Isn't it worrying that Germany sees a resurgence of Nazism?

[Astalnar]

That is because the National Socialists only co-opted the term socialism, while in fact being full on corporatists if you look at their economic and social policies.
Similar to the Democratic Party co-opting the term democracy, while in fact being corporate-oligarchs.

These are taken from the Munich Manifesto in 1920. 11 out of 25 points are clearly socialist in nature. There are some that play on both nationalistic and socialistic tendencies, so I did not include them. I wouldn't call that co-opting socialism. To me it seems, socialism played quite a central role in the program of NSDAP.

9. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.
11. Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of debt (interest)-slavery.
12. In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
13. We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).
14. We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
15. We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.
16. We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.
17. We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on land and prevention of all speculation in land.
20. The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program, to enable every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education and subsequently introduction into leading positions. The plans of instruction of all educational institutions are to conform with the experiences of practical life. The comprehension of the concept of the State must be striven for by the school [Staatsbürgerkunde] as early as the beginning of understanding. We demand the education at the expense of the State of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without consideration of position or profession.
21. The State is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, by the encouragement of physical fitness, by means of the legal establishment of a gymnastic and sport obligation, by the utmost support of all organizations concerned with the physical instruction of the young.
25. For the execution of all of this we demand the formation of a strong central power in the Reich. Unlimited authority of the central parliament over the whole Reich and its organizations in general. The forming of state and profession chambers for the execution of the laws made by the Reich within the various states of the confederation. The leaders of the Party promise, if necessary by sacrificing their own lives, to support by the execution of the points set forth above without consideration.

[josykay]

You do realize, that even in 1920 points 11, 12 and 16, 17 are antisemitic dogwistles?
Also literally no german owned company was natonalized. Thyssen, Krupp and others would remain in private hands, and so did their profit.

Article 17 was even litterally amended, to specificly talk about jewish land sepculation.


Aside of the 25 point program being defacto meaningless, the Nazis also purged out every "socialist" tendency in the late 20s and murdered their supporters like Strasser.

[Ihavewaffles]

The problem is that in some states a quarter of people vote for a party that pretends to be normal but has racist shit like "immigrants are not only unwilling but actually unable to integrate" in their platform.

Uhm, Merkel said integration has failed, is she a nazi too?

[Felya]

These are taken from the Munich Manifesto in 1920. 11 out of 25 points are clearly socialist in nature. There are some that play on both nationalistic and socialistic tendencies, so I did not include them. I wouldn't call that co-opting socialism. To me it seems, socialism played quite a central role in the program of NSDAP.

Might because Beer Hall Putsch didn’t happen until 1923...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation...ialist_Program

To [Hitler, the program] was little more than an effective, persuasive propaganda weapon for mobilizing and manipulating the masses. Once it had brought him to power, it became pure decoration: 'unalterable', yet unrealized in its demands for nationalization and expropriation, for land reform and 'breaking the shackles of finance capital'. Yet it nonetheless fulfilled its role as backdrop and pseudo-theory, against which the future dictator could unfold his rhetorical and dramatic talents.

Success?

[Endus]

These are taken from the Munich Manifesto in 1920. 11 out of 25 points are clearly socialist in nature. There are some that play on both nationalistic and socialistic tendencies, so I did not include them. I wouldn't call that co-opting socialism. To me it seems, socialism played quite a central role in the program of NSDAP.

"The Nazis were socialist! They said so! And the Nazis would never lie, right? If you can't trust Nazis, who can you trust?"

Next: Why North Korea is the perfect example of what democracy looks like, right?

Be more critically aware of what you're reading, and stop pushing Nazi propaganda as if it were truth. I really have to wonder where the hell you people are getting this information from.

[Adam Jensen]

Germany doesn't have any real army, nor a giant mass of demobilized soldiers. It's not really likely Germany will go three for three on world wars.

Then again, you know the old saying.

Third time's a charm.

[Felya]

Be more critically aware of what you're reading, and stop pushing Nazi propaganda as if it were truth.

You don’t think people linking nazi propaganda, 100 years after it was written, cool? It’s solid fucking work... a 100 years later... people still push it...

