Posted on 11/13/2014 6:44:41 PM PST by The_Harlequin
Using the Nazi analogy to discredit political opponents is a popular game that seems to work best as a substitute for honest criticism. Although such comparisons usually do little more than expose ones ignorance of the actual history of the Third Reich, it doesnt mean that valid comparisons dont exist. Within the right context, similarities can be drawn, Godwin's Law be damned.
Actually, theres only one good reason why the subject should ever be brought up in the first place. Nazi Germany was a fundamental transformation of a parliamentary democracy that became a one party dictatorship. Just as important, it was done within the governments legal framework and with a popular mandate from the people. That factor alone makes it a relevant example of a government gone wronga compelling schematic and a warning for citizens concerned about the future of their own respective countries.
Consider the following: (1) The rise and fall of Nazi Germany is an important page in world history thats relatively recent; (2) It took place in a Western European country with a democratic parliamentary government, not too far removed from other democracies of its time; (3) In spite of the fact that Germany had free elections with a duly elected and functioning legislature, the country ended up in the hands of criminals.
Heres an intellectual exercise Ive used to help me develop my political perception of ongoing events. You can try it too:
Imagine youre a German citizen sometime after WWI but before any members of the Nazi party were elected to Parliament. At what point might you have come to the realization that your country was headed for catastrophe?
This is admittedly a flawed exercise, as we cant really duplicate the thoughts and feelings of a German population that had to endure a military surrender followed by the severe provisions of the Treaty of Versailles. And it would be difficult to imagine the hardships brought on by the worldwide Great Depression that was in many ways more acutely felt in Germany. Nevertheless, we can at least try to derive some understanding of how governments go bad, and why the citizens allow it to happen.
As a German citizen, you would have been way ahead of the curve if youd started getting concerned about your country in 1929. The Nazis were a well recognized political party with elected members in Parliament. Joseph Goebbels, in charge of propaganda, staged the first truly grand-scale Nazi Party rally featuring blaring Wagnerian overtures, goose-step marches, and torchlight processions. From 1924 to 1929 they increased their Parliament numbers from 12 to 107. The Nazis were an up and coming German political party experiencing support at the ballot box. Would that have been something that you would have considered cause for alarm?
Perhaps by 1932 you might have wondered what was fueling the increasing popularity of the Nazi Party. In February, Hitler decided to run for president against Hindenburg, getting 30% of the vote. Hindenburg received 49%, failing to get the absolute majority he needed to win. A run-off election would be necessary. By July the Nazi Party became the largest political party in Germany, holding 230 seats, representing 37% of Parliament. As a German citizen, what might you have thought about that?
Imagine how you might have reacted in January 1933 when, in an attempt to keep the Nazi Party in check, President Hindenburg appointed Hitler Chancellor of Germany. At least one man did react. Former General Erich Ludendorff who had once supported Hitler sent a telegram to President Hindenburg regarding his new chancellor:
"By appointing Hitler Chancellor of the Reich you have handed over our sacred German Fatherland to one of the greatest demagogues of all time. I prophesy to you this evil man will plunge our Reich into the abyss and will inflict immeasurable woe on our nation. Future generations will curse you in your grave for this action."
Were these the words of a man with perceptive insight or the rants of a reactionary kook?
Shortly after Hitler was appointed Chancellor, Hindenburg passed the Law for the Protection of People and State giving him the power to arrest leaders and members of the German Communist Party without any approval from Parliament. This in effect allowed the Nazis to force all opposition parties to shut down. By this time the Nazi Party had increased their Parliament seats to 288, representing 44% of the Reichstag. Was this just business-as-usual politics or something more?
Things got much more serious later that year, but did anyone take serious notice? In March 1933 the German parliament passed the Enabling Act as an emergency measure to remedy the distress of the people and the state. It allowed Hitler and his Cabinet to pass laws without parliamentary consent and paved the way towards a one party dictatorship. At this point, what might have been your concerns as a German citizen?
Maybe you might have objected to some of the laws that Hitler passed following the passage of the Enabling Act. The "Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service" specified that all employees not of Aryan descent or opposed to the Nazi Party would be forced to resign. Hitler proclaimed the Nazi Party to be "the only political party in Germany." All others were banned. And he declared that to defend Germany he had the right to act unilaterally as "supreme judge" without resort to courts. Would you have called him a dictator?
If by this time you were not yet convinced that Hitler had gone from Chancellor to absolute ruler, what happened in August may have removed all doubt. The death of President Hindenburg inspired Hitler to issue a decree appropriating to himself the powers of the President, including supreme military command. The decree was illegal but it wasnt challenged. By any definition of the word, Hitler had become dictator of Germany, and was from then on called the Fuhrer.
