Replies

...they never had even an outline to conquer the world.

Not saying they did. But remember, "conquer," and "dominate" are two different things. Their dream was that Aryans, and particularly Germany, would eventually dominate the world. It's just silly to keep arguing otherwise.

A "continental system" under the Germans was something the United States simply couldn't tolerate. The economy here was very fragile; unemployment even at the time of Pearl Harbor was 10%.

You'd still have to show that the Germans -posited- such domination. I don't know that they did.

If we've been playing word games over the meaning of "conquer" as opposed to "dominate", then we've wasted a lot of band width.

Hitler had no plan to conquer the world. I would still challenge you to show he ever even spoke of world domination.

I believe he did speak of a fight to the death with the Communists -- he hated socialism, you know. But I don't think his rhetoric included world domination.

If it did, it should be easy for you to find.

Walt

Here's another translated excerpt quoted by Hayek. It's from Paul Lensch, another national socialist philosopher from the WWI era

"The result of Bismarck's decision of the year 1879 was that Germany took on the role of the revolutionary; that is to say, of a state whose position in relation to the rest of the world is that of'a representative of a higher and more advanced economic system. Having realized this, we should perceive that in the present World Revolution, Germany represents the revolutionary, and her greatest antagonist, England, the counter-revolutionary side."

Quaint,

...In an attempt to explain how Nazi-ism and Socialism are different you set upon the extremely weak argument that Nazi-ism wasn't socialism because it wasn't intended to operate world-wide.

Even as you admit that today "socialist" nations aren't operating worldwide nor do they have imperialistic intentions.

However, even the weak argument cannot be supported because it cannot be shown that Hitler did or did not seek to occupy the entire world, whether or not he intended to dominate it, nor can it be shown that there are any meaningful differences between the economic realities of socialism and Nazi-ism.

You did, however, throw a great many people off on a tangent that is meaningless even if it were proven one way or the other.

What is truely amazing, however, was that under YOUR definition of socialism, Nazi-ism WAS world-wide. Bringing the light to all the working people of the world. Simpley because you totally ignore the simple fact that in Hitler's view, ONLY the "Aryan race" counted as people.

I defy you to find a single authentic quote from Hitler or ANY Nazi expressing animosity toward "socialism." There was plenty of praise for it. They continually talked of stopping the spread of "Bolshevism," and the Soviets continually talked of stopping the spread of "Fascism." Totalitarians always need a bogeyman for th people. All flavors of socialists, or collectivists, like the Bolshevists and the Fascists, the modern Democratic Party, and the current regime in China, think THEIR socialism don't stink.