Hitler was a socialist?

Hitler was a socialist? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

NorthernGent -> Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 2:24:39 AM)
Spotted yet again on another thread. Perhaps it can be resolved once and for all. Cutting a long story short: At their core, Hitler and the Nazis believed the world was a battle for survival; the battle lines were drawn on the grounds of blood/race. On one side you had the Germanic peoples; on the other side you had the Slavs. Now, the Jews were deemed to be the enemy within so had to be removed to maintain the strength of the Germanic peoples for the forthcoming battle for survival. You would have to come up with a conjuring trick of which Houdini would be proud to equate this to Socialism. Furthermore, Hitler was backed by conservatives, rather than socialists; these conservatives being the conservative elite: big business, the military, the aristocracy. Now, this elite despised Hitler; they thought he was an uncouth, little Austrian not fit to tie their shoe-laces. Yet they backed him for one reason: he could help them smash Socialism and maintain their position as the elite, which, of course, he did (in the short term).

meatcleaver -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 2:40:02 AM)
The irony is, Hitler rose out of the most democratic systems the world has ever seen. The Weimar was more democratic than present day modern democracies and in this lay the danger. With the victors of WWI, especially France, making demands of reparations on Germany and causing the currency to go into meltdown, people were actually prepared to vote in real change through tjhe ballot box. This is where the political shananigans of the right came in, to appoint Hitler as Chancelor with the idea of replacing him with their own man. Unfortunately Hitler and his national socialist party were one step ahead of the game. Someone burnt the Reichstag down, (no one knows by who but who gained?),a stooge was found for doing it and executed, Hitler brought in security laws ( a sort of 1930s Patriot Act) and within 24 hours the country was secure.

LadyEllen -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 3:01:39 AM)
Hitler was not a socialist, he was a national socialist. Am obvious statement perhaps, but since to try to explain it would make anyone seem like an apologist for what is an utterly discredited political form and for what arose out of the particularly nuanced form of socialism that the qualifier "national" indicates, that's probably about as good as its going to get with this discussion. E

NorthernGent -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 3:21:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen Hitler was not a socialist, he was a national socialist. A self-proclaimed description means absolutely nothing where actions are not aligned with the label. For example, Hitler and the Nazis railed against Bolshevism; they believed Bolshevism to be the ideological enemy and German propaganda of the day was filled with the "evil" of Bolshevism. It's fair to say Socialism and Communism are related. Furthermore, socialist was included in the party name for one very good reason: they wanted to appear to be all things to all people, so they concocted this utterly meaningless label.

seeksfemslave -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 3:51:18 AM)
Hitler's economic policy did include features that might be called Socialist. He directed labour. eg he tried to remove wimmen from the active economy. He decided on what businesses may produce. He instigated massive public works programmes. He tried to promote employment by directing that labour intensive works would get government support. Had he concentrated on freeing Germany from the shackles imposed by the Versailles Treaty, had he not had his pathological hatred of Jews/Communism and had he not planned his policy of European/Eastern Russia domination he quite possibly would be remembered as one of the greatest leaders of all time. As it is he was IMO a remarkable tho' wicked man.

meatcleaver -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 3:54:49 AM)
Seeks, the USA and just about every European country had similar policies as they tried to get out of the depression. Was the FDR Hitler's brother?

LadyEllen -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 4:00:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent A self-proclaimed description means absolutely nothing where actions are not aligned with the label. then we're onto a loser from the start Communism is meaningless, since the communists murdered millions they thought to be not equal Capitalism is meaningless, since even the most capitalist societies have socialist programmes at work within them etc E

NorthernGent -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 4:03:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave Hitler's economic policy did include features that might be called Socialist. You could pick any government in the modern period and point to features that could be called in socialist in nature. You have to look at the man and his values. He believed in racial theories of supremacy. He wanted to steal land from Eastern Europe in order to recreate some Holy Roman Empire, which would consist of Germans farming the land (a worldly-view wrapped up in conservative romanticism; Socialism at that time was the preserve of the cities). He may have had a policy here and there.....and he may have included the word socialist in the title........but the man was at the extreme right of Conservatism.

