Socialism = NAZI (Hitler was a socialist)

A Veritas News Service Book Review - "A magnificent work... it should be required reading for all Americans. This book reveals socialisms nasty little secret." William Cooper

The Nazis were not a tribe of prehistoric savages. Their crimes were the official, legal acts and policies of modern Germany -- an educated, industrialized, CIVILIZED Western European nation, a nation renowned throughout the world for the luster of its intellectual and cultural achievements. By reason of its long line of famous artists and thinkers, Germany has been called "the land of poets and philosophers."

But its education offered the country no protection against the Sergeant Molls in its ranks. The German university students were among the earliest groups to back Hitler. The intellectuals were among his regime's most ardent supporters. Professors with distinguished academic credentials, eager to pronounce their benediction on the Fuhrer's cause, put their scholarship to work full time; they turned out a library of admiring volumes, adorned with obscure allusions and learned references.

The Nazis did not gain power against the country's wishes. In this respect there was no gulf between the intellectuals and the people. The Nazi party was elected to office by the freely cast ballots of millions of German voters, including men on every social, economic, and educational level. In the national election of July 1932, the Nazis obtained 37% of the vote and a plurality of seats in the Reichstag. On January 30, 1933, in full accordance with the country's legal and constitutional principles, Hitler was appointed Chancellor. Five weeks later, in the last (and semi-free) election of the pre-totalitarian period, the Nazis obtained 17 million votes, 44% of the total.

The voters were aware of the Nazi ideology. Nazi literature, including statements of the Nazi plans for the future, papered the country during the last years of the Weimar Republic. "Mein Kampf" alone sold more than 200,000 copies between 1925 and 1932. The essence of the political system which Hitler intended to establish in Germany was clear.

In 1933, when Hitler did establish the system he had promised, he did not find it necessary to forbid foreign travel. Until World War II, those Germans who wished to flee the country could do so. The overwhelming majority did not. They were satisfied to remain.

The system which Hitler established -- the social reality which so many Germans were so eager to embrace or so willing to endure -- the politics which began in a theory and ended in Auschwitz -- was: the "total state". The term, from which the adjective "totalitarian" derives, was coined by Hitler's mentor, Mussolini.

The state must have absolute power over every man and over every sphere of human activity, the Nazis declared. "The authority of the Fuhrer is not limited by checks and controls, by special autonomous bodies or individual rights, but it is free and independent, all-inclusive and unlimited," said Ernst Huber, an official party spokesman, in 1933.

"The concept of personal liberties of the individual as opposed to the authority of the state had to disappear; it is not to be reconciled with the principle of the nationalistic Reich," said Huber to a country which listened, and nodded. "There are no personal liberties of the individual which fall outside of the realm of the state and which must be respected by the state... The constitution of the nationalistic Reich is therefore not based upon a system of inborn and inalienable rights of the individual."

If the term "statism" designates concentration of power in the state at the expense of individual liberty, then Nazism in politics was a form of statism. In principle, it did not represent a new approach to government; it was a continuation of the political absolutism -- the absolute monarchies, the oligarchies, the theocracies, the random tyrannies -- which has characterized most of human history.

In degree, however, the total state does differ from its predecessors: it represents statism pressed to its limits, in theory and in practice, devouring the last remnants of the individual. Although previous dictators (and many today; e.g., in Latin America) often preached the unlimited power of the state, they were on the whole unable to enforce such power. As a rule, citizens of such countries had a kind of partial "freedom", not a freedom-on-principle, but at least a freedom-by-default.

Even the latter was effectively absent in Nazi Germany. The efficiency of the government in dominating its subjects, the all-encompassing character of its coercion, the complete mass regimentation on a scale involving millions of men -- and, one might add, the enormity of the slaughter, the planned, systematic mass slaughter, in peacetime, initiated by a government against its own citizens -- these are the insignia of twentieth-century totalitarianism (Nazi AND communist), which are without parallel in recorded history. In the totalitarian regimes, as the Germans found out after only a few months of Hitler's rule, every detail of life is prescribed, or proscribed. There is no longer any distinction between private matters and public matters. "There are to be no more private Germans," said Friedrich Sieburg, a Nazi writer; "each is to attain significance only by his service to the state, and to find complete self-fulfillment in his service." "The only person who is still a private individual in Germany," boasted Robert Ley, a member of the Nazi hierarchy, after several years of Nazi rule, "is somebody who is asleep."

