stalinists color much of their bias. From Elements of Socialism (1912), by John Spargo and Ph.D. George Louis Arner.
 
pg 201. "Every Socialist is of necessity an idealist". 
 
Hitler was an idealist. 
 
pg 205 "The Socialist ideal of peace involves more than the abolition of war between nations. It is more fundamental, more inclusive, than the and involves the abolition of social war within nations". (emphasis in original)
 
This is why Hitler disbanded unions because of their destructive habits of striking. Fascism, as a revision of Marxism, instead of class warfare, was the whole society working together in national struggle instead of class struggle. Hitler said, "We are the conquerors and executors of Marxism stripped of its Jewish Talmudic dogma". What was the Jewish Talmudic Dogma,  World Unity and class warfare. 
 
Moreover, Hitler was about creating a "New Man", a Utopian Society. Socialism came out of Utopianism. Socialism as a word was coined by Robert Owen who tried to set up his Utopian society in America on a farm.  (It didn't work out.) 
 
Again, Fascism/National Socialism is a Revision of Marxism. There are many forms of Leftism. What Dubya and Jeffrey are doing is presenting only ONE form of Leftism and saying that is the correct one. Error is always mixed with truth. Nationalism is not a product of the right--but of the Left. The Left used Nationalism to end Monarchies. Mazzini a Leftist used the cry of Nationalism to unite Italy. 
 
If Fascism is a revision of Marxism, and Marxism is Leftist, then Fascism is Leftist. Hitler was a Leftist with a hyper Nationalism.
James Travil Added Jul 28, 2018 - 9:43pm
"James, every single Nazi group self-identifies as rightwing because they believe in Leftist propaganda."
That's the most idiotic statement I've read today. The most devoutly Right-Wing are the ones who define it, and themselves, and they are the Nazis. Don't like it, TOUGH you are a factual revisionist and a historical revisionist to boot. And as I mentioned before non-Neo-Nazi, original Nazi groups which survived WWII like Right Sector also identify as rightwing, so it's not a modern thing or a American vs. European thing, it's European and originally rightwing. Just like the rightwing Christian high school I went to taught. 
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 29, 2018 - 9:23am
Fact:  The "Left" existed BEFORE Marx. 
 
Fact:  The French Revolution was the creation of Leftists. 
 
The French Revolution and the American Revolution created Leftist countries. 
 
Marx and Marxism is not the definer of what is Left. All Marx did was coalesce different strands of Liberalism, Utopianism, Blanquism, with French Idealism, German Idealism, with British Economic theory of Ricardo to produce his brand of Leftism called "Communism", "International Socialism", Marxism, Bolshevism, etc. 
 
Marx does NOT define all the parameters of the Left. The Left was born BEFORE Karl Marx was born!  
 
James, my poor man, How can the Nazis be rightists when they hated Aristocracy, clergy, and Monarchy? Monarchists are rightists James. A Rightist is for Throne and Altar. Everything else is Leftist. 
James Travil Added Jul 29, 2018 - 1:57pm
Brainwashed to the bone ^
I give up, but you lose because your illogical rambling convinced no one, especially not me. Beyond stupid, Nazis don't know what they themselves are, whatever! #dumbashell 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 29, 2018 - 2:16pm
@ Lindsay Wheeler:
Good grief you are long-winded.
All right, deep breath:
 "To find out what is a Socialist, lets go to info written before the rise of Fascism since the bogeyman Hitler for the Stalinists color much of their bias. From Elements of Socialism (1912), by John Spargo and Ph.D. George Louis Arner.
 
pg 201. "Every Socialist is of necessity an idealist". 
 
Hitler was an idealist."
 
 So, you think every idealist is by necessity a Socialist?  That makes the Founders of the U.S. Socialist.  I can't think of anything more ridiculous.  You blather on about monarchies, are you saying that those who feverently believed in the divine right of kings were Socialists?  Hell, doesn't that make you a Socialist?  
 
"Pg. 205 "The Socialist ideal of peace involves more than the abolition of war between nations. It is more fundamental, more inclusive, than the and involves the abolition of social war within nations". (emphasis in original)
 
This is why Hitler disbanded unions because of their destructive habits of striking."
 
 
WTF does that have to do with the "Socialist ideal of peace?"  Lindsay that makes no sense.  Hitler disbanded unions because of their links with both the Communists and the Socialists, something he utterly opposed.  It also made things easier to work with the industrialists.  He needed their cooperation in order to rearm and didn't want to mess around with the possibility of strikes and collective bargaining.  Workers were now to do what they were told.
 
"Fascism, as a revision of Marxism, instead of class warfare, was the whole society working together in national struggle instead of class struggle."
 
Which is actually a trait of classic conservatism in which the state was seen as an organic whole working together.  Individualism  had no place in this order.
 
