Chuck Woolery: 'The Nazis Were Socialists. They Were Left'

CNS ^ | October 16, 2015 | Mark Judge

[Torcert]

"Nazi is described as a right wing organization, Yet their were Socialists [sic]. They were left. But Chuck. But My BUTT."

"National Socialist German Workers' Party. Nazi Party. Hitler. Need I go on?"

"Maybe better. Democrats don't value the country. They value the power of Government. There is a difference ya know."

"You want to know how much power our Government has over our lives? Just make the suggestion we shut it down. That's how much.LIBERTY we have."

"While European countries, one by one, are dying on the vine, Democrats insist we become more like them. Insane!"

[Torcert]

Then of course the is the fact that Socialists like to deny socialism has failed by trying to pretend it's never been tried before:

[W.]

The National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP), more commonly known as the Nazi Party, was a political party in Germany between 1920 and 1945.

[After the war, they came to be known in America as the Democrat Party.--Ye Editor]

[jdsteel]

Not true. Read Goebbles biography or Hitlers speeches. Their agricultural system was 100% Marxist, as was their health care. The powerful central government and propaganda were as well.

[DiogenesLamp]

One comparable analogy would be the different factions of Islam - Shia and Sunni. They are at odds with each other but are still pushing Islam.

And just because they are in conflict doesn’t make one side less Islamic.

That is a good analogy. For what it's worth, Islam and Nazism were quite compatible back in the 1940s.

[Boogieman]

Maybe you should go back and read those speeches again. Hitler railed against Marxists constantly. The Nazi party fought them in the streets, and actions are louder than words.

Their reforms were socialist, but not Marxist. That doesn’t mean they didn’t borrow anything from Marx, but they rejected many of the most fundamental points of his thinking and hated the other socialists who did not.

[Torcert]

Isn’t always interesting how evils flock together?

[DiogenesLamp]

Isn’t always interesting how evils flock together?

Yup. And did you see this?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3351181/posts

They posted that just after I posted that picture of Hitler and the Grand Mufti. Synchronicity!

[Torcert]

Yes, and they all seem to have the same ideas....

[FourtySeven]

What is it about game show hosts and conservatism? First Pat Sajack and now Chuck Woolery? Maybe we should elect game show hosts to elective offices. Probably better than choosing from a pool of lawyers.

(And yes I know Bob Barker is lefty-ish. But I think even he is disappointed in how his name was used on that extremist anti-whaling ship. Besides his replacement, Drew Carey isn’t a leftist)

[ErnBatavia]

This is great stuff from the guy whose most famous line

I thought it was: "If you're not totally satisfied, return the empty jar for a full refund"....

[Torcert]

It could be they are secure enough that they can speak out.

Unlike others involved in the #NationalSocialistMedia who do not dare speak up for freedom.

[John S Mosby]

Quite true. The Kaiser approved the German Army’s conducting of a train bearing Lenin and millions in gold to pay for the Bolshevik revolution. The fact is, that the blowback to Germany was managed by an actual communist who directed this op in the first place. And so, the communists got through in Russia and then came to Germany. And the Kaiser— gone. Ludendorff all that was left and senile. Hitler the top of the shiite pile stepped into his place.

[dfwgator]

What’s interesting to contemplate is if Germany actually went Communist, would they have stayed lackeys of Moscow, or would they have tried to wrest leadership of the worldwide Communist movement from Russia?

Afterall, they were the birthplace of Marx, and a much more industrialized and richer nation than Russia was. And one wonders what the end result would have been, another war between Germany and Russia?

[jdsteel]

“Hitler railed against Marxists constantly. The Nazi party fought them in the streets, and actions are louder than words.”

Followers of Marxism often kill each other. That does change the fact that Nazi's had a completely Marxist agricultural system in their country and imposed it on countries they invaded. The exception was industry, where private ownership was permitted so long as the owners were loyal to the party. They had a socialized health care system, which they used to justify weeding out the infirm due to the cost of care to them. The ideal of the blond haired blue eyed ideal German was straight out of the Marxist “über man” that would emerge as a result of the Marxist system. They had government control of citizen behavior and speech.

THOSE actions speak louder than words. Fascism is a strain of Marxism, as are Socialism and Communism.

[Boogieman]

You really don’t get the finer points of what you are discussing.

Socialism is NOT a “strain of Marxism”, it is the other way around. Socialism pre-dated Marx’s ideas, and Marxism is just one strain of Socialism. There was no Marxist idea of the “uber man”, that was a notion the Nazis borrowed from Friedrich Nietzche, not Marx.

Seriously, you are not well versed in these subjects, just stop embarrassing yourself.

[jdsteel]

Marx had many influences (Hegel, Engels, the early version of French Socialism post French Revolution) but for all intents and purposes Marxism blended those elements to inspire the Commies and Socialists that followed. Marx saw Socialism as the transition between Capitalism and Communism. Marx believed that the system would transform and evolve individuals to the point where they would care for the system above their own needs. Hitler once again followed Marx with that idea and (through perversion of his work and persuasion) used the work of Nietzsche to bolster that idea(uber man) and help sell the idea of Eugenics. As stated before, the agricultural system was completely Marxist and the state set prices of everything it produced. Hitler said many contradictory things in his speeches regarding socialism, but what He did was a strain of Marxism, not of our founding fathers. Seriously, condescension isn't warranted.