In place of the despised "private individuals," the Germans heard daily or hourly about a different kind of entity, a supreme entity, whose will, it was said, is what determines the course and actions of the state: the nation, the whole, the GROUP. Over and over, the Germans heard the idea that underlies the advocacy of omnipotent government, the idea that totalitarians of every kind stress as the justification of their total states: COLLECTIVISM.

Collectivism is the theory that the group (the collective) has primacy over the individual. Collectivism holds that, in human affairs, the collective -- society, the community, the nation, the proletariat, the race, etc. -- is THE UNIT OF REALITY AND THE STANDARD OF VALUE. On this view, the individual has reality only as part of the group, and value only insofar as he serves it; on his own he has no political rights; he is to be sacrificed for the group whenever it -- or its representative, the state -- deems this desirable.

...the necessity, for which the older doctrines make little allowance, of sacrifice, even up to the total immolation of individuals, on behalf of society... For Liberalism (i.e., individualism), the individual is the end and society the means; nor is it conceivable that the individual, considered in the dignity of an ultimate finality, be lowered to mere instrumentality. For Fascism, society is the end, individuals the means, and its whole life consists in using individuals as instruments for its social ends.

"The higher interests involved in the life of the whole," said Hitler in a 1933 speech, "must here set the limits and lay down the duties of the interests of the individual." Men, echoed the Nazis, have to "realize that the State is more important than the individual, that individuals must be willing and ready to sacrifice themselves for Nation and Fuhrer." The people, said the Nazis, "form a true organism," a "living unity", whose cells are individual persons. In reality, therefore -- appearances to the contrary notwithstanding -- there is no such thing as an "isolated individual" or an autonomous man.

Just as the individual is to be regarded merely as a fragment of the group, the Nazis said, so his possessions are to be regarded as a fragment of the group's wealth.

"Private property" as conceived under the liberalistic economy order was a reversal of the true concept of property [wrote Huber]. This "private property" represented the right of the individual to manage and to speculate with inherited or acquired property as he pleased, without regard for the general interests... German socialism had to overcome this "private", that is, unrestrained and irresponsible view of property. All property is common property. The owner is bound by the people and the Reich to the responsible management of his goods. His legal position is only justified when he satisfies this responsibility to the community.

Contrary to the Marxists, the Nazis did not advocate public ownership of the means of production. They did demand that the government oversee and run the nation's economy. The issue of legal ownership, they explained, is secondary; what counts is the issue of CONTROL. Private citizens, therefore, may continue to hold titles to property -- so long as the state reserves to itself the unqualified right to regulate the use of their property.

If "ownership" means the right to determine the use and disposal of material goods, then Nazism endowed the state with every real prerogative of ownership. What the individual retained was merely a formal deed, a content-less deed, which conferred no rights on its holder. Under communism, there is collective ownership of property DEJURE. Under Nazism, there is the same collective ownership DE FACTO.

During the Hitler years -- in order to finance the party's programs, including the war expenditures -- every social group in Germany was mercilessly exploited and drained. White-collar salaries and the earnings of small businessmen were deliberately held down by government controls, freezes, taxes. Big business was bled by taxes and "special contributions" of every kind, and strangled by the bureaucracy. At the same time the income of the farmers was held down, and there was a desperate flight to the cities -- where the middle class, especially the small tradesmen, were soon in desperate straits, and where the workers were forced to labor at low wages for increasingly longer hours (up to 60 or more per week).

But the Nazis defended their policies, and the country did not rebel; it accepted the Nazi argument. Selfish individuals may be unhappy, the Nazis said, but what we have established in Germany is the ideal system, SOCIALISM. In its Nazi usage this term is not restricted to a theory of economics; it is to be understood in a fundamental sense. "Socialism" for the Nazis denotes the principle of collectivism as such and its corollary, statism -- in every field of human action, including but not limited to economics.

"To be a socialist", says Goebbels, "is to submit the I to the thou; socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole."