"Hitler said, "We are the conquerors and executors of Marxism stripped of its Jewish Talmudic dogma". What was the Jewish Talmudic Dogma,  World Unity and class warfare."
 
 Yeah, sorry, I'm going to need clarification on this because I'm not sure what you mean.  This looks similar to something Mefo would say, he's nothing more than an antisemitic Holocaust denier.
 
"Moreover, Hitler was about creating a "New Man","
 
Yes, an actual "National Socialist man."  Refer to the above about what Hitler considered to be a Socialist.
 
"a Utopian Society. Socialism came out of Utopianism. Socialism as a word was coined by Robert Owen who tried to set up his Utopian society in America on a farm.  (It didn't work out.)"
 
 The idea of a "Utopian society" has existed for centuries.  
 
"Again, Fascism/National Socialism is a Revision of Marxism."
 
Sorry but no.  Hitler was never influenced by Marx.  He loathed Communism and Socialism.
 
"There are many forms of Leftism."
 
And "rightism."
 
"What Dubya and Jeffrey are doing is presenting only ONE form of Leftism and saying that is the correct one."
 
You are doing the same.  You seem to think  only your definition is the one that counts.  It doesn't.
 
"Error is always mixed with truth. Nationalism is not a product of the right--but of the Left. The Left used Nationalism to end Monarchies. Mazzini a Leftist used the cry of Nationalism to unite Italy."
 
  What are you talking about?  Only leftists are nationalist?  That's ridiculous.  Did you forget that Italy was a monarchy after reunification?  Do you need a lesson in some basic history?
 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 29, 2018 - 2:35pm
@Lindsay Wheeler:
 "Fact:  The "Left" existed BEFORE Marx. "
 
 That's such a narrow definition I'm not sure what to do with it.
 
"Fact:  The French Revolution was the creation of Leftists."
 
OK.
 
"The French Revolution and the American Revolution created Leftist countries."
 
The French Revolution was later hijacked by Napoleon who made himself emperor.  I can't think of anything more right than an emperor.  The defeat of Napoleon led to the restoration of the monarchy.  The American Revolution led to a true classic liberal democracy with limits on voting rights.
 
 
"James, my poor man, How can the Nazis be rightists when they hated Aristocracy, clergy, and Monarchy? Monarchists are rightists James. A Rightist is for Throne and Altar. Everything else is Leftist."
 
 
 Ah, the crux of the matter emerges.  Lindsay defines the right in the most narrow term possible to prevent argument.  Lindsay you are so completely full of shit that it finally spilled out onto your keyboard.  
James Travil Added Jul 29, 2018 - 2:50pm
Lindsay is just upset about the fact that Nazis are rightwing and bad people. He can't conceive of a bad rightist only lefties. Even rightwing extremism has to be good so that can't be Nazis! Nazis can't even define themselves only a lunatic like Lindsay can. Nuts! The Christian high school I went to was rightwing but even they recognized that the Nazis were rightwing also and that extremism, left or right, was a bad thing. Fake conservatives (ie: fascists) like Lindsay just want to hide their own evil. 
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 29, 2018 - 4:49pm
Jeffrey:  So, you think every idealist is by necessity a Socialist? That makes the Founders of the U.S. Socialist. I can't think of anything more ridiculous.
 
I refer you to Jon Nichols fabulous book The 'S' Word, A Short History of an American Tradition: Socialism! In that book, Prof. Nichols outs Thomas Paine as a "proto-socialist". I have read his Paine's pamphlet Agrarian Justice; it is a socialist-welfare book. So yes, at least Thomas Paine who was a Founding Father of America and who also worked in the French Revolution was proto-socialist. Abraham Lincoln, thru the New York Herald Newspaper was a reader of Karl Marx. Horace Greeley the editor of the Herald managed to print over 400 articles by Marx and Engels!

Jeffrey:  The idea of a "Utopian society" has existed for centuries.
 
Western Culture and Civilization had NO idea or concept of "utopia". Utopia thinking came out of the Kabbala. It is one of the two doctrines of Jewish Messianism. Utopia came into existence during the Renaissance when many young Italians came into contact with Jews and the Kabbala. Utopian thinking is NOT Western Culture but Jewish culture. 

Jeffrey:  Sorry but no. Hitler was never influenced by Marx. He loathed Communism and Socialism.
 
In Mein Kampf, Hitler said of himself “And so I began to examine the sources from which they drew this supposed wisdom. I studied book after book, pamphlet after pamphlet.” (40) He repeats this four more times:
 
“More than any theoretical literature, my daily reading of the Social Democratic press enabled me to study the inner nature of these thought-processes” (41);
 
“Before two years had passed, the theory as well as the technical methods of Social Democracy were clear to me” (43);
 
“The greater insight I gathered into the external character of Social Democracy, the greater became my longing to comprehend the inner core of this doctrine….I gradually obtained a clear picture of its intrinsic will.” (50)
 
“Slowly I had become an expert in their own doctrine and used it as a weapon in the struggle for my own profound conviction.” (62)
 
It is very clear that the young struggling Adolf, threatened with bodily injury if he didn’t leave a job by the then Democratic Socialist trade unionists, learned his future tactics from the Democratic Socialists in Vienna, Austria.
 
