1/9/2005
Hitler was a socialist
I wish these libs would get off that Bushitler thing, it’s getting old.
Click here for Hitler was a socialist
The most interesting passage, IMO from this are as follows:
John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.)
“True, it is a fixed idea with the French that the Rhine is their property, but to this arrogant demand the only reply worthy of the German nation is Arndt’s: “Give back Alsace and Lorraine”. For I am of the opinion, perhaps in contrast to many whose standpoint I share in other respects, that the reconquest of the German-speaking left bank of the Rhine is a matter of national honour, and that the Germanisation of a disloyal Holland and of Belgium is a political necessity for us. Shall we let the German nationality be completely suppressed in these countries, while the Slavs are rising ever more powerfully in the East?”
Have a look at the headline quote above and say who wrote it. It is a typical Hitler rant, is it not? Give it to 100 people who know Hitler’s speeches and 100 would identify it as something said by Adolf. The fierce German nationalism and territorial ambition is unmistakeable. And if there is any doubt, have a look at another quote from the same author:
This is our calling, that we shall become the templars of this Grail, gird the sword round our loins for its sake and stake our lives joyfully in the last, holy war which will be followed by the thousand-year reign of freedom.
That settles it, doesn’t it? Who does not know of Hitler’s glorification of military sacrifice and his aim to establish a “thousand-year Reich”?
But neither quote is in fact from Hitler. Both quotes were written by Friedrich Engels, Karl Marx’s co-author (See here and here). So let that be an introduction to the idea that Hitler not only called himself a socialist but that he WAS in fact a socialist by the standards of his day. Ideas that are now condemned as Rightist were in Hitler’s day perfectly normal ideas among Leftists. And if Friedrich Engels was not a Leftist, I do not know who would be.
But the most spectacular aspect of Nazism was surely its antisemitism. And that had a grounding in Marx himself. The following passage is from Marx but it could just as well have been from Hitler:
“Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew — not the Sabbath Jew, as Bauer does, but the everyday Jew. Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Jewry, would be the self-emancipation of our time…. We recognize in Jewry, therefore, a general present-time-oriented anti-social element, an element which through historical development — to which in this harmful respect the Jews have zealously contributed — has been brought to its present high level, at which it must necessarily dissolve itself. In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Jewry”.
Note that Marx wanted to “emancipate” (free) mankind from Jewry (”Judentum” in Marx’s original German), just as Hitler did and that the title of Marx’s essay in German was “Zur Judenfrage” — which is exactly the same expression (”Jewish question”) that Hitler used in his famous phrase “Endloesung der Judenfrage” (”Final solution of the Jewish question”). And when Marx speaks of the end of Jewry by saying that Jewish identity must necessarily “dissolve” itself, the word he uses in German is “aufloesen”, which is a close relative of Hitler’s word “Endloesung” (”final solution”). So all the most condemned features of Nazism can be traced back to Marx and Engels. The thinking of Hitler, Marx and Engels differed mainly in emphasis rather than in content. All three were second-rate German intellectuals of their times.
Cao’s note: Do you see a striking resemblance to the ideology of Osama Bin Laden in this text? Is there any wonder why Al Qaeda and the Nazis are joined together at the hip? Labelling people with “conservative views” as Nazis is baseless misinformation spread by the leftist DEZINFORMATSIA. Don’t believe it. If you have doubt, read some of Hitler’s writing from Mein Kampf. The nexis here makes itself evident in the knowledge that Saddam Hussein carried a copy of Mein Kampf in his back pocket.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
January 9th, 2005 at 11:59 am
The Hitler- Engels/Marx connection is fascinating- that is, top see it so clearly.
It does bear repeating though, that words, no matter how well sounding, are not the bellweather of an ideology.
For example, the former Soviet Constitution has to be one of the most beautiful documents ever written.
It was, and always has been, actions that either validated or invalidated ideologies.
There is no question that Western democracies have the track record of making and defining freedom as a the hallmark their intent.
We nay not always agree or see eye to eye with some of our foreign friends, but the cornerstone of democracy remains a beacon.