[Endus]

You don’t think people linking nazi propaganda, 100 years after it was written, cool? It’s solid fucking work... a 100 years later... people still push it...

Particularly if they're American. It bears pointing out, I suppose, that one of Hitler's inspirations for how he built the Third Reich was, explicitly, as detailed in Mein Kampf, the USA. He saw their institutional racism as a model to copy from. It really shouldn't be surprising that Hitler's views, in turn, found fertile ground in the USA.

[Astalnar]

"The Nazis were socialist! They said so! And the Nazis would never lie, right? If you can't trust Nazis, who can you trust?"

Next: Why North Korea is the perfect example of what democracy looks like, right?

Be more critically aware of what you're reading, and stop pushing Nazi propaganda as if it were truth. I really have to wonder where the hell you people are getting this information from.

What exactly is your argument here? Members of The National Socialist German Workers' Party lied to the public about being National Socialists, and were in truth just what? Seriously, the party that was in existence for more than two decades managed to convince large enough number of voters to support their program, telling them they are National Socialists doing things National Socialists would do, but it was all a ruse? Even better, the party who lied all these years about being National Socialistic was the one who formed the government. They must've been some of the better liars in the human history.

Do explain, why would they lie about being National Socialists, but be completely honest about what they think of the Jews.

What National Socialist propaganda am I pushing?

I don't know what information you're talking about, and I don't know on who this "you people" refers to.

"Be more critically aware of what you're reading." That's a good advice, why don't you actually listen to yourself for once.

[Felya]

What exactly is your argument here? Members of The National Socialist German Workers' Party lied to the public about being National Socialists, and were in truth just what? Seriously, the party that was in existence for more than two decades managed to convince large enough number of voters to support their program, telling them they are National Socialists doing things National Socialists would do, but it was all a ruse? Even better, the party who lied all these years about being National Socialistic was the one who formed the government. They must've been some of the better liars in the human history.

Yes, they were even able to convince people that killing millions of Jews was justified... pardon if pretending to be socialist, is easy to believe. Maybe look at the US and how a billionaire is a working class hero to millions? It’s not that hard... (that’s what she said)

Do explain, why would they lie about being National Socialists, but be completely honest about what they think of the Jews.

How were they honest about Jews? It was the same populist lie... The same populism that convinced people that Jews were the enemy, used socialism to portray their populism. In case you haven’t picked up on it... socialism is actually a populist concept.

What National Socialist propaganda am I pushing?

Literally the one Nazi wrote in 1920... you referenced it to justify your argument above.

I don't know what information you're talking about, and I don't know on who this "you people" refers to.

"Be more critically aware of what you're reading." That's a good advice, why don't you actually listen to yourself for once.

Uhm... By “you people”, he means people unwittingly spreading Nazi propaganda.

[Endus]

What exactly is your argument here? Members of The National Socialist German Workers' Party lied to the public about being National Socialists, and were in truth just what?

Fascist corporate capitalists, for the most part. They were mostly perfectly content to support and protect private ownership of factories, and only nationalized them if there was a question of loyalty; that was political, rather than economic principle. At least, once Hitler had control of the party; there were some true socialist leanings before that, but Hitler deliberately removed that from the Nazi Party. By killing them, if necessary. Seriously, look up the Night of the Long Knives. Read Niemoller's famous poem, which starts with "First, they came for the socialists".

Yes, they lied. Obviously. You're literally pushing Nazi propaganda, here.

What National Socialist propaganda am I pushing?

The idea that they were in any way socialist.

That was propaganda. It was not true. It was obviously not true, looking back at what they did.

[Astalnar]

Fascist corporate capitalists, for the most part. They were mostly perfectly content to support and protect private ownership of factories, and only nationalized them if there was a question of loyalty; that was political, rather than economic principle. At least, once Hitler had control of the party; there were some true socialist leanings before that, but Hitler deliberately removed that from the Nazi Party. By killing them, if necessary. Seriously, look up the Night of the Long Knives. Read Niemoller's famous poem, which starts with "First, they came for the socialists".

Yes, they lied. Obviously. You're literally pushing Nazi propaganda, here.

The idea that they were in any way socialist.

That was propaganda. It was not true. It was obviously not true, looking back at what they did.