NorthernGent -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 4:11:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen then we're onto a loser from the start We're not, and I'm sure you realise this. Look at the man, the values to which he ascribed and then acted accordingly. What tends to define Hitler: 1) The Holocaust - borne of his notions of racial war. 2) Anti-Bolshevism - borne of his fascist notions of 'strength in discipline'. 3) Militaristic tendancies - borne out of his conservate romanticism that Germanic peoples will farm stolen land, as per the days of the Holy Roman Empire (supported by fascist notions of the strong nation). The rest is small details, by comparison.

seeksfemslave -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 4:24:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Seeks, the USA and just about every European country had similar policies as they tried to get out of the depression. This is only true after orthodox right wing policies: balance budgets, drive down wages, maintain the value of the currency, introduce tariff protection had been tried and made things worse. Pragmatism ruled. I agree it should . I am not a doctrinaire idealogue.

seeksfemslave -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 4:31:56 AM)
quote: NorthernGent .....but Hitler was at the extreme right of Conservatism. IMO you are muddling up his economic views with his pathological socio political views. No right wing conservative would try to implement state direction of any industry. Witness today the right wing Republicans that voted against the bailout package. By the way he also imposed state control of the arts. Is that conservative? I dont think so.

NorthernGent -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 4:45:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave IMO you are muddling up his economic views with his pathological socio political views. Can you explain this one, Seeks, because I'm struggling with it. quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave No right wing conservative would try to implement state direction of any industry. Seeks, there is such a thing as conservative authoritarians; the two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, take a look 'round this board and you'll see you're swamped in both conservative and liberal authoritarians. Also, the order of the day was Prussian Authoritarianism. By and large, along with big business, they were the elites; and they were by no means overly concerned with hearing the voice of the average man on the street. quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave Witness today the right wing Republicans that voted against the bailout package. By the way he also imposed state control of the arts. Is that conservative? I dont think so. What are you saying here, Seeks? Conservatives don't want the government in their lives? What about the call for a strong defence and the vast sums of money poured into it? What about the call for government to back their views on abortion, capital punishment, tough on law and order etc..........tax and spend is a question of whom you tax and where you spend it, rather than some misty-eyed notion that liberals want the government to save them and conservatives yearn to be free.

rexrgisformidoni -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 7:21:42 AM)
Hitler was insane. That's what he was. and there is an incredible book about Nazi economics written shortly after ww2 from the archives called Leviathan. It explains a lot about the command economy of Nazi Germany.

MichiganHeadmast -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 7:40:51 AM)
He subordinated the individual to the collective. Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Castro, Chavez, Ceausescu, Kim (senior and junior), Mao. All peas in a pod. All murderous.

NorthernGent -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 7:52:16 AM)
The 'rule of law' subordinates the individual to the collective. Yeah, they're all murderous, but this doesn't get us very far in terms of the OP.

Alumbrado -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 7:52:55 AM)
Leading an organization espousing socialism in one form or anothe, tends to catalogue one as a socialist. Socialism is an economic concept, in its various guises, including National Socialism (which was neither coined, nor formed by Hitler). The common and defining features are removing any current non-socialist government, nationalizing industry and property, and paying lip-service to the workers in order to gain power. On every count, the Nazis walked like socialists, talked like socialists, and looked like socialists. The fact that other socialist groups allied themselves with a select few liberal ideologies does not mean that the German anti-liberal platform excludes them from being 'Twue' socialists.... they just weren't stereotypical socialists. And pointing out that Hitler was not personally faithful to every tenet of idealized Twue liberal socialism falls rather flat when one looks at the lifestyles and actions of Mao, Castro, et al. compared to the beliefs of their rank and file. Nut cases corrupted by power with a few clever ideas to upset the apple cart are not an uncommon occurence in the history of the world, and that is really the 'ism' that Hitler should be identified with.

meatcleaver -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 7:57:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MichiganHeadmast He subordinated the individual to the collective. Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Castro, Chavez, Ceausescu, Kim (senior and junior), Mao. All peas in a pod. All murderous. What do you think capitalism does? There have been enough studies of the role of corporations and their behaviour which if they were individuals they would be classed as psychopathic. Read The Corporation by Ray Anderson for a glimpse into this idea. The result of this means is that democratic politicians control people by proxy and keep themselves at a distance from the exploitation and societal and economic control capitalism has in the west. You may say that corporations don't go round murdering and enslaving people. I agree, in the west they don't but in the underdeveloped world they do and they have the backing of western democratic governments to do so. Its easy to add Chavez and Castro in with that mix, both were a reaction to the abuses by international capitalism and the psychopathic tendency of western democratic politicians (in this particular case American) to control people beyond their borders. Remember, the USA has had its own genocide, one doesn't need an obvious psychopath in charge to commit atrocities, one just needs a population that looks the other way.

