New Improved Hockey Stick?

[bripat9643]

Westwall -

This is exactly what I do for a living. I have written very extensively about Fascist theory, and particularly about post-Soviet politics (largely in enclave states). So I think I can probably answer your question.

But let's be honest here, man - you know as well as I do that Hitler was right wing. Why do you need it explained?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/284408-how-we-know-hitler-was-right-wing.html#post6971567

How can you write about something you know nothing about?

Oh yeah, I forgot . . . . you're a leftist.

 

[Saigon]

BriPat -

I'd be delighted to compare our credentials on this topic.

 

[SSDD]

Hitler not only didn't despise socialism, but actively considered himself a socialist. He viewed himself as a socialist and the basis of his socialist theory was that every individual and every group must unquestioningly work to fulfill national policy. That being the case, it didn't matter who owned and operated any given business so long as the people who managed it were doing what they were told by the state.

In all seriousness, SSDD, this may be amongst the most stupid and false claim ever made on this board. PLEASE go and do a little research.

I can't imagine how hard you must have worked to avoid all of the evidence proving the opposite. It must have taken years to have built the little bubble of myths you live inside.

I can't imagine how hard you must have worked to avoid the actual facts....the facts being hitler's own words and actions.

Once more since it is clear that you are reading challenged....In correspondence to Herman Rasuchinning, hitler stated

"Our socialism reaches much deeper. It does not change the external order of things, it orders solely the relationship of man to the state... Then what does property and income count for? Why should we need to socialize the banks and the factories? We are socializing the people."

So you are telling me that hitler didn't know his own political views? Are you telling me that he despised socialism and yet identified himself as a socialist, and described the means of achieving his socialist agenda? The facts reside in what hitler thought, said and did...not in the opinions of 2 generations of socialist "philosophers" trying like hell to distance themselves from him.

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

So you are telling me that hitler didn't know his own political views?

It's a little more complicated than that, I'm afraid.

Go to any source you trust, and I'm sure you'll find an explanation of why Nazis used the word 'socialism' without ever being socialist in the modern sense of the word.

I think that's the best way of you learning, and it saves me time posting material you either won't read or won't understand.

Please note that I have started a thread on this topic. In that thread I have included quotes from Hitler, some books for you to check out, and some explanations on how and why Fascist theory is right wing. Ask any questions you like.

 

[SSDD]

"The main plank in the Nationalist Socialist program is to abolish the liberalistic concept of the individual and the Marxist concept of humanity and to substitute for them the folk community, rooted in the soil and bound together by the bond of its common blood."

More ignorance on your part. If you have read philosphy, you didn't get it. Maybe you should have read with a dictionary in hand. In hitler's time, liberal didn't mean what liberal means today. At that time, the word liberal wasn't a dirty word to distance oneself from. At that time, liberal was still used to describe the political philosophy of people like the founders of the US.

Individualism is the cornerstone of classical liberalism, or modern conservativism. Liberal as it is used today is the exact opposite of that. Modern liberalism has rejected individualism in favor of collectivism.

"The German state is gravely attacked by Marxism."

Again, two wings of the same house. Both interested in control of everything, but going about it in different ways.

"While Hitler's attitude towards liberalism was one of contempt, towards Marxism he showed an implacable hostility… Ignoring the profound differences between Communism and Social Democracy in practice and the bitter hostility between the rival working class parties, he saw in their common ideology the embodiment of all that he detested -- mass democracy and a leveling egalitarianism as opposed to the authoritarian state and the rule of an elite; equality and friendship among peoples as opposed to racial inequality and the domination of the strong; class solidarity versus national unity; internationalism versus nationalism."

Myth: Hitler was a leftist

Clearly, you never put your "historian's claims to the reality test. How can your historian actually believe that hitler destested mass democracy and leveling egalitarianism in the face of his actions? Hitler instituted programs that built modern houses for working class families (by 1933 hitler had built over two hundred thousand housing units. Before his defeat, he had provided almost a million and a half housing units for the german people...he instituted similar programs for farmers and the rent on the farms was tied to production and the rents could never exceed a small share of the farm's yearly earnings....he instituted a policy of SEVERAL WEEKS of PAID VACATION for workers along with weekend, state paid trips to state owned resorts.....he instituted social security and workers health and insurance systems....a program that loaned money at very low interest rates to newly married couples was instituted.....at the birth of each child, the couple had 1/4 of its debt cancelled.....and the list continues on and on.

Make no mistake, hitler was a socialist. His words and deeds confirm the fact. Socialist historians tend not to speak much about the expansive social programs that hitler instituted because it would create the obvious embarassment of acknowledging that hitler was one of them.