By this definition, the Nazis practiced what they preached. They practiced it at home and then abroad. No one can claim that they did not sacrifice enough individuals.

Excerpted from Chapter 1 of THE OMINOUS PARALLELS, by Leonard Peikoff... most probably the most important book written in modern times. Buy it... read it... study it.

Again you give me superficial differences.The principle of socialism or nazism is collective sacrifice to the goals of those in charge.The Nazis defined themselves as socialists.Goebbels said "To be a good socialist,is to submit the I to the thou:socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole"

Not so different than this by Ludwig Von Mises in 1922 the book "Socialism"

CHAPTER 9 The Position of the Individual Under Socialism 1 Selection of Personnel and Choice of Occupation The Socialist Community is a great authoritarian association in which orders are issued and obeyed. This is what is implied by the words "planned economy" and the "abolition of the anarchy of production." The inner structure of a socialist community is best understood if we compare it with the inner structure of an army. Many socialists indeed prefer to speak of the "army of labour." As in an army, so under Socialism, everything depends on the orders of the supreme authority. Everyone has a place to which he is appointed. Everyone has to remain in his place until he is moved to another. It follows that men become pawns of official action. They rise only when they are promoted. They sink only when they are degraded. It would be waste of time to describe such conditions. They are the common knowledge of every citizen of a bureaucratic state.

II.9.1 It is obvious that, in a state of this sort, all appointments should be based upon personal capacity. Each position should be held by the individual best fitted to hold it—always provided that he is not required for more important work elsewhere. Such is the fundamental principle of all systematically ordered authoritarian organizations—of the Chinese Mandarinate equally with modern bureaucracies.

II.9.2 In giving effect to this principle the first problem that arises is the appointment of the supreme authority. There are two ways to the solution of this problem, the oligarchical-monarchical and the democratic, but there can be only one solution—the charismatic solution. The supreme rulers (or ruler) are chosen in virtue of the grace with which they are endowed by divine dispensation. They have superhuman powers and capacities lifting them above the other mortals.

Obviously Von Mises saw what would be the results of Socialism.Whether it be so called Left or Right.Yes I agree their is a difference between classic Liberalism and Conservatism.Locke is perhaps IMHO the most important political philosipher.

"As an aside, I do not think the traditional left/right political spectrum has much use in the modern world since no country has ever passed from socialism into communism to see the state dissolve, but rather we have found that both ends of the political spectrum end in human enslavement. I therefore find myself a libertarian, struggling against the drug warriors on the right and the politically correct nanny state advocates on the other."

I also call myself a friend of liberty.

The Hitler Letter

By Rabbi Daniel Lapin

Posted by the Culture of Life Foundation -

I have no intention of explaining how the correspondence which I now offer to the public fell into my hands. There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them. (Preface to The Screwtape Letters by C. S. Lewis)

My Dear Julius (1), Landsberg prison which I entered on April 1, 1924 and where I wrote Mein Kampf, is strangely similar to this place that I entered after shooting myself on the afternoon of April 30, 1945 and from where I write this letter. I found myself in both places involuntarily, yet they have each provided me with peace as well as perspective to write of the ideas that fueled our movement. I dedicated Mein Kampf to the dead heroes of the so-called Beer Hall Putsch who fell on November 9, 1923 with loyal faith in the resurrection of their people(2). I dedicate this letter to you along with the nine other heroes of Nuremberg who joined me here on October 16, 1946. May their memory shine forever, a glowing example to the followers of our ideas.

As one tends to do in the timeless eternity of our existence here, I often reflect upon my single most regrettable error-underestimating America. On December 8, 1941, I hurried back by train to Berlin from my headquarters on the Russian front. It is true that earlier that year Ribbentrop and I had promised the Japanese Foreign Minister, our good friend Yosuke Matsuoka, that should Japan become engaged in a war against the United States, Germany would join the war immediately. However, to us, the Three-Power Pact had as its goal frightening and keeping America out of the war. I encouraged Japan to immediately take an active part in the war against England(3) and not to provoke America. Although I didn't see much future for the Americans, I did not want them in the war until we had put down Russia.