"His [Hitler's] differences with the communists, he explained, were less ideological than tactical. German communists he had known before he took power, he told Rauschning, thought politics meant talking and writing. They were mere pamphleteers, whereas "I have put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun", adding revealingly that "the whole of National Socialism" was based on Marx."

"Without race, he went on, National Socialism "would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground". Marxism was internationalist. The proletariat, as the famous slogan goes, has no fatherland. Hitler had a fatherland, and it was everything to him."

"Now that the age of individualism had ended, he told Wagener, the task was to "find and travel the road from individualism to socialism without revolution". Marx and Lenin had seen the right goal, but chosen the wrong route - a long and needlessly painful route - and, in destroying the bourgeois and the kulak, Lenin had turned Russia into a grey mass of undifferentiated humanity, a vast anonymous horde of the dispossessed; they had "averaged downwards"; whereas the National Socialist state would raise living standards higher than capitalism had ever known. It is plain that Hitler and his associates meant their claim to socialism to be taken seriously; they took it seriously themselves."

"For half a century, none the less, Hitler has been portrayed, if not as a conservative - the word is many shades too pale - at least as an extreme instance of the political right. It is doubtful if he or his friends would have recognised the description. His own thoughts gave no prominence to left and right, and he is unlikely to have seen much point in any linear theory of politics."

"But there were still, in Marx's view, races that would have to be exterminated. That is a view he published in January-February 1849 in an article by Engels called "The Hungarian Struggle" in Marx's journal the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, and the point was recalled by socialists down to the rise of Hitler. It is now becoming possible to believe that Auschwitz was socialist-inspired. The Marxist theory of history required and demanded genocide for reasons implicit in its claim that feudalism was already giving place to capitalism, which must in its turn be superseded by socialism. Entire races would be left behind after a workers' revolution, feudal remnants in a socialist age; and since they could not advance two steps at a time, they would have to be killed. They were racial trash, as Engels called them, and fit only for the dung-heap of history."

"That brutal view, [...] was by the last years of the century a familiar part of the socialist tradition, though it is understandable that since the liberation of Auschwitz in January 1945 socialists have been eager to forget it. [...] The idea of ethnic cleansing was orthodox socialism for a century and more."

"The claim that Hitler cannot really have been a socialist because he advocated and practised genocide suggests a monumental failure, then, in the historical memory. Only socialists in that age advocated or practised genocide, at least in Europe, and from the first years of his political career Hitler was proudly aware of the fact. Addressing his own party, the NSDAP, in Munich in August 1920, he pledged his faith in socialist-racialism: "If we are socialists, then we must definitely be anti-semites - and the opposite, in that case, is Materialism and Mammonism, which we seek to oppose." There was loud applause. Hitler went on: "How, as a socialist, can you not be an anti-semite?" The point was widely understood, and it is notable that no German socialist in the 1930s or earlier ever sought to deny Hitler's right to call himself a socialist on grounds of racial policy. In an age when the socialist tradition of genocide was familiar, that would have sounded merely absurd. The tradition, what is more, was unique. In the European century that began in the 1840s from Engels's article of 1849 down to the death of Hitler, everyone who advocated genocide called himself a socialist, and no exception has been found."

"The Jew, Hitler told Wagener, was not a socialist, and the Jesus they crucified was the true creator of socialist redemption. As for communists, he opposed them because they created mere herds, Soviet-style, without individual life, and his own ideal was "the socialism of nations" rather than the international socialism of Marx and Lenin. The one and only problem of the age, he told Wagener, was to liberate labour and replace the rule of capital over labour with the rule of labour over capital."

"These are highly socialist sentiments, and if Wagener reports his master faithfully they leave no doubt about the conclusion: that Hitler was an unorthodox Marxist who knew his sources and knew just how unorthodox the way in which he handled them was. He was a dissident socialist."

"On 16 June 1941, five days before Hitler attacked the Soviet Union, Goebbels exulted, in the privacy of his diary, in the victory over Bolshevism that he believed would quickly follow. There would be no restoration of the tsars, he remarked to himself, after Russia had been conquered. But Jewish Bolshevism would be uprooted in Russia and "real socialism" planted in its place - "Der echte Sozialismus". Goebbels was a liar, to be sure, but no one can explain why he would lie to his diaries. And to the end of his days he believed that socialism was what National Socialism was about."