That beacon is one we can proudly say, began with ‘the shot heard round the world.’ That at times there are differences only serves to validate that light.
That is a record that highlights the differences between ourselves (democracies) and non democratic countries. They may spout all the right words, but in the end, their actions negate those words.
January 9th, 2005 at 12:02 pm
You might be having trouble with your commnets- just wrote one and it disappoeared!
January 9th, 2005 at 12:08 pm
Sorry, SC&A. I have to approve all comments because of the trackback spam I’ve been receiving. Slows things down a bit.
The ideology doesn’t work in the practical sense; man will, by his very nature, set out to rule over others. That’s why our form of government prevented such despotism; there were check and balances built into the 3 branches.
Cao
*autopen
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
January 9th, 2005 at 4:18 pm
Nice way to put it! The libs always forget the checks and balances thing in their arguments. I saw your banner and it would with my latest post. Please visit.
January 9th, 2005 at 4:48 pm
It always did strike me as funny that lefties will spit the word “Nazi” as if it’s the ultimate insult, meanwhile apologizing for or even endorsing communism, which is distinguishable from fascism only by its much higher body count and by lacking an obsession with race. People who believe that the state should be all powerful, and that individuals are nothing more than interchangeable representatives of their ethnic group — who am I describing, Nazis or liberals?
January 9th, 2005 at 5:14 pm
or terrorists?
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
January 9th, 2005 at 7:21 pm
This is a great find. I am always having to remind people that it was a socialst movement.
January 10th, 2005 at 9:35 am
u can’t be serious, ur talking to a socialsist, Hitler as on the other end of the scectrum, he was facist, authoritarian and right wing, socialists are anarchical and left wing, u can’t be that stupid can you?
January 10th, 2005 at 9:46 am
Read through Mein Kampf and compare those writings to the Communist Manifesto and get back to me. Right now, as we speak, members of Stormfront (nazis) are meeting with Al Qaeda on pravda.ru discussion forums. Go and take a look if you don’t believe me. Wake up and smell the coffee, will ya? It doesn’t take a village idiot to see what’s happening here–
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
January 10th, 2005 at 10:09 am
Keep writing your “articulate and smart” stuff. In doing so you are doing more for the liberal cause than Al Franken, Michael Moore, or anyone else out there.
January 10th, 2005 at 10:20 am
Ummm yeah that’s why you’re trying so hard to stop me. mheh. You can’t even see how completely you expose yourselves with that Stalinist pseudo-intellectual air of vacuous superiority. Keep it up; it just proves the point that we’re not only fighting islamists who want to wipe us off the faith of the earth, but we’re also fighting the people at home who are helping them do it.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
January 14th, 2005 at 12:39 pm
The “Hitler was a Socialist” is one of the funniest urban legends going around out there right now.
Hitler used his enemies to his advantage. He even included “Socialist” in the official name of the Nazi Party, but never practised anything close to socialism.
In fact, he linked the Jews to communism and launched WWII to rid the world of communism.
The idea of this new movement to link Hitler with the left is laughable but understandable. The right wants to believe everything bad must be favored by the left. But linking Hitler to the left is no different from how Hitler tried to link Jews to communism: link your opponents to all the world’s ills.
January 14th, 2005 at 12:58 pm
Wow what field did that come out of (left, maybe?)? It really bugs you that someone would say such a thing, doesn’t it? The comparison is striking and you refute the evidence produced by John Ray, who has a PHD? Click here. What is your educational background and what qualifies you as an expert? What is your evidence to the contrary? Instead of making empty blanket statements, prove to me that this is not the case with some facts. I’m all ears.