Exactly one month after the Japanese betrayed me by attacking Pearl Harbor I told you all at our Berlin headquarters that America is a decayed country. My feelings against Americanism were feelings of hatred and deep repugnance. Everything about the behavior of American society reveals that it's half Judaized and the other half Negrified. How can one expect a state like that to hold together?(4) Well, America did hold together and she seized victory from us. However, and this is important my friend, she has finally adopted many of the vital ideas of our movement. Could not this be described as an ultimate vindication of all we lived and died for? Perhaps it is even a victory of sorts.

Let me explain. First and foremost we were socialists. As national socialists, or Nazis, we presumed that government and the people were hostile to one another. Thus, we understood that the old German tradition of citizens owning guns had to end. On March 18, 1938 we enacted our Law on Weapons and ruled that only government officials were allowed to own firearms. You can imagine my approval as I watched Senator Thomas Dodd craft America's Gun Control Act of 1968 by having our own law of 1938 translated for him by an official of The Library of Congress(5). My dear Julius, we can be proud of how similarly the two laws read. Those leading American gun control efforts are naïve and well-meaning but their results will resemble ours. We told the German people that gun control laws were needed to curb gang activity and preserve democracy, what those laws really did was help us prevail.

Do you remember, dear Julius, how we Nazis always understood that every German citizen must live for the state. We did everything possible to keep our people healthy. They were our future and the destiny of our nation. In the same way that wise farmers must accept responsibility for the health of their herds, we used the power of government to keep our flocks healthy. We were disgusted by the addictive powers of cigarettes since both mind and body were supposed to belong to the Fuhrer. We succeeded in almost criminalizing the smoking of cigarettes.

Our Minstry of Science and Education ordered elementary schools to discuss the dangers of tobacco(6). Government sponsored cultural and educational events were declared to be "smoke-free." In the late 1930s we called for increased taxes on cigarettes and later instituted bans on cigarette advertising. I am most proud of the legislation we introduced prohibiting sales of cigarettes to minors. We set up counseling centers for the psychological treatment of smokers and we established smoke-free restaurants.

We soon managed to prohibit smoking on Luftwaffe properties and followed that with prohibiting smoking in post offices, government buildings and many workplaces. "No Smoking" cars were established on all German trains with fines levied upon violators and in 1940 SS Chief Heinrich Himmler announced a smoking ban for all on-duty police and SS officers. Our comrade, Hermann Goring, decreed that soldiers may not smoke in public and most of our cities banned smoking on public transport in order to protect the ticket takers from the hazards of second-hand smoke. We can indeed be proud that today America has also come to realize the importance of central government taking the initiative in regulating what people do not have the good sense to do voluntarily. We may have lost the battle of ideas in the middle of the century, but we Nazis are winning the war of ideas at its end.

Do you remember that awkwardness in late 1940, my dear Julius? The American consulate in Leipzig reported our policies to the American State Department, of conducting compassionate euthanasia on the patients in the Grafeneck Mental Asylum in Wurttemberg. What an uproar resulted in America!

But now, one of America's most prestigious institutions, Princeton University, has appointed as professor of bioethics (whatever that is) one Peter Singer who openly advocates putting to death the mentally defective, the terminally ill and even severely disabled infants. He would give parents and doctors the right to actually kill-not just withhold treatment-newborns with, for instance, Spina Bifida and hemophilia. Singer insists that a newborn has no greater right to life than pigs, cows and dogs. Peter Singer is one of us, Julius. And the best part of it is that those who most loudly protested our comparatively mild policies in Wurttemberg, have not uttered even a squeak of protest to Princeton University and its professor of bioethics. The ridiculous idea that all human life is sacred is now finally under attack in America. A sitting president was reelected after affirming the legitimacy of exterminating infants during birth and doctors in their province of Oregon have begun doing away with the elderly and weak. Yes, America is certainly coming around to our way of seeing things.

Finally dear Julius, you will remember what I frequently said and wrote in Mein Kampf: "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people(7)." I explained that as long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation. It is truly heartwarming to see how well this lesson has been learned by American government. In the name of the children, incursions into the private lives of American citizens have been made that we Nazis would have gazed at with open mouthed admiration. Does it matter that our bodies failed as long as our spirit still triumphs?