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

So you are telling me that hitler didn't know his own political views?

It's a little more complicated than that, I'm afraid.

I am afraid that it isn't.

Go to any source you trust, and I'm sure you'll find an explanation of why Nazis used the word 'socialism' without ever being socialist in the modern sense of the word.

I went to the only source that matters. History. hitler's acts, social programs, and thoughts are recorded and if you read them and look at what he did, it is clear that he was a socialist. It is funny that you guys work so hard to distance yourselves from him over the jews and yet embrace stalin and lenin who killed more people in the name of the state than hitler ever thought about.

 

[editec]

SSDD -

So you are telling me that hitler didn't know his own political views?

It's a little more complicated than that, I'm afraid.

Go to any source you trust, and I'm sure you'll find an explanation of why Nazis used the word 'socialism' without ever being socialist in the modern sense of the word.

I think that's the best way of you learning, and it saves me time posting material you either won't read or won't understand.

Please note that I have started a thread on this topic. In that thread I have included quotes from Hitler, some books for you to check out, and some explanations on how and why Fascist theory is right wing. Ask any questions you like.

Oh I think the NAZIs were a "kind" of socialism.

The mostly corporate kind of socialism. (aka fascism)

But one with an absolute dictator. (aka tyrannical fascism)

In other words, really really BAD socialism.

Just like there can be bad capitalism, bad anarchy, bad republicanism, even bad democracies.

There is NO form of government, and no form of economic system that cannot become oppressive.

This is the mistake newbies to the social sciences too often make.

they honestly think that a system can be better than the people in charge of it.

They think this DEPSITE THE FACT that they can find examples of government gone wrong through out history.

Basically these social science newbies are FAITH-BASED THINKERS because they don't know enough about the REAL WORLD to be anything else.

 

[Old Rocks]

Not only are they 'Faith based' but also in complete denial of reality. You can see that in the posts where they denigrate the work of scientists and intellectuals that have spent a lifetime studying subjects. In fact, it is wonderful irony that they sit in front of a computer, typing a post, stating that scientists are stupid, and have done nothing worthwhile. Really interesting on how some that actually claim to be scientists are the worst offenders.

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

So you are telling me that hitler didn't know his own political views?

It's a little more complicated than that, I'm afraid.

Go to any source you trust, and I'm sure you'll find an explanation of why Nazis used the word 'socialism' without ever being socialist in the modern sense of the word.

I think that's the best way of you learning, and it saves me time posting material you either won't read or won't understand.

Please note that I have started a thread on this topic. In that thread I have included quotes from Hitler, some books for you to check out, and some explanations on how and why Fascist theory is right wing. Ask any questions you like.

Oh I think the NAZIs were a "kind" of socialism.

The mostly corporate kind of socialism. (aka fascism)

But one with an absolute dictator. (aka tyrannical fascism)

In other words, really really BAD socialism.

Just like there can be bad capitalism, bad anarchy, bad republicanism, even bad democracies.

There is NO form of government, and no form of economic system that cannot become oppressive.

This is the mistake newbies to the social sciences too often make.

they honestly think that a system can be better than the people in charge of it.

They think this DEPSITE THE FACT that they can find examples of government gone wrong through out history.

Basically these social science newbies are FAITH-BASED THINKERS because they don't know enough about the REAL WORLD to be anything else.

Well said. It is good to know that there are still some people left who can look at the facts of what a government did and accurately place it on the correct political scale regardless of what revisionists have been saying for more than half a century.

 

[SSDD]

Not only are they 'Faith based' but also in complete denial of reality. You can see that in the posts where they denigrate the work of scientists and intellectuals that have spent a lifetime studying subjects. In fact, it is wonderful irony that they sit in front of a computer, typing a post, stating that scientists are stupid, and have done nothing worthwhile. Really interesting on how some that actually claim to be scientists are the worst offenders.

Not all scientists rocks....just those doing shoddy science for their political masters, or the next bit of funding...

Like all faithers, you only observe the things that you believe support your faith and either reject outright those that don't, or torture them into conforming to your view.

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

I'll contine the hilarious 'Hitler was a commie!' topic in its own thread, but if at any point you start to wonder WHY a communist might have said things like:

"The main plank in the Nationalist Socialist program is to abolish the liberalistic concept of the individual and the Marxist concept of humanity and to substitute for them the folk community, rooted in the soil and bound together by the bond of its common blood."

"The German state is gravely attacked by Marxism."

"In the years 1913 and 1914, I… expressed the conviction that the question of the future of the German nation was the question of destroying Marxism."

"In the economic sphere Communism is analogous to democracy in the political sphere."

