Hitler and socialism – rationalwiki gas oil ratio


An entirely Americentric argument, spurred on by certain batty ideo logues and infamous websites, claims that Adolf Hitler was not the far-right, anti-communist nationalist that everyone else remembers him to be, but rather an egalitarian socialist. [1] Much like the Discovery Institute and their assault on the theory of evolution, this attempts to evoke the association fallacy on anyone who practices left-wing politics and by that standard anyone who slightly leans to the left is an adherent of fascism. The fact that we even need to write this should tell you something about these people, but why not take a hack at it? While the Nazis did oppose capitalism as an " international" ideology out to destroy the German nation, Hitler was not opposed to private enterprise within a national "sandbox". Furthermore, in order to get to power he allied with people whose economic views were much more pro-business, distancing himself from alte kaempfer like Gottfried Feder and bringing people such as Hjalmar Schacht into his circle.

“ ”It this historic hour, we German Social Democrats pledge ourselves to the principles of humanity and justice, of freedom and socialism. No Enabling Act can give you the power to destroy ideas which are eternal and indestructible … You can take our lives and our freedom, but you cannot take our honour. We are defenseless but not honourless.

• That the 96-member Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) was Hitler’s main opposition in the Reichstag and the only political party that attempted to halt the laws that established him as dictator and brought down the Weimar Republic. In fact, all of the ideological predecessors of today’s conservative and classically liberal parties voted unanimously for the law, while the SPD voted unanimously against despite the presence of SA guards in the building. [3] [4]

• That the Strasserites , the only strand of Nazism that could be referred to as "left-wing" (i.e. pro- working class in nature), were all killed off (with a handful of conservative dissidents) in what we all know as the Night of the Long Knives.

Hitler was not by any means a political theorist akin to Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Che, Mao or any other of the members of the Marxist pantheon. In fact, the most obvious point he makes in Mein Kampf is that he found the topics of political economy and class boring and mundane, lacking any merit for deep thought (mostly due to the fact he was absolutely clueless about the topic). Rather, Hitler’s basic belief was this:

Hitler believed that Germany could have won World War I if the Socialist Second International (all of whom had pretty Jewish last names – of course almost any German surname can be Jewish) had not conspired with the Bolsheviks, [8] "hijacked" the government and "forced" the German surrender. This piece of Nazi pseudohistory is known as the stab-in-the-back legend. [9]

Hitler said that everything ever touched by Jews, especially their evil new "religion" of Bolshevism, was a huge cabal… with international capitalism. However, he also said that the notably Christian " Bismarckian Socialism" was not just un-Jewish, it was wholly German and had been a highlight of their cultural and imperial epoch. Ergo, he decided to create a new reactionary populist political trend from a century before. The fact he chose to add the word "socialist" to the party name (National Socialist German Workers’ Party) was as relevant to his true thinking as would be tying the word " rational" to Stalin or " Democratic People’s Republic" to China or North Korea — a fig-leaf to sucker the hoi polloi vote.

Not only did Hitler make clear he wanted to eradicate the Bolsheviks and any elements of communism on the planet, every type of leftie on earth, from the Soviets to the British Labour Party to George Orwell, saw the Nazis as bad news. Nonetheless, because Stalin wanted to consolidate power in the government, he adopted the all-or-nothing "social fascist" policy and as a result across Europe and Asia the German Communist Party spent more time demonizing moderate dissidents as fascists (sound familiar?), [10] rather than the actual Nazis who were keen to murder them all as soon as humanly possible. Trotsky of course called this point, [11] but like almost everybody else in the 1920s thought of Hitler more as a cranky tool of German business interests than a genuinely sociopathic authoritarian that could manage to get enough political support. It was only into the tumultuous 1930s and later the liberation of the extermination camps in Eastern Europe that the Allies realized who they had really been up against.

• ↑ Yeah, Hitler was such an egalitarian socialist that "[t]o maintain the supposed purity and strength of the Aryan race, the Nazis sought to exterminate Jews, Romani and Poles along with the vast majority of other Slavs and the physically and mentally handicapped. They imposed exclusionary segregation on homosexuals, Africans, Jehovah’s Witnesses and political opponents. The persecution reached its climax when the party-controlled German state organized the systematic murder of approximately six million Jews and five million people from the other targeted groups, in what has become known as the Holocaust". Furthermore, improving the stock of the Germanic people alone through racial purity and eugenics, broad social welfare programs and a collective subordination of individual rights, which could be sacrificed (obviously not by "Aryan master race", but by "undesirable people" only) for the good of the state and the "Aryan master race", isn’t socialism (not left-wing socialism anyway). Hitler wasn’t even egalitarian in his method of killings.