Wheeler: "There are many forms of Leftism."

Jeffrey:   And "rightism."
 
Aristotle wrote: "Health is One, disease is manifold". Truth is One, Error is many. There is only One Form of the Right. There are manifold forms of heresy. There is one form of Orthodox Christianity---there are many heresies. 
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 29, 2018 - 4:54pm
In a book published in 1939, an American Jew, Harry Waton figured out the same thing. He writes: “Nazism is an imitation of Judaism; nazism adopted the principles and ideas of Judaism…” (pgs. 54, 63, 81) Without reference to Waton at all, the Sociology Professor Kevin MacDonald also backs this claim through his own insight:  “…in this regard National Socialism was very much like Judaism, which has been throughout its history fundamentally a group phenomenon in which the rights of the individual have been submerged in the interests of the group.” (Ch. 5, p. 165) [1] The first biographer of Adolf Hitler, Konrad Heiden [2] writes that even though the Austrian Social Democrats repulsed Hitler, he had great admiration for them and he told a friend of his that his organization “would have to be copied from the Social Democrats”. (pgs. 66-67) Social Democracy is just another form of International Socialism.
 
[1] Zionism is a form of National Socialism. In general, Jews are idealistic, i.e. socialists; then, the reconstituting of their homeland is nationalism. When the Jews say “Never Again” and excoriate anything National Socialism—they are instead practicing what they excoriate. Hypocrisy.
[2] Other than being the first biographer of Hitler, Konrad Heiden also is the author of A History of National Socialism. The man knows what he is talking about.
 
Excerpt from my book: Part I, The Case of the Barefoot Socrates: Academic Myth-Making and the Jewish Transformation of the West. pg 91. 
Doug Plumb Added Jul 29, 2018 - 9:50pm
re "Fact:  The "Left" existed BEFORE Marx. 
 
Fact:  The French Revolution was the creation of Leftists. 
 
The French Revolution and the American Revolution created Leftist countries. 
 
Marx and Marxism is not the definer of what is Left. All Marx did was coalesce different strands of Liberalism, Utopianism, Blanquism, with French Idealism, German Idealism, with British Economic theory of Ricardo to produce his brand of Leftism called "Communism", "International Socialism", Marxism, Bolshevism, etc. 
 
Marx does NOT define all the parameters of the Left. The Left was born BEFORE Karl Marx was born! "
 
Yep. Utilitarianism is very well covered in book 4 of Plato's Republic. Neatly sliced, diced and splayed in about two pages.
 
Doug Plumb Added Jul 29, 2018 - 9:51pm
I'm going to read your book Lindsay.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 30, 2018 - 6:30pm
Thanks Doug.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 30, 2018 - 7:29pm
@Lindsay Wheeler:
 
“Jeffrey:  The idea of a "Utopian society" has existed for centuries.
 
Western Culture and Civilization had NO idea or concept of "utopia". Utopia thinking came out of the Kabbala. It is one of the two doctrines of Jewish Messianism. Utopia came into existence during the Renaissance when many young Italians came into contact with Jews and the Kabbala. Utopian thinking is NOT Western Culture but Jewish culture.”
 
So full of bullshit....sounds like a psychotic MEFOBILLS......
 
St. Ambrose, 4th Century:
”Nature has poored forth all things for all men, to be held in common.  For God commanded all things to be produced so that food should be common to all, and that the earth should be a common possession of all.  Nature, therefore, created a common right, but use and habit created private right...”
 
John Wycliffe:
”....all good things of God ought to be in common....
 
John Ball, 1381:
”Things cannot go well in England, nor ever will, until all goods are held in common....there will be neither serfs nor gentlemen, and we shall all be equal.”
 
Look into the Taborites, Lindsay.  They were an offshoot movement of Christianity that practiced a form of Communism.  
 
There is a lot more, FFS Thomas Moore in 1516 came up with the idea of a “Utopia.”


“Jeffrey:  Sorry but no. Hitler was never influenced by Marx. He loathed Communism and Socialism.
 