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...m-1186455.html

Please, stop embarassing yourself. Educate yourself first. These are just excerpts, but I do recommend reading the whole article. And what do you know, it comes from Independent, a leftist source of information.

[wunksta]

""The claim that Hitler cannot really have been a socialist because he advocated and practised genocide"

No, it's based on the fact that Hitler sided with technocrats and rich elites.

One of the key topics that highlighted differences within the party was what should be done to the homes and estates of those from noble “princely” background. The more radical northern representatives believed that the estates should be expropriated and put to the greater use of the many. Hitler made a two-hour speech in which he stated where he stood: that expropriation of the estates would push the party along the road of communism and that he could not tolerate anything that would help “communist-inspired movements”.

https://www.historylearningsite.co.u...rence-of-1926/

The Labour Front (DAF)
This was a Nazi organisation that replaced trade unions, which were banned. It set wages and nearly always followed the wishes of employers, rather than employees.

The living standards of German workers in the non-armaments industries did not really improve under the Nazis. From 1933 to 1939:

wages fell
the number of hours worked rose by 15 per cent
serious accidents in factories increased
workers could be blacklisted by employers for questioning their working conditions

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guide...7p3/revision/3

In a 1923 interview with pro-Nazi writer George Sylvester Viereck, Hitler said, “In my scheme of the German state, there will be no room for the alien, no use for the wastrel, for the usurer or speculator, or anyone incapable of productive work.”

In Hitler’s version of National Socialism, socialism was “Aryan” and focused on the “commonwealth” of everyday Germans — a group of people he unites as one based entirely on their race.

https://www.vox.com/2019/3/27/182838...brooks-gohmert

[Endus]

Please, stop embarassing yourself. Educate yourself first. These are just excerpts, but I do recommend reading the whole article. And what do you know, it comes from Independent, a leftist source of information.

Because one controversial book by a single author contradicts the entire body of historical analysis?

That's not how anything works.

I'll just quote directly from Hitler himself;

Socialism is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists. Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic. We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national.
Interview, 1923

'Socialist' I define from the word 'social; meaning in the main ‘social equity’. A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency. Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true socialism is not.
Speech, December 28 1938

The man was deliberately redefining the word for his own use. The idea that Nazism has anything to do with left-wing values is ahistorical horse shit.

[Narwhalosh Whalescream]

There would be no restoration of the tsars, he remarked to himself, after Russia had been conquered. But Jewish Bolshevism would be uprooted in Russia and "real socialism" planted in its place - "Der echte Sozialismus". Goebbels was a liar, to be sure, but no one can explain why he would lie to his diaries. And to the end of his days he believed that socialism was what National Socialism was about."

Generalplan ost is socialism now? The partial eradication and subjugation of all east slavic peoples?

[Dezerte]

These are taken from the Munich Manifesto in 1920. 11 out of 25 points are clearly socialist in nature. There are some that play on both nationalistic and socialistic tendencies, so I did not include them. I wouldn't call that co-opting socialism. To me it seems, socialism played quite a central role in the program of NSDAP.

To Hitler, the program was little more than an effective, persuasive propaganda weapon for mobilizing and manipulating the masses. Once it had brought him to power, it became pure decoration: 'unalterable', yet unrealized in its demands for nationalization and expropriation, for land reform and 'breaking the shackles of finance capital'. Yet it nonetheless fulfilled its role as backdrop and pseudo-theory, against which the future dictator could unfold his rhetorical and dramatic talents

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation...ialist_Program

[Astalnar]

Because one controversial book by a single author contradicts the entire body of historical analysis?

That's not how anything works.

I'll just quote directly from Hitler himself;

Socialism is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists. Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic. We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national.
Interview, 1923

'Socialist' I define from the word 'social; meaning in the main ‘social equity’. A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency. Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true socialism is not.
Speech, December 28 1938

The man was deliberately redefining the word for his own use. The idea that Nazism has anything to do with left-wing values is ahistorical horse shit.

Save the "not the real socialism™" horseshit for someone who cares.