meatcleaver -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 8:02:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado Leading an organization espousing socialism in one form or anothe, tends to catalogue one as a socialist. Socialism is an economic concept, in its various guises, including National Socialism (which was neither coined, nor formed by Hitler). The common and defining features are removing any current non-socialist government, nationalizing industry and property, and paying lip-service to the workers in order to gain power. On every count, the Nazis walked like socialists, talked like socialists, and looked like socialists. The fact that other socialist groups allied themselves with a select few liberal ideologies does not mean that the German anti-liberal platform excludes them from being 'Twue' socialists.... they just weren't stereotypical socialists. And pointing out that Hitler was not personally faithful to every tenet of idealized Twue liberal socialism falls rather flat when one looks at the lifestyles and actions of Mao, Castro, et al. compared to the beliefs of their rank and file. Nut cases corrupted by power with a few clever ideas to upset the apple cart are not an uncommon occurence in the history of the world, and that is really the 'ism' that Hitler should be identified with. You don't know what you are talking about. According to your analysis the USA is the most fascist country in the world, maybe it is. It has the largest military, it has more troops based in more countries than any other country. It has caused more deaths than probably any other country these last few years and it has just nationalized most of its banking system. Hitler was able to gain power by a unique set of circumstances which you obviously don't understand which had nothing to do with any economic ideology.

slaveboy291 -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 8:19:56 AM)
People do go by labels largely National Socialist German Workers party and plus the belief by many I hesitate to say conservatives since most seem to think supporting Bush and supporting Iraq makes them a conservative are the one who who say this and believe that anything to the left is undemocratic and that the right promotes democracy so they tend to lump the Naziism, Socialism and Communism together. Also other factors like the Nazi's controlling industry and bringing in public health care(a big if innacurate argument many use against universal health "you wanna be like the Nazi's") the fact that the Nazi's were one of the first to discover the dangers of smoking, Hitler apparently being a vegetarian etc etc etc. Of course they conveniently leave out the fact about the Depression, as well as the consequences the Germany's economy by war reparitions when figuring these in(the website Hitlerwasasocialist even said that Germany was in a boom when the Nazi's came to office) and that some issues, like cancer for example which the aforementioned tried to turn from a health issue into a political issue have nothing to do with left or right and that plenty of right-wing goverments have brought in what would be deemed leftist ideas(for example, here in Ontario the Conservatives brought in public Hydro) The claim that Hitler and the Nazi's were socialists is the result of political and historical ignorence and an attempt to demonize the other side.

NorthernGent -> RE: Hitler was a socialist? (10/8/2008 8:34:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado Leading an organization espousing socialism in one form or anothe, tends to catalogue one as a socialist. Socialism is an economic concept, in its various guises, including National Socialism (which was neither coined, nor formed by Hitler). The common and defining features are removing any current non-socialist government, nationalizing industry and property, and paying lip-service to the workers in order to gain power. There have certainly been right-wing coups throughout history, so that would discount one of your defining features; 'paying lip-service to the workers in order to gain power' is lacking in detail; as for nationalising industry, well, all authoritarian regimes subordinate industry to the state. Socialism is far more than an economic concept. It encompasses society and culture, too. For example, Socialism is concerned with class rather than nationality, whereas Fascism is rife with cultural Nationalism (witness Hitler's ideas surrounding 'volk') and the rebirth of the nation; that is primarily where the line is drawn. Both right and left wing authoritarian regimes will grab and maintain power through force, neither allows for a right of appeal as state authority is absolute; crucially though, one organises itself along lines of class, the other on lines of nationality. quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado talked like socialists This is an earlier post of mine. Look at the man, the values to which he ascribed and then acted accordingly. What tends to define Hitler: 1) The Holocaust - borne of his notions of racial war. 2) Anti-Bolshevism - borne of his fascist notions of 'strength in discipline'. 3) Militaristic tendancies - borne out of his conservate romanticism that Germanic peoples will farm stolen land, as per the days of the Holy Roman Empire (supported by fascist notions of the strong nation). The rest is small details, by comparison. quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado The fact that other socialist groups allied themselves with a select few liberal ideologies does not mean that the German anti-liberal platform excludes them from being 'Twue' socialists.... they just weren't stereotypical socialists. Weren't you talking of common and defining features to make your point? Which is it? Common and defining, or not stereotypical? Anyway, I'm unsure as to the point you're making here (and its relevance). quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado And pointing out that Hitler was not personally faithful to every tenet of idealized Twue liberal socialism falls rather flat when one looks at the lifestyles and actions of Mao, Castro, et al. compared to the beliefs of their rank and file. That's not the point being made, Alumbrado. The point being made is that his core values placed him around the extreme fringes of Conservatism - see earlier posts for an explanation. P.S You should lose the reference to "Twue" in a discussion - it's really not doing you any justice, whatsoever.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125