In Mein Kampf, Hitler said of himself “And so I began to examine the sources from which they drew this supposed wisdom. I studied book after book, pamphlet after pamphlet.” (40) He repeats this four more times:
 
“More than any theoretical literature, my daily reading of the Social Democratic press enabled me to study the inner nature of these thought-processes” (41);
 
“Before two years had passed, the theory as well as the technical methods of Social Democracy were clear to me” (43);
 
“The greater insight I gathered into the external character of Social Democracy, the greater became my longing to comprehend the inner core of this doctrine….I gradually obtained a clear picture of its intrinsic will.” (50)
 
“Slowly I had become an expert in their own doctrine and used it as a weapon in the struggle for my own profound conviction.” (62)
 
It is very clear that the young struggling Adolf, threatened with bodily injury if he didn’t leave a job by the then Democratic Socialist trade unionists, learned his future tactics from the Democratic Socialists in Vienna, Austria.”
 
You are placing this out of context. 
 
Hitler (on Social Democrats):
”What most repelled me was its hostile attitude toward the struggle for the preservation of Germanism and it’s disgraceful courting of the Slavic comrade...in a few months I obtained what might have otherwise required decades: an understanding of a pestilential whore cloaking herself as social virtue and brotherly love.”
 
Silly boy...I’ve read Mein Kampf.
 

 
“Wheeler: "There are many forms of Leftism."

Jeffrey:   And "rightism."
 
Aristotle wrote: "Health is One, disease is manifold". Truth is One, Error is many. There is only One Form of the Right. There are manifold forms of heresy. There is one form of Orthodox Christianity---there are many heresies.”
 
Says the creaky old monarchist.  You are entitled to your opinion but that’s all it is.  The talk of “heresies” leaves me laughing.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 30, 2018 - 7:45pm
@Lindsay Wheeler:
“In a book published in 1939, an American Jew, Harry Waton figured out the same thing. He writes: “Nazism is an imitation of Judaism; nazism adopted the principles and ideas of Judaism…” (pgs. 54, 63, 81)”
 
That’s nice.
 
 
“Without reference to Waton at all, the Sociology Professor Kevin MacDonald also backs this claim through his own insight:  “…in this regard National Socialism was very much like Judaism, which has been throughout its history fundamentally a group phenomenon in which the rights of the individual have been submerged in the interests of the group.” (Ch. 5, p. 165) [1]The first biographer of Adolf Hitler, Konrad Heiden [2] writes that even though the Austrian Social Democrats repulsed Hitler, he had great admiration for them and he told a friend of his that his organization “would have to be copied from the Social Democrats”. (pgs. 66-67) Social Democracy is just another form of International Socialism.”
 
Yet, as I showed you above, he called them a “pestilential whore” because of their internationalism and resistance to pan-Germanism.  What Hitler took from them is the idea of a mass movement.  In Mein Kampf his true admiration was for the Pan-German Nationalist Party (per Mein Kampf, its unknown how much he actually followed them).  His criticism of them was their anticlerical attitude (something he forgot later) and their failure to establish a relationship with some group with actual power.  That is where the idea of a mass movement comes from.
 
[1] Zionism is a form of National Socialism.”
 
Oddly as a form of nationalism I can’t disagree with this.
 
“In general, Jews are idealistic, i.e. socialists;”
 
Christ, one-track mind again, I don’t mind telling you that’s really annoying.  There were multiple types of Zionism based upon what they wanted.  There was political Zionism, Practical Zionism, Labor Zionism, Revisionist Zionism, Cultural Zionism, Revolutionary Zionism, Religious Zionism.....
All of them wanted a reconstituted Israel but all had different goals about what that Israel would look like.  
 
 
David Montaigne Added Jul 30, 2018 - 10:13pm
Liked the article; loved the comments
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 30, 2018 - 10:46pm
I find I get a lot of varied comments.  Many of them pissed at me about something or another.....:D
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 31, 2018 - 1:16pm
Socialism and Marxism, in some sense, have come out of Christianity. 
 
In the book Elements of Socialism, pg 326, the Belgian Socialists considered their part of Socialism that derived out of France was a "continuation of Christianity". (Vandervelde) 
 
Not everything a Saint says is gospel. I dispute St. Ambrose's conjecture. All people are selfish and if one stepped out of the way, another would just monopolize it and make money off of it. All human beings suffer from original sin, and St. Ambrose is on a flight of fancy. 
 
And again, as a classicist (although the armchair type), I agree with Rabbi Waton here: 
 
“And now we come to the idea of progress. The notion of progress is totally foreign to the Greek mind and to the Roman mind…For the Greek thinkers, the very idea of change is excluded from the essence of the divine; and the life of God is a life of eternal changeless contemplation of the eternally changeless. In this we see the apotheosis of leisure—the ideal of aristocracy. God is the opposite of the worker. Greek reflection cannot even think of progress. And the same is true of the Roman mind. Over against both stands the inherent purpose of the Hebrew mind—the effort to achieve a universal family, which becomes fully explicit in Jesus. It is precisely the absence of dualism in the Hebrew mind which necessitates the unity of the two elements, which Greece and Rome separate. And in this Jewish conception of the universal family there is immanent the notion of progress. (p. 193)
 
And that is why the destruction of the West!  Christendom was the continuation of Greek and Roman milieu. The Jews think it their prerogative to change Europeans into them!  All revolution comes from them meddling in European affairs. Talk about Respect---where is the respect towards Europeans?  As the Anglicans noted of the Puritans--they were demi-jews. All of the West now is demi-jew! Europeans have forgotten what it means to be European!
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 31, 2018 - 3:32pm
@Lindsay Wheeler:
”Socialism and Marxism, in some sense, have come out of Christianity.”
 