I think that old out-dated comparison that the left uses to trash people on the right should be thrown in the garbage, because it’s old and outdated and doesn’t represent the facts. Here is more evidence:
Hitler championed the rights of workers, regarded capitalist society as brutal and unjust, and sought a third way between communism and the free market. In this regard, he and his associates greatly admired the strong steps taken by President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal to take large-scale economic decision-making out of private hands and put it into those of government planning agencies. His aim was to institute a brand of socialism that avoided the inefficiencies that plagued the Soviet variety, and many former communists found his program highly congenial. (socialism is socialism, my dear boy. ) He deplored the selfish individualism he took to be endemic to modern Western society, and wanted to replace it with an ethic of self-sacrifice: “As Christ proclaimed ‘love one another’,” he said, “so our call — ‘people’s community,’ ‘public need before private greed,’ ‘communally-minded social consciousness’ — rings out.!
Hitler was not only a socialist in his own day but he would even be a mainstream socialist in most every way, today.
What’s more, just like a good socialist, Hitler justified everything he did in the name of “the people” (Das Volk). The Nazi State was, like the Soviet State, all-powerful, and the Nazi party, in good socialist fashion, instituted pervasive supervision of German industry. And of course Hitler and Stalin were initially allies. It was only the Nazi-Soviet pact that enabled Hitler’s conquest of Western Europe. The fuel in the tanks of Hitler’s Panzern as they stormed through France was Soviet fuel.
And a book that was very fashionable worldwide in the ’60s was the 1958 book “The Affluent Society” by influential “liberal” Canadian economist J.K. Galbraith — in which he fulminated about what he saw as our “Private affluence and public squalor”. But Hitler preceded him. Hitler shared with the German Left of his day the slogan: “Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz” (Common use before private use).
And we all know how evil Nazi eugenics were, don’t we? How crazy were their efforts to build up the “master race” through selective breeding of SS men with the best of German women — the “Lebensborn” project? Good Leftists today recoil in horror from all that of course. But who were the great supporters of eugenics in Hitler’s day? They were in fact American Leftists — and eugenics was only one of the ideas that Hitler got from that source. What later came to be known as Fascism was in fact essentially the same as what was known in the USA of the late 19th and early 20th century as “Progressivism”, so Fascism is in fact much more of an American invention than a European one. The Europeans carried out fully the ideas that American Leftists invented but could only partially implement. America itself resisted the worst of the Fascist virus but much of Europe did not. The American Left have a lot to answer for. The leftist roots of Eugenics can be found here and the largely American roots of Fascism here.
I attribute your position on this to that of someone who has not compared and contrasted the writings of Marx and Hitler, and one who doesn’t understand history all that well. Being a socialist is nothing to brag about. Saddam Hussein is a socialist–and carried (I’m not sure if he does now) a copy of Mein Kampf in his back pocket. Explain to me why those two would be connected.
-excerpts from Hitler was a socialist-John Ray, MA, PHD.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
January 18th, 2005 at 1:52 pm
I had a similar discussion over at my place…click here
January 18th, 2005 at 4:08 pm
I also have a PHD. No need to refute it. It’s silly to argue with revisionist historians who want to paint one of the worst right wing fanatics as something other than he was. Hitler was bad. He leaned to the right. He was a National Socialist — not a left wing socialist. Big difference. Any freshman poli-sci student would know that. Hey, any 12-yr-old would know that!
February 20th, 2005 at 5:05 pm
There’s no difference socialism=socialism.
Hitler’s strategy for popularity was not lost on Stalin. Quite soon after Hitler invaded Russia, Stalin reopened the Russian Orthodox churches and restored the old ranks and orders of the Russian Imperial army to the Red Army so that it became simply the Russian Army and stressed nationalist themes (e.g. defence of “Mother Russia”) in his internal propaganda. As one result of this, to this day Russians refer to the Second World War as “the great patriotic war”. Stalin may have started out as an international socialist but he ended up a national socialist. So Hitler was a Rightist only in the sense that Stalin was.
In Australia too, socialism and a degree of nationalism have been found to be quite compatible.
Many conservatives accuse Hitler of being a leftist, on the grounds that his party was named “National Socialist.” But socialism requires worker ownership and control of the means of production”. It does? Only to Marxists. So Hitler was less Leftist than the Communists — and that would not be hard. Surely a “democratic” Leftist should see that as faintly to Hitler’s credit, in fact.