"The Marxists will march with democracy until they succeed in indirectly obtaining for their criminal aims the support of even the national intellectual world, destined by them for extinction."

"Marxism itself systematically plans to hand the world over to the Jews."

"The Jewish doctrine of Marxism rejects the aristocratic principle of Nature and replaces the eternal privilege of power and strength by the mass of numbers and their dead weight."

...by all means ask.

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

I'll contine the hilarious 'Hitler was a commie!' topic in its own thread, but if at any point you start to wonder WHY a communist might have said things like:

.

You go ahead and do that. I will enjoy humiliating you on another topic. You might try looking up the definition of liberal in the 1930's and the definition of liberal today before you make to much of an ass though. Not doing so would be a foolish error on your part. Liberal in the 30's referred to classical liberal or today's conservative.....liberal today refers to socialism to one degree or another.

If you had a clue, you wouldn't need to be told such basic facts, but go ahead with your thread.

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

So how do you explain the quotes....a little strange for a Marxist, aren't they?

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

So how do you explain the quotes....a little strange for a Marxist, aren't they?

No. They are not strange at all if you realise that what was called a liberal in the 30's is not the same as what is called a liberal today. You obviously read the word liberal coming from hitler and assume that he is using the word in the same context as it is used today.

If you really knew your political philosophy, you would know that simply is not true and his demand that the liberalistic concept of the individual be destroyed is pure socialism.

In the 1930's the word liberal referred to classical liberalism. At that time the term classical liberalism wasn't in use because liberal had meant the same thing since the enlightenment. Classical liberalism is a philosophy in which the fundamental emphasis is to secure the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the state. Hitler was a nationalist socialist and for his political vision to be realised, the notion of the individual as a soveriegn who has rights that do not come from the state had to be eliminated.

When hitler said ""The main plank in the Nationalist Socialist program is to abolish the liberalistic concept of the individual and the Marxist concept of humanity and to substitute for them the folk community, rooted in the soil and bound together by the bond of its common blood." He was saying that conservative elements respecting the individual must be removed because they simply aren't compatible with his notions of socialism.

hitler saw the german culture as a collective community and the idea of the individual was simply not acceptable. Classical liberalism and the same philosphy by its modern name, conservativism simply was not compatible with the collective mentality. His "folk community" was an eutopian dream straight out of the socialist handbook. It was about turning guiding the german culture to a state of higher evolution via intelligent selective breeding, education, and methods of higher evolution by self effort and the elimination of "materialistic greed".

In 1933 hitler said in reference to his idea of the folk community:

"It is thus necessary that the individual should come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of his nation; that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole ... that above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual. .... This state of mind, which subordinates the interests of the ego to the conservation of the community, is really the first premise for every truly human culture .... we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow man."

That idea is straight out of the socialist book and has nothing whatsoever to do with conservativism which is all about preserving the rights of the individual and protecting the individual from government interference.

Contrast hitler's statements with other socialist leaders:

"Comrades! We must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all." (Nikita Khrushchev , February 25, 1956 20th Congress of the Communist Party)

All our lives we fought against exalting the individual, against the elevation of the single person, and long ago we were over and done with the business of a hero, and here it comes up again: the glorification of one personality. This is not good at all." (Vladimir Lenin, as quoted in "Not by Politics Alone.)

And contrast those statements with a couple of modern liberals here in the US.

We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society." (Hillary Clinton, 1993)

"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans ..." (President Bill Clinton, USA Today, March 11, 1993, Page 2A)

In the intervening years, the term liberal was turned on its head. In the 30's liberal refered to the sort of philosophy that the founders of the US held where the government existed entirely to protect the rights of the individual.

If you would take the time to learn the difference between classical liberalism and modern liberalism (two entirely different political philosophies) and understand that in the 1930's hitler was not talking about modern liberalism which is nothing more than various degrees of socialism, his comments make perfect sense if you understand that he was promoting socialism.

 

[skookerasbil]

Saigon.......s0n, do you get news up there in Bumfook, Finland? IDK.....perhaps the government keeps this shit from its citizens or somethng.

Theres an energy BOOMin America......and its not solar or wind or any other BS renewable.


Its Oil and natural gas.......fossil fuels where I come from!!!



So......who exactly is NOT winning?

"And the International Energy Agency projects the U.S. could leapfrog Saudi Arabia and Russia to become the world's biggest oil producer by 2020. IEA sees the U.S. becoming a net oil exporter by 2030."



Power Shift: Energy Boom Dawning in America




Like Ive been sayng........the science? Nobody cares.