I like how you make things twist and squirm to fit into your narrative, Lindsay. That’s impressive.  
 
 
“Not everything a Saint says is gospel. I dispute St. Ambrose's conjecture.”
 
Fine by me.  It shows me that when confronted by uncomfortable facts you dismiss them.
 
 
“The Jews think it their prerogative to change Europeans into them!”
 
Wow.  Lindsay, you and Doug are running neck and neck for the title of WB’s resident cat lady.  
 
“All revolution comes from them meddling in European affairs.”
 
WTF are you babbling about?
 
“Talk about Respect---where is the respect towards Europeans?”
 
About what...Lindsay, Jews were marginalized and persecuted up to the point where Hitler decided to murder them wholesale.  
 
“As the Anglicans noted of the Puritans--they were demi-jews. All of the West now is demi-jew! Europeans have forgotten what it means to be European!”
 
Your inner cat lady is showing....
James Travil Added Jul 31, 2018 - 11:50pm
To be fair Jeffrey, Lindsay looks a lot like Grizzly Adams, who was a lot like a male version of a cat lady. 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jul 31, 2018 - 11:51pm
I think he looks more like a crazy George RR Martin.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Aug 1, 2018 - 5:43am
Ohh, I don't know, here is Prof. Michael E. Jones in his article The Revolutionary Jew. He has a book with a similar title: The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History by E. Michael Jones. Jews for Jesus versus Jews against Jesus; Christians versus Jews; Christians versus Judaizers. This book is the story of such contests played out over 2000 turbulent years. In his most ambitious work yet, Dr. E. Michael Jones provides a breathtaking and controversial tour of history from the Gospels to Julian the Apostate to the Hussites to the French Revolution to Neoconservatism and the End of History. A Must Read. $48 + S&H, Hardback
 
Jeffrey says:  Jews were marginalized and persecuted up to the point where Hitler decided to murder them wholesale. 
 
I like how they skip over their own excrement! Does not matter that the Jews were going around saying that Nations are social construct. Does not matter that Jewish unions were persecuting and denying patriotic Austrian Germans work!  Does not matter that Marx first called for genociding reactionary Europeans! See, Jews do no wrong. They are NEVER the cause of their problems. They gaslight their victims. Adolf Hitler was the recipient of two forms of soft genocide in Austria as a young man. In his OWN HOME country---he was persecuted by foreigners and Easterners to boot! That the central core of the Jewish mentality is to do away with nations---Which is an act of treason---and Hitler is guilty of what?  What goes around comes around---if you engage in Treason and genocide---maybe there is Justice and Justice fell on the head of the perps!  Who genocided the Russian Royal Family? And yet no Jew has been responsible. Trotsky glorified the genocide of the Russian Royal Family!
 
There is a God in Heaven---As Jesus said, "Do unto others as you wish they do unto you"!  Stalin said, "Genocide is a legitimate tool of socialism"!  The Jewish led Bolshevist party genocided the Russian Royal Family---what goes around comes around! In 1849, Marx and Engels called for the genociding of reactionary peoples and classes---AND THEN THEY ARE OUTRAGE THAT WHAT THEY CALL FOR---FALLS ON THEIR HEADS!  These people really don't think their sh** stinks. 
 
If genocide is a legitimate tool of socialism---done by the Soviet Union---why are you crying for?  You advocate Genocide, Call for Genocide---Commit Genocide---and then cry when it happens to you?  Really? Sanctimonious Hypocrites! Here is the article by George Irbe, "Genocide, when necessary". 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Aug 1, 2018 - 11:03am
@Lindsay Wheeler
”Ohh, I don't know, here is Prof. Michael E. Jones in his article target="_blank">The Revolutionary Jew.”
 
That linked me back to “Culture Wars.”  Nah, thanks, though.
 
Jeffrey says:  Jews were marginalized and persecuted up to the point where Hitler decided to murder them wholesale. 
 
“I like how they skip over their own excrement!”
 
WTF are you talking about?
 
“Does not matter that Jewish unions were persecuting and denying patriotic Austrian Germans work!”
 
LOL, they were?  Just Jewish Unions?
 
“Does not matter that Marx first called for genociding reactionary Europeans!”
 
That’s nice.  
 
“See, Jews do no wrong.”
 