OK, so Hitler was Fuhrer of the Third Reich. Was that such a bad thing? A referendum was held the same month which asked the public if they approved of Hitlers powers. Ninety percent said yes. Unfortunately by this time German citizens were powerless to oppose Hitler even if theyd wanted to. Loyalty oaths had become mandatory for all public officials and dissent of any kind was vigorously shut down by the Gestapo.
With virtually no political opposition, Hitler took his first steps towards world domination. In February 1938, Germany annexed Austria. In March 1939, Germany occupied Czechoslovakia, and six months later invaded Poland. Military invasions of Denmark, Norway, Belgium and Holland would follow in the Spring of 1940. These were good times in the eyes of many Germans. Would you have perceived something otherwise?
From this point on, everyone knows how the story goes and how it ends. Although there were Germans who were no doubt having second thoughts by this time, there would be no turning back. It had gotten far too late to prevent Germanys eventual destruction. And therein lies the lesson of Nazi Germany.
Totalitarian nations, dictatorships, and police states dont happen overnight. They start out as supposedly good ideas with support from the citizenry. In fact history shows that in the beginning, despots and tyrants are viewed as heroic protectors, benevolent rulers, welcomed with fanfare and open arms, perceived as champions of the people. But eventually average citizens wake up amidst chaos and decay, look around, and ask in bewilderment, Wha hoppin? Of course by that time, its usually too late to do anything about it.
Theres also a lesson to be learned about tyrants and their legions of fanatic followers: Some people never learn no matter how bad it gets. Blind loyalty is not a faculty of reason. In 1945, as Russian troops surrounded Berlin, Hitler's approval ratings were probably still somewhere above zero. The true believers who empower tyrants usually hold on to their illusions all the way to the grave.
Theres one last lesson to remember. The inhuman atrocities committed by the Nazis occurred relatively late on their timeline. By the time the Nazis were resorting to torture, mass murder and military aggression, theyd been established for at least a decade. If rampant brutality is your only gauge for recognizing a dangerous regime, youve missed a few red flags along the way. And worse, youve waited too long to stop it.
Nazis were, are and will always be leftists.
All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.
— Benito Mussolini
Fascism
Not all fascists were Nazis, but all Nazis were fascists. Liberal Democrats are also fascists.
And the only ones that got close to killing Hitler were the evil monarchist sympathizing Wehrmacht officers, much to the dismay of socialists everywhere in Europe.
It’s interesting reading from the perspective outlined at the beginning.
The author’s point and was not stated; substitute Obastard for Hitler and the parallels are striking. It’s just that Obola isn’t as (smart or ruthless?) as Hitler. He certainly was/is well on his way to creating a one party state.
Outstanding insight into the genesis of a Dictatorship.
was this an excerpt?
It should include all of the things they proposed and did with their power. Like creating a state-run welfare system...
Terrific article!!!
Should be required reading!
The only people capable of conquering the English, are the English themselves...And they’ve done it.
Consequently we demand:
11. Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of rent-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 nationalization 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.
18. We demand struggle without consideration against those whose activity is injurious to the general interest. Common national criminals, usurers, Schieber and so forth are to be punished with death, without consideration of confession or race.
19. We demand substitution of a German common law in place of the Roman Law serving a materialistic world-order.
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 [Staatsbuergerkunde] 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.
22. We demand abolition of the mercenary troops and formation of a national army.
23. We demand legal opposition to known lies and their promulgation through the press. In order to enable the provision of a German press, we demand, that: a. All writers and employees of the newspapers appearing in the German language be members of the race: b. Non-German newspapers be required to have the express permission of the State to be published. They may not be printed in the German language: c. Non-Germans are forbidden by law any financial interest in German publications, or any influence on them, and as punishment for violations the closing of such a publication as well as the immediate expulsion from the Reich of the non-German concerned. Publications which are counter to the general good are to be forbidden. We demand legal prosecution of artistic and literary forms which exert a destructive influence on our national life, and the closure of organizations opposing the above made demands.
24. We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: common utility precedes individual utility.
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.
Whoever has no citizenship is to be able to live in the USA only as a guest, and must be under the authority of legislation for foreigners.
My question, that I always ask of any Leftocrat, is, “What laws do I get to break, since I’m an actual citizen?” Oddly, I’ve never gotten an answer...
Naziism is fascism, a form of socialism. Both are about total government control of the economy; they just use different methods and forms to achieve it.
Traditional socialism simply nationalizes or takes over the means of production. The fascist (Nazi) version of socialism is more subtle. it maintains the fiction of private property, while regulating every aspect of its use, thus completely controlling it, just as much as the traditional socialism does.
Our economy in America today is moving ever and ever closer to a fascist model.
But unlike 1930's Germany millions of us here foresaw what Obama meant. There just weren't enough of us to stop him.
It’s 1400 words and can be read in minutes. Lengthy?
This isn’t Twitter.
And there is no other safe place in the world to move. This is where we must make our stand - perhaps the last stand.
bttt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.