Posted on 11/25/2007 11:50:06 AM PST by ECM
The Nazis were Marxists, no matter what our tainted academia and corrupt media wishes us to believe. Nazis, Bolsheviks, the Ku Klux Klan, Maoists, radical Islam and Facists -- all are on the Left, something that should be increasingly apparent to decent, honorable people in our times. The Big Lie which places Nazis on some mythical Far Right was created specifically so that there would be a bogeyman manacled on the wrists of those who wish us to move "too far" in the direction of Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The Hayek quote in #19 really boils it down to its essence, for me.
The differences were superficial and ideological. Practically Stalinism and Nazism were practically identical. Stalin himself broke with the “International” Socialism (Trotsky) and became a “National Communist”. Nazism in essence is Socialism crossed with Nationalism and Racism (which lacks in international communist ideology(. The methods, the rethoric (the one says class, the other says race), the goals and the cost in human lives were identical.
I definately overused “basically” in my above post. LOL!
So who is that?
I would like someone smarter than me to explain why the nazis hated communist russia if nazi-ism is the same thing as communism.
What embarrassing sophistry!
Friedrich Hayek?
bump
You are correct. They were the national socialists. The communist are international socialists.
Germany was very militaristic and nationalistic. They were still proud about Germany having finally become a nation in 1870 and were unwilling to espouse a cooperative "world government". They felt the German race was superior and wanted to run their state (and other nations they conquered) along those lines.
Russia was "one-world government" minded. They wanted an international brotherhood of workers to rise up and defeat all foes. They leaned more toward an intellectual elite to run their program than a forceful, military cabal like Germany.
These are some of the major differences as I see them. Perhaps someone else can point out others, or point out where I might be incorrect.
Woody Guthrie.
Is that Woody Guthrie?
Two common megalomaniac ideologies and each thought they were the master race destined to conquer and subjugate all others. Sound like another ideology with its goal of establishing a World Caliphate through the Sword?
Ideology is no small matter. It’s key to understanding a thing in terms of structure, antecedents, methodology, etc. etc. etc.
projection - (psychiatry) a defense mechanism by which your own traits and emotions are attributed to someone else
We know that the Left's leaders are aware of the traits of what they advocate (national/international socialism) and aware of the public's attitude toward Nazis. Thus the National Socialist Left use the word "Nazi" as a weapon against opponents to provoke their dupes.
Freepers have long known of the Left's dupes' psychological disorder characterized by extreme hostility toward views contrary to their own feeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings.
Such contrary views are dangerous for our democracy says the author of the popular-on-the-left book "Republic.com" and government must force the narrow-minded people holding those views to change. Now there's a Nazi!
At a globalists level the article reminded me of today's Devos Man, the transnational corporate executive.
As reported back then the "most cruel joke of all" has been how Hitler treated those capitalists and small businessmen who thought National Socialism would save them from radicalism. Some businesses had been expropriated; some were subjected to a capital tax; all had profits strictly controlled; and all were subjected to intense government regulation . . . the Nazis were their masters, not servants.
The Devos men's internationalist New Democrat Third Way "progressive" partners will do more than expropriate, raise taxes, and control -- beware! they are in the market for rope. Got rope?
(It's a Marxist revolution from the top down, dummies.)
If you will read Germn history in the ‘30’s and early ‘40’s you will learn that Hitler was convinced that once he thought he was strong enough Stalin would attack Germany.They were both stalling for time. That was what the Non Agression Treaty and Trade agreenents were for. Hitler kinda jumped the gun when he attacked Poland, then Stalin attacked Poland to keep a buffer between him and Hitler.Then Hitler got nervious and attacked stalin. The attack caught Stalin and most of Germany by surprise. Both sides had train loads of goods enroute to each other.
Marx believed in the supremacy of the international proletariat, the industrial working class of the mid 19th century that was nearly nonexistent by the 1930's. The Nazis believed in the supremacy of a Master Race whose blood conferred the ability and the right to rule. The former believed in solidarity by economic class, the latter by racial identification.
Both are "socialist" in the collectivist approach to individual political and property rights but are economically different - Marx would have claimed that they were different stages in the inevitable historical progression toward world socialism. Communism, however, requires the State to possess the means of production, and Nazism allowed private possession of them so long as their use was directed by the State. In that Nazism more resembled fascist economic practice than Marxist.
These doctrines were similar in practice - both Nazism and Communism employed the rhetoric of oppression and offered moral absolution for the violent repression of race or class enemies, respectively. As Hayek pointed out, it was common for Communist street-fighters to join with their enemies in the Sturmabteilung once it became clear which side was going to win. They had, after all, common enemies.
This gets very confusing when one attempts to trace the roots of Nazism from its contemporary fascism. The latter, codified by Mussolini and a fellow named Gentile, was nominally anti-communist, even anti-socialist although its own economics were difficult to tell from socialism in practice. Nazism and fascism were nationalist; Marxism is emphatically internationalistic. All three are statist (Marx proposing that eventually the state would "wither away," one of his more nonsensical and historically invalid notions). All three are collectivist. All three posit the supremacy of the collective entities over those of their individual constituents, the difference being the nature of those entities. All three were and are murderous, brutal, and in application thoroughly oppressive and evil. But identical, they were not.
>>National Socialism in Hitler’s Germany was NOT Marxism. What is was was abject socialism with a fascist twist. What it was was totalitariansim, which it had/has in common with most all marxist and especially communist states. But Marxism and Nazism differed in ideology, particularly economically.
Call them whatever else you will...both were and are repressive, ignore individual unalianebale rights, are totalitarian and lead to genocide...but they also differ in the finer points of how to implement their totalitarian regimes.<<
Is it fair to say that they were socialists because they believed in state ownership and control of the means of production. But they were not Marxists because they never claimed the socialist government would fade away to “pure communism”?
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.