Where did I say that?   
 
“They are NEVER the cause of their problems.”
 
Most German Jews were loyal and patriotic citizens.  They generally voted for center parties, not Communist or Socialist.   Most German Jews were members of the middle-class.
 
“Adolf Hitler was the recipient of two forms of soft genocide in Austria as a young man. In his OWN HOME country---he was persecuted by foreigners and Easterners to boot!”
 
LOL, Hitler worked with Jews and did business with them.  He apparently got along fine with them.
 
Here’s the thing, Lindsay.  When Hitler wrote Mein Kampf he wasn’t going to say, “I got along fine with Jews and didn’t fully form my antisemetic opinions until after the war.”  No, he wanted to portray himself as the young revolutionary from an early age...and that included backdating his antisemetism to Vienna.
 
“That the central core of the Jewish mentality is to do away with nations---
Which is an act of treason---“
 
You mean the German Jews who loved their country, the Polish Jews that died because they were Jews, etc.....
 
“and Hitler is guilty of what?”
 
Starting the European side of the bloodiest war in history that included the attempted genocide of Europe’s Jews....
 
“What goes around comes around---if you engage in Treason and genocide---maybe there is Justice and Justice fell on the head of the perps!”
 
You are so fucked up, are you saying that Europe’s Jews deserved this?  WTF is the matter with you?
 
“Who genocided the Russian Royal Family? And yet no Jew has been responsible. Trotsky glorified the genocide of the Russian Royal Family!”
 
Yet the order to murder the Czar and his family came from two non-Jews, Stalin and Lenin.
 
“Stalin said, "Genocide is a legitimate tool of socialism"! “
 
Stalin wasn’t a Jew.
 
“The Jewish led Bolshevist party genocided the Russian Royal Family---“
 
Jewish led???  LOL
 
 
“If genocide is a legitimate tool of socialism---done by the Soviet Union---why are you crying for?  You advocate Genocide, Call for Genocide---Commit Genocide---and then cry when it happens to you?”
 
When did I do that????? 
 
 
James Travil Added Aug 1, 2018 - 6:52pm
"There is a God in Heaven"
Proof please (of the existence of any kind of god or of a place called Heaven -- extra points if you can provide proof of both). I won't be holding my breath. Hell I'm betting that you can't even prove the existence of the Biblical Jesus! 
Lindsay Wheeler Added Aug 1, 2018 - 7:48pm
King David was ordered by the prophet to not number his people. King David did anyway. So God punished the Innocent Hebrew people to the tune of 50,000. It got King David's attention and he repented of his sin. 
 
God did not punish King David---He punished the people. Sometimes sin is communal. 
 
You wouldn't understand. 
 
And to James Travil:
 
From Clinias the Cretan in the Laws:
 
"Why look upon Creation,
"See Order, 
"Know God."
Jeffrey Kelly Added Aug 1, 2018 - 9:02pm
I understand that genocide of any type sucks and there is no justification for it.  
 
You honestly believe that Hitler’s actions were in some way justified?  That’s more fucked up than denying it happened, Lindsay.  I find that more repulsive than any denier.  
Jeffrey Kelly Added Aug 1, 2018 - 9:03pm
Sin is never communal, you sick bastard.
James Travil Added Aug 1, 2018 - 9:46pm
So no proof whatsoever huh Lindsay? Just as I knew it would be. Please be advised that this is a discussion about National Socialism, which is a real thing. Gods, goddesses, demons, devils, spooks and spirits are not the same, they are fantasy and myth. If you want to be taken seriously keep make believe stuff out of the discussion of real things. 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Aug 1, 2018 - 10:20pm
I find it completely fucking repulsive that Lindsay thinks the European Jews got what they deserved due to some communal sin bullshit.
James Travil Added Aug 1, 2018 - 10:46pm
Jeffrey, that's what you get when you entertain the perversion of the false Christian "god". Deities and devils are excuses for the most amoral and inhuman behavior. Thus when some crackerjack tries to bring that bullshit up they need to be called out on the fact that their god crap is fictional now nonsense. If not PROVE your "god" exists I say. Most certainly the made-up edicts of a nonexistent being carry no more than ZERO weight. If not I'm going to start to quote Dungeons and Dragons deities and demigods as valid excuses for behavior and standards in the real world. Nuts! 
Dave Dubya Added Aug 2, 2018 - 12:01am
Wow. Lindsay's white nationalism has glaringly emerged for all to see.
 
He's a regular "Tiki Torch Christian". Trump has really emboldened these "very fine people" out of the woodwork.
 
"Jews will not replace us!" "Gott Mitt Uns! Sieg Heil!"
 
