way the original version of their party operated in Germany during the 1930s.
history repeating itself again (& again)....
We (Americans) never learn
Posted on 09/24/2011 7:30:33 PM PDT by decimon
>
The walls were covered with flags, photographs, posters, slogans and emblems. His SA uniforms hung neatly ironed on a hanger…When I said that it must be rather claustrophobic with all that stuff on the walls, he laughed and sat down on the bed, and said: “Mensch! You should have seen it last year! You would have laughed! Then it was all red flags, stars, hammers, sickles, pictures of Lenin and Stalin and Workers of the World Unite!…Then, suddenly when Hitler came to power, I understood it was all nonsense and lies. I realized Adolf was the man for me. All of a sudden!” He snapped his fingers in the air. “And here I am!”…Had a lot of people done the same, then? “Millions! I tell you, I was astonished how easily they all changed sides!”
>
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
Because they had so much in common.
Because they had so much in common.
More seriously--and more on point with the conversation raised below--Ramsay Steele helps explain why, despite being branded as "right-wing," fascism is best understood as a manifestation of a left that set itself against liberalism:
Fascism began as a revision of Marxism by Marxists, a revision which developed in successive stages, so that these Marxists gradually stopped thinking of themselves as Marxists, and eventually stopped thinking of themselves as socialists. They never stopped thinking of themselves as anti-liberal revolutionaries.
Whole thing here. Well worth a read.
“The fanatic is not really a stickler to principle. He embraces a cause not primarily because of its justness or holiness but because of his desperate need for something to hold onto.”...Eric Hoffer
Kinda like Bloods and Crips, same thuggery, different name.
Kinda like Bloods and Crips, same thuggery, different name.
>>”Hitler is just as straightforward in Mein Kampf. He dedicates an entire chapter to the Nazis’ deliberate exploitation of socialist and communist imagery, rhetoric, and ideas and how this marketing confused both liberals and communists. The most basic example is the Nazi use of the color red, which was firmly associated with Bolshevism and socialism. “We chose red for our posters after particular and careful deliberation…”<<
One thing I have never understood about the Republicans is why they allow themselves to be molded by the media into whatever shape the editors choose without making the slightest protest. The designation that irks me the most are “Red states” and “Blue states” which according to the media means Republicans and Democrats. All of my of my adult life I have viewed Democrat Party as representative of “red communist / socialists”.
NBC—David Brinkley famously referred to the 1984 map showing Reagan’s 49-state landslide as a “sea of blue”, which made some sort of sense with me because it left Red for the Democrats. Then out of nowhere or perhaps at the direct orders from the UN comes the color swap where journalists started using “Red” for the Republicans and “Blue” for the Democrats majority states. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee used the chosen color scheme when it launched their national “Red to Blue Program” in 2006 and there wasn’t ever a peep in protest that I can recall .from any of the so called republican mouth pieces about the color change. I can’t believe that the Republican leaders have no objections to wearing the red communists colors.
Exactly. But make it clear the Night of the Long Knives didn't happen to eliminate communists, it happened to get rid of possible competition to Hitler's rule.
Good and informative post, most people I know think the Nazi’s were right wing conservatives, same thing with Mousolini’s crowd, used to argue with my father that always voted dem. and so still do most of my family, some people never learn
“I’ll take democrat role models for $500.”
“The Republican party of the early 1930s was made up of guys who thought Benito Mossawhatver was a good guy !”
Progressives were a large part of the R party then, including Herbert Hoover. Teddy Roosevelt had not been out of power that long. The left wing progressives were also quite fond of Benito, Adolf and Uncle Joe, although they were generally fondest of Uncle Joe.
Herbert Hoover was a misguided big government Republican, but he loved the United States of America. nobody should have ever doubted that. his actions after leaving the White House indicate a man that loved his country and fellow man more than he cared about his own image.
But both were cut from the same cloth. Both Hitler and Mussolini were socialists who believed in Marxism, and came to fascism from that mindset. That socialism and fascism are characterized as at opposite ends of a political spectrum is a fallacy that serves ‘leftists’ well.
history repeating itself again (& again)....
We (Americans) never learn
There's not a dime's worth of difference, if you ask me. And a dime is not a high denomination — just look at the likeness it carries!
“Herbert Hoover was a misguided big government Republican, but he loved the United States of America. nobody should have ever doubted that. his actions after leaving the White House indicate a man that loved his country and fellow man more than he cared about his own image.”
Never said he didn’t love his country. But it’s not that big a step from big-government Republican to Fascist. Nor from big-government Democrat to Fascist. There were a lot of Americans in the 30’s who thought Hitler and Moussolini were pretty interesting guys with a lot of good ideas. Almost all of them were progressives, whatever label they used for party.
I found this quote from a sympathetic Hoover biography: “In Berlin, Hoover met with Adolph Hitler. It was to be a short, courtesy meeting arranged by the American embassy which was dedicating itself to promoting American neutrality. It turned into a one hour meeting. Coming out of it, Hoover characterized the Fuhrer as an intelligent, lucid man capable of great thought.” http://brian1984books.blogspot.com/2007/10/herbert-hoover-by-eugene-lyons.html
I would not be surprised if that was the reason many switched.
They have not had a choice. Those that did not comply were marginalized or destroyed. It was the mediacracy. Only now are we starting to come out from under its despotism.
Once Hitler signed the Non-Aggression Pact with Stalin, most on the Left could suddenly come out of the closet and proclaim their admiration for Hitler, it was only when he invaded their beloved Soviet Union, that they turned on him.
>>They have not had a choice. Those that did not comply were marginalized or destroyed. It was the mediacracy. Only now are we starting to come out from under its despotism.<<
Republicans (and Democrats) are afraid of bloggers because there’s no way to control them. The media has the editors and TV producers to make sure nothing too truthful or frightening gets printed, bloggers have no concerns about publishing the truth even when their audience is too frightened to acknowledge that it is the truth. One of my old taglines was “The truth is good for you, like sunlight, but too much all at once can really hurt.” Even I didn’t fully grasp how true that is.
Even on FR, we see people demanding an “authorized” source for news as if the Washington Post or the NY Times is unbiased. As the US newspapers fold up we see more threads being posted from the unbiased Mail and the “pure as a baby’s breath” Globe in the UK. You Tube videos are always ridiculed by the shills on FR because they aren’t saying “officially approved” messages.
One of the few places on FR where the members understand how valuable the bloggers are is “banglist”. That’s where I go to catch up on the latest GunWalker or F&F news. They seem to be the only ones covering it.
Life gets more interesting everyday.
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.