You can play moving of the goalposts with someone else. You said National Socialists lied and decieved about being Socialists, now you're claiming they weren't the real socialists, as they tried to redefine the term.

[Elegiac]

Save the "not the real socialism™" horseshit for someone who cares.

You can play moving of the goalposts with someone else. You said National Socialists lied and decieved about being Socialists, now you're claiming they weren't the real socialists, as they tried to redefine the term.

...Those aren't mutually exclusive arguments? Lol.

[Slant]

Ah so marginalizing of people who don´t think the same way you think is it then.

Hm where have i heared that before, you might have to help me her Endus, i think i distantly can remember some people doing that with great enthusiasm before, just where and when might that have happened i wonder?

But nice double standart there, it´s ok as long as they have the same opinion as me, but fuck them over as soon as they say something i don´t like.

And yeah i know you now will say they´re nazis and don´t deserve the same decency as everyone else but as far as i know they have the same rights and somehow that isn´t ok with othe rpeople.

Did you just normalize Nazi ideology? I think you did.

Nazi ideology is not an acceptable stance. It is not protected by free speech. Get that into your head. Nazi ideology is not a socialist reform program to improve society. It is largely about the displacement of other ethnicities, eradicating Jews, creating new living space for the Germanic race.

You do not get to whinge about people like Endus not tolerating Nazi ideology. The extreme form of American "free speech" that people seem to think exists, it doesn't. It only exists in the heads of internet warriors and US politicians that don't care enough to raise a fuss over a few hundred neo-nazis in the US. Nazi ideology is inherently unconstitutional in any of the Western democracies.

There is no double standard. And I'm not afraid to point that out and have a deep dive into it if you think you have the historic knowledge to back your schoolyard logic up. It's not that Nazis don't have the right to free speech. It's that they don't have the right to "free speech" nazi ideology. And when you watch them do shit, you'll notice that they often walk a very fine line of what is acceptable to say and what isn't.

And what's most important: People like you do not get to pretend that nazi ideology is normal and should be accepted as normal. Free speech does not mean consequence free speech. If you start spreading nazi ideology here or normalize it as a valid opinion to have, people like Endus and me will come along and set you straight. Because it is not an acceptable social position to be a nazi. It needs to get isolated, excluded and shunned. And there is not a single damn thing any of the Governments can do about it. Because that is how free speech actually works.

- - - Updated - - -

Uhm, Merkel said integration has failed, is she a nazi too?

That's not what she said. She said the idea of waiting for integration to happen all by itself has failed. She has made examples of integration that worked wonderfully. Heck, one of them helped Germany win the world cup in 2014. The point she was making was that integration into the host country needs to be enforced more strongly, you can't just let people in and pretend they'll become integrated by passively absorbing German air.

- - - Updated - - -

Because one controversial book by a single author contradicts the entire body of historical analysis?

That's not how anything works.

I'll just quote directly from Hitler himself;

Socialism is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists. Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic. We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national.
Interview, 1923

'Socialist' I define from the word 'social; meaning in the main ‘social equity’. A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency. Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true socialism is not.
Speech, December 28 1938

The man was deliberately redefining the word for his own use. The idea that Nazism has anything to do with left-wing values is ahistorical horse shit.

Well done. Mind if I use that argument, nevermind, I'm going to anyway, that is just beautiful.

- - - Updated - - -

Save the "not the real socialism™" horseshit for someone who cares.

You can play moving of the goalposts with someone else. You said National Socialists lied and decieved about being Socialists, now you're claiming they weren't the real socialists, as they tried to redefine the term.

It's a direct quote, man. You do not get to ignore it. You lost and it is you who embarassed himself.

[zealo]

These are taken from the Munich Manifesto in 1920. 11 out of 25 points are clearly socialist in nature. There are some that play on both nationalistic and socialistic tendencies, so I did not include them. I wouldn't call that co-opting socialism. To me it seems, socialism played quite a central role in the program of NSDAP.

Uncritically quoting the NSDAP party program, rather than examining their actual historical actions, is a load of horseshit.

That does not fly as a legitimate source on the actual ideology of the nazi party as it unfolded in the roughly two and a half decades of their existence.