He's the poster boy of Trump Amerika.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Aug 2, 2018 - 8:11am
Around 1918, Rosa Luxemburg, a German Jew, head of the Communist Sparticist
League, wrote a pamphlet on “The Nationalities Question” castigating Lenin for supporting nationalist groups when they should have been dismantling them. She writes that
 
"It is obvious that the phrases concerning self-determination and the entire nationalist movement, which at present constitute the greatest danger for international socialism, …"[1]
 
In her first chapter, she acknowledges the Jewish-Austrian writer, the democratic socialist Karl Kautsky (1854 – 1938) who wrote on the same subject:
 
 
“Kautsky formulates – as far as we know, for the first time in socialistic literature of recent times – the historical tendency to remove completely all national distinctions within the socialist system and to fuse all of civilized humanity into one nationality.”[2]
 
In a letter to Kautsky, Karl Marx advised that the worker must be freed from his national chains:
 
“Every Polish peasant or worker who wakes up from the general gloom and participates in the common interest, encounters first the fact of national subjugation. This fact is in his way everywhere as the first barrier. To remove it is the basic condition of every healthy and free development.”[3]
 
[1]https://libcom.org/library/nationalities-question-in-the-russian-revolution-luxemburg   Retrieved o5/27/2018 World Socialist Movement. “Rosa Luxemburg and the National Question”.
http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/luxemburg_and_the_national.php  Retrieved on 06/04/2008
[2]emphasis added. [K. Kautsky, Nationalität und Internationaliät, pp.12-17 & p.23.] https://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1909/national-question/ch01.htm
[3] A letter to Karl Kautsky, 7 February 1882, originally published in Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Briefe an A Bebel, W Liebknecht, K Kautsky und andere (Moscow, 1933)}
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1882/letters/82_02_07.htm
Jeffrey Kelly Added Aug 2, 2018 - 1:03pm
So what....when did Rosa Luxembourg speak for all Jews?  Lindsay, your problem is the same with all the stupid Holocaust deniers and antisemites out there (the truly sad thing is that right now I actually have more respect for them than I do you).  
 
The lot of you think that Jews believe in the exact same things and move to the beat of some hive mind.  They don’t.  I’ve mentioned that most German Jews were middle class and they wouldn’t want Communism.  Most Polish Jews were highly religious, why would they want an anti-religious political movement in charge?
 
When the Bolsheviks took over in Russia they made antisemitism illegal and made Jews an ethnic minority like the Ukrainians.  This benefited Jews on a secular level but their religious freedoms were suppressed like the Russian Orthodox (and others).  So while Jewish culture was encouraged the religious aspects of Judaism were suppressed.
 
There is no excuse for what Hitler and others did.  None.  The idea of collective punishment for some sort of “sin” repulses me and I think you are seriously fucked up “human being.”
 
I will naturally allow you to continue to post your stupid horseshit because I really do believe in freedom of speech.  I will continue to reply as I am able.  I am sorry for anyone else reading this who is offended by Lindsay and my replies to him.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Aug 2, 2018 - 5:45pm
Well, you need to take that up with the Bible. 
 
Jeffrey writes: "Sin is never communal, you sick bastard."
 
In Jeremiah, 22 1-5, if an innocent man dies, I will destroy the city. 
 
Jesus died in Jerusalem. He was totally innocent. A generation later---two Roman Legions descended upon Jerusalem and put the whole city under the sword. 
 
What do you think happened to the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel?  They sinned against God. God sent evil Pagans to wipe them out. Did not a prophet warn the Hebrews that Nineveh was going to be sent against them? They paid NO heed. 
 
Did not God send the Hebrews to Palestine and told them to put all things to the sword for the evil of the indigineous people was complete. He told them to put all men, women, children, and even their animals to the sword. The Hebrews committed some nine genocides clearing out Palestine. 
 
God punished Sodom and Gomorrah. What do you think the Flood was?
 
God punishes communally as well as individually!  He does both! You are not a religious man, it seems, and you are not versed in religious things. 
 
I fear God. God is not a respecter of persons. He Judges. All things He uses as his tool. He uses the unrighteous and the Righteous to do His Will when it so occurs. 
 
Justice is always waiting to be called. King David, even though annoited by God, Never, Never touched Saul. Do you really think that God who is pure Justice, will allow his annoited, A Christian King and his Family go butchered, without calling down Justice?
 
The World is not about patty-cake, and all nicety. Hitler was not a righteous man but that doesn't stop God from using all and sundry. I wish neither WWI nor WWII occured. But people set in motion things---and God has to do His Thing. 
 
Somewhere I read that one of the Laws of the Jews in the Diaspora was they were not to interfere with the Gentile nations. (Right now, I lost the reference to that.) They can not help but interfere. They did interfere and disturb Gentile nations. If you are going to break the Law---then God is going to step in. 
 
It's funny, Jews never take responsibility for their actions. 
 
There is Justice. 
 