 

[skookerasbil]

Saigon.......s0n, do you get news up there in Bumfook, Finland? IDK.....perhaps the government keeps this shit from its citizens or somethng.

Theres an energy BOOMin America......and its not solar or wind or any other BS renewable.


Its Oil and natural gas.......fossil fuels where I come from!!!



So......who exactly is NOT winning?


As a result, U.S. oil and gas production is growing so rapidly - and demand dropping so quickly - that in just five years the U.S. may no longer need to import oil from any source but Canada, according to Citigroup. And the International Energy Agency projects the U.S. could leapfrog Saudi Arabia and Russia to become the world's biggest oil producer by 2020. IEA sees the U.S. becoming a net oil exporter by 2030.




Power Shift: Energy Boom Dawning in America




Like Ive been sayng........the science? Nobody cares.

[/IMG]

 

[bripat9643]

SSDD -

So how do you explain the quotes....a little strange for a Marxist, aren't they?

No one has said Hitler was a Marxist. He was a socialist, however. The two are not indistinguishable. Marxists would be the first to tell you that not all socialists are Marxists.

 

[westwall]

SSDD -

So how do you explain the quotes....a little strange for a Marxist, aren't they?

Dude, you are pathetic. I asked you to describe the differences to the average citizen of both Soviet Russia and Fascist Germany and you post a stupid link. Use your own damned words and tell us the difference. It's not hard, let's see if the journalist wannabe can come up with an original thought.

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

So how do you explain the quotes....a little strange for a Marxist, aren't they?

Dude, you are pathetic. I asked you to describe the differences to the average citizen of both Soviet Russia and Fascist Germany and you post a stupid link. Use your own damned words and tell us the difference. It's not hard, let's see if the journalist wannabe can come up with an original thought.

It is more than obvious that orignial thinking isn't his best thing. He reads and either believes, or disbelieves depending on how well the author meshes with his preconcieved political notions. He was sure that hitler was a conservative based on a quote by hitler stating that the liberaistic notion of the individual must be abolished without realizing that the term liberal in 1930 didn't describe the same political philosophy as it does today.

Then he failed to note that by wanting to abolish the concept of the individual, he was speaking pure socialism. The concept of the individual and individual rights are exactly the opposite of socialism as evidenced by Khrushchev and lenen stating the same goals. I guess now he is going to say that those two were't socialist either.

He goes on about left wing and right wing and doesn't realise that he is talking about two wings in the same house. Lenin was definately to the left of hitler but both were socialists.

People like him who only research enough to find something that agrees with thier preconcieved notions rarely, if ever know what they are talking about. He hates the idea of hitler being socialist just like him so he went out looking for hitler quotes that seemed to be anti socialist. The problem was that he didn't know enough about political philosophy to recognize that the word liberal in 1930 described an entirely different political philosophy than it does today. Most of the revisionists have counted on poorly educated, uncritical thinkers to not know that and thus simply follow along with their claims that hitler wasn't socialist just like them insofar as simply being in the right wing of their very own philosophical house.

What's funny, and a bit pathetic is that he uses a quote from hitler stating that the concept of the individual must be abolished, and then in the link he provided to you about the myth that hitler was a leftist there is a list of supposed hitler policies. Right at the top is individualism over collectivism. Clearly his author (whoever it may be) never read any of hitler's speeches,, private writings, or bothered to look at the myriadof collectivist policies and projects hitler instituted.

His author goes on to claim that nazi germany preferred realism over idealism....the guy is an idiot. the third reich was pure idealism. He also went on to claim that nazi germany preferred gun ownership over gun control....nazi germany had the strictest gun control policies of the day. In the same list, his "author" also claimed that hitler favored common sense over scientific theory in the same list as he pointed out that hitler preferred eugenics over freedom of reproduction. The "author" is all over the board contradicting himself at damned near every turn.

This one is a real hoot also...gives an inkling of the sort of idiot that wrote it. In defense of his claim that hitler favored one-person rule or self-rule over democracy he gives this quote from hitler:

"The [Nazi party] should not become a constable of public opinion, but must dominate it. It must not become a servant of the masses, but their master!"

That quote is in direct and absolute opposition to the "author's" claim that hitler favored self rule.

In short, siagon, as we all know is a know nothing poser. He fancies himself as an intellectual but doesn't posess either the knowledge base or the intellect to pull the sham off. The more he talks, the more fraud he gets caught on.

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

So how do you explain the quotes....a little strange for a Marxist, aren't they?

No one has said Hitler was a Marxist. He was a socialist, however. The two are not indistinguishable. Marxists would be the first to tell you that not all socialists are Marxists.

Ah, right....!