I know you have a question to ask me, my friend: What about the Jews? After all, how can I say that much of America is adopting our views when Jews still exert such disproportionate influence in that country? Grasp the genius of your Fuhrer. You see dear Julius, with well meaning earnestness, most American Jews are solidly behind the ideas I have been describing. In the mistaken belief that they are making America safer for minorities, American Jews have joined those advocating ever larger and ever more powerful government. In reality, what they are doing is making America more hospitable to our form of national socialism. When it eventually arrives, they too will see the real dangers, but by then, it will be too late. Now they only see danger in illiterate thugs with no hair on their heads and in degenerate psychopaths with second hand Nazi regalia. American Jews are frightened by a handful of the sort of people we used to execute, instead of being terrified of the danger they are helping to create-government with limitless power that could one day be hospitable to tyranny.

We didn't just kill Jews-we were obsessed with them. We knew and understood the power their God conferred upon them. It was either their three thousand year-old vision of holiness or our modern ideas of scientific progress that would prevail in the world. Do you recall that Israeli thug, Isser Harel, who founded their cursed Mossad and who captured our brother Adolf Eichmann in Buenos Aires in 1960? Harel was astounded when Eichmann, upon realizing that he had been captured by Jews(8), called out the Hebrew prayer Shema Yisrael , "Hear Oh Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One." Eichmann understood. You, Julius, you also understood. You ascended the gallows in Nuremberg and your very last words were "Heil Hitler!" (for which I thank you) and then "Purim Fest 1946."(9) You knew that when the Allies hanged my ten friends, they were playing out a modern day version of the Biblical Book of Esther in which ten enemies of the Jews were hanged on the festival of Purim.

And it wasn't just the Jews. Joseph Goebbels put it quite correctly when he said, "The Fuhrer is deeply religious though completely anti-Christian. He views Christianity as a symptom of decay. Rightly so, it is a branch of the Jewish race(10)." We can be confident that America will preserve and develop our Nazi ideas of human perfectability because of one stroke of genius that even Reich minister of propaganda, the great Joseph Goebbels, has to admire. Those who are advocating socialism in America, whether deliberately or inadvertently, have succeeded in turning the term "Nazi" into a slur that may only be used against those on the right, such as Christian conservatives. Never is it used against those on the left who are precisely the Americans doing most to advance our agenda. We are winning Julius, we are winning. Heil Hitler.

Radio talk show host, Rabbi Daniel Lapin is the author of the recent best seller, America's Real War, and is president of Seattle-based Toward Tradition.

(1) Hitler is addressing Julius Streicher, hanged by the Allies in Nuremberg, October 16, 1946. (2) Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler, Publ.Verlag Franz Eher, 1927, Dedication and Preface (3) The Second World War, Volume 3, Winston S. Churchill, Publ. Houghton Mifflin, 1950. Page 186 (4) The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, William L Shirer, Publ. Simon and Schuster, 1959. Page 895 (5) Aaron Zelman, JPFO, Milwaukee, WI. (6) The Nazi War on Cancer, Robert N. Proctor. Publ. Princeton University Press. Page 198. (7) Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler, Publ. Houghton Mifflin, 1943, Page 403. (8) Los Angeles Times, April 7, 1989. (9) Newsweek, October 26, 1946. Joseph Kingsbury-Smith, an American reporter present at the hangings. (10) Joseph Goebbels, quoted in Anthrozoos, 5 (1992) page 18.

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.

Nazis versus Liberals
Hitler and the Nazis	Liberals and Democrats
Preached class warfare	Preach class warfare
Demonized capitalists as exploiters of the working class	Demonize capitalists as exploiters of the working class
Supported nationalization of education	Support nationalization of education
Supported nationalization of health care	Support nationalization of health care
Supported nationalization of transportation	Support nationalization of transportation
Instituted strict gun control regimen	Support strict gun control
Encouraged pornography	Encourage pornography
Encouraged illegitimacy	Encourage illegitimacy
Encouraged abortion	Encourage abortion
Demonized Christians as right-wing fanatics	Demonize Christians as right-wing fanatics
Employed the "Big Lie" to further their goals	Employ the "Big Lie" to further their goals
Sought to rule every activity and need of the individual	Seek to rule every activity and need of the individual
Believed the Collective had primacy over the Individual	Believe the Collective has primacy over the Individual