I'm a religious man. I fear God. Please don't tell me what isn't and is right. You have no clue. You don't believe in the Bible, so don't complain. You don't know what you are talking about. 
 
Evil begets Evil. The Evil of International Socialism---Bred the Evil of National Socialism. And  again, in his book, Foundations of Leninism, Stalin said, "genocide is a legitimate tool of socialism". So don't complain. Those that plan genocide---shall be genocided in return. 
 
It was the Jew Karl Marx and the Englishman Fredrick Engels that unleashed the Law of the Jungle in Europe---NOT Hitler. Kill or be killed. That is the Law of the Modern World. 
Dave Dubya Added Aug 2, 2018 - 7:05pm
Kill or be killed. That is the Law of the Modern World. Absolutism and a Black and White world view are trademark authoritarian personality features.
 
https://healthresearchfunding.org/authoritarian-personality-theory-of-prejudice-explained/
 
Under the authoritarian personality theory of prejudice, there are two groups of people: those who think like the authoritarian and those who do not. There are no shades of grey. You’re either “with” that person or you’re “against” them.
 
This means there is a need for the authoritarian to maintain control, using their vision of superiority, to promote a specific worldview. There is no empathy, thoughts of equality, or an effort to create something to the mutual benefit of all. The world is filled with enemies and the superego demands their compliance based on the prejudice that has developed over time because of the weaker ego.
James Travil Added Aug 2, 2018 - 7:17pm
One has to remember that the son of God (the God Zeus that is) Hercules spoke out against the idea of group sin or the guilt of a whole people for the supposed sins of a few. He spoke for his Father the King of the Gods and as such His Word carries more weight than entirely fictional characters such as the Biblical king David or Jesus (www.nobeliefs.com)
 
In addition it should be mentioned that the spider goddess of the Drow Elves, Loth was known for her extreme conservative nature as well as instituting proto fascism in the Drow peoples. So here we see divine evidence of fascism being a conservative, rightwing philosophy. This also throughly debunks the Mad Hatter (Lindsay's) irrational and illerate irreligious ramblings. 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Aug 2, 2018 - 10:30pm
@Lindsay Wheeler:
”Well, you need to take that up with the Bible.
 
I don’t give a fuck what the Bible says or how you cherry pick or distort it
 
“Jesus died in Jerusalem. He was totally innocent. A generation later---two Roman Legions descended upon Jerusalem and put the whole city under the sword.”
 
They did that because the Jews revolted.  The Jews were not the first or last to do so.
 
“What do you think happened to the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel?”
 
I don’t give a shit.
 
“Did not God send the Hebrews to Palestine”
 
Who fucking cares?
 
 
“God punished Sodom and Gomorrah. What do you think the Flood was?”
 
Fairy tales and horseshit.
 
“God punishes communally as well as individually!  He does both!”
 
That’s a pretty shitty God.
 
“You are not a religious man, it seems, and you are not versed in religious things.”
 
No and I’m a better man for it.  I’m not warped like you.  I have no issues with religious people in general unless they get perverted by their piety.  Like you.
 
“I fear God.”
 
Good for you.  
 
“God is not a respecter of persons. He Judges. All things He uses as his tool. He uses the unrighteous and the Righteous to do His Will when it so occurs.”
 
Wow, that’s truly frightening, that means some warped religious fanatic like you can do shitty things to people and claim you are God’s tool.  Well, Lindsay, you are half right.  You are a tool.
 
“Do you really think that God who is pure Justice, will allow his annoited, A Christian King and his Family go butchered, without calling down Justice?”
 
Oh, you mean the Czar?  Well, considering that Stalin and Lenin gave the order and they are not Jews it seems your “God” has really shitty aim.  Stalin allowed millions to die yet died in his sleep.  How’d that justice working out for you?
 
“The World is not about patty-cake, and all nicety. Hitler was not a righteous man but that doesn't stop God from using all and sundry.”
 
Ah, so Hitler was God’s tool.  So, God decided to break Europe and allow atheist Communisim to take over half....just to punish the Jews?  That’s seriously cutting off your nose to spite your face.
 
 
 
“I'm a religious man.”
 
Very selectively religious....
 
“I fear God. Please don't tell me what isn't and is right. You have no clue.”
 
I know what is right and wrong.  Innocents slaughtered in the name of some warped “Justice” is wrong.
 

 “So don't complain. Those that plan genocide---shall be genocided in return. 
 
You are a repulsive “human being.”

James Travil Added Aug 2, 2018 - 11:34pm
"Fairy tales and horseshit."
That pretty much sums up the Christian "religion" (ie: hate group). I traced the actual identity of their no name false "god" to the ancient demon Moloch. Children burnt to death as sacrifices are the friend's standard game. This is the monster freaks like Lindsay worship and fear. I spit in the face of the demon! 

Recent Articles by Writers Jeffrey Kelly follows.