Nazis Are Not Socialists

[Pogo]

National Socialist Party of Germany (NAZI), quotes about Nazi:
We ask that government undertake the obligation above all of providing citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living. The activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the interests of the community, but must take place within the confines and be for the good of all. Therefore, we demand: ... an end to the power of financial interest. We demand profit sharing in big business. We demand a broad extension of care for the aged. We demand ... the greatest possible consideration of small business in the purchases of the national, state, and municipal governments. In order to make possible to every capable and industrious [citizen] the attainment of higher education and thus the achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an all-around enlargement of our system of public education.... We demand the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents.... The government must undertake the improvement of public health -- by protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor -- by the greatest possible support for all groups concerned with the physical education of youth. [W]e combat the ... materialistic spirit within and without us, and are convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only proceed from within on the foundation of The Common Good Before the Individual Good.

Leave it to Socialists to disavow those who call themselves socialists and implement socialist policies.

Hilarious!

"Hilarious" might describe a wag who could have learned, just from this thread alone, that Nazis opposed socialists, sought to overthrow them running the country, organized the SA (storm troopers) to intimidate them, and tossed them into Dachau as soon as they came to power.

But of course that would have required actual work.

Left wingers are violent and often not logical. Just look to Berkley. They will slit their own mothers throat to obtain power.
This is not surprising in the least.

Nothing in any part of my post referred to or implied anything about "left wingers". Go learn how to read.

You are all collectivists. There are simply different flavors.

Once AGAIN unable to read simple English.

Once again for you Illiterati --- I made no mention of any "left wingers". NOR did I mention anything about "collectivists" or make any statement in the first person at all. You pulled all that entirely out of your ass, because you're illiterate.. And with every post.......... you dig deeper.

 

[Markle]

thats a fake quote dipshit

It is translated from Hitler’s May 1st speech in 1927, referenced in John Toland’s Adolf Hitler: The Definitive Biography, 1976, ISBN 0-385-42053-6. This is described in context in the article by John J. Ray, “Hitler was a Leftist.”

Who said, 'We are socialists... enemies of today's capitalistic economic system... with its unfair salaries...?'

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

thats a fake quote dipshit

It is translated from Hitler’s May 1st speech in 1927, referenced in John Toland’s Adolf Hitler: The Definitive Biography, 1976, ISBN 0-385-42053-6. This is described in context in the article by John J. Ray, “Hitler was a Leftist.”

Who said, 'We are socialists... enemies of today's capitalistic economic system... with its unfair salaries...?'

Bernie Sanders.

 

[Votto]

thats a fake quote dipshit

It is translated from Hitler’s May 1st speech in 1927, referenced in John Toland’s Adolf Hitler: The Definitive Biography, 1976, ISBN 0-385-42053-6. This is described in context in the article by John J. Ray, “Hitler was a Leftist.”

Who said, 'We are socialists... enemies of today's capitalistic economic system... with its unfair salaries...?'

It may well be. There is a lot of disinformation out there.

That is why I endorse a book by a historian on the topic

Hitler's Beneficiaries: Plunder, Racial War, and the Nazi Welfare State: Götz Aly: 9780805087260: Amazon.com: Books

The premise of the book is, Hitler simply bought off a war weary populace that was steeped in genocide.

Hitler feared an uprising from the masses like they had during WW1. To counter this, he embraced socialist policy. In fact, the citizens of Germany had a higher standard of living than those in the US during the war.

It worked like this. Hitler heavily taxed the top 4% of the wealthy in Germany. It not only brought in revenue, it made the lower classes happy as we see it does here in the States. Then he targeted an upwardly mobile minority, the Jews, and rounded them up, took their gold, and sent them off to die. In short, it was a money making scheme. Then he invaded countries, and then printed a currency so that the Nazi soldiers could simply use it to pay for anything they wanted thus looting the said country and sending the economy into hyperinflation. The Nazi regime simply instructed the country that they had looted to round up the Jews, take their gold, and stabilize their economy. Shrug, it worked like a charm.

Hitler then took all of his loot and used it for two things, the massive nanny state and the military, much like things are set up in the US today. Of course, the money simply was not enough, so Hitler simply printed the money out his arse. Debt rose so high that Hitler was afraid it might alarm some, so he instructed the government not to pass a budget so as not to arouse fear. Sound familiar? It is rumored that Hitler created so much debt that he essentially burned all of his bridges. It was either world conquest or economic ruin. Perhaps that was the plan all along. Of course, looking at the US, it all seems eerily familiar. In the US you also have a war weary populace that has a massive nanny state and military that has created massive debt. The only thing missing is the massive genocide.......unless you count the 50 million plus unborn who have lost their lives to abortion.

 

[Pogo]

Except when they are.

"White supremacists from the Traditionalist Workers Party, the League of the South and the National Socialist Movement — the country’s most-prominent neo-Nazi organization — gathered on the side of the town’s historic courthouse and screamed back and forth at anti-fascist (Antifa) demonstrators who were separated from the Nazis by police and barricades."

Socialists screaming at socialists.

Armed Nazis Descend On Tiny Kentucky Town

Oh...so now you guys are trying to pretend they are not rightwing extremists.

It's mind-boggling that they keep running this play expecting different results. Especially since the history books were already written before they were born.

 

[Pogo]

No, they couldn't be. The fact that Nazi is an shorthand form of "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei," which translates to "National-Socialist German Workers' Party" in English, the very word "socialist" being part of the term, is surely an indication that Nazis were and are not socialists.

Once again --- see the examples of the DPRK, GDR, Grape Nuts, 10.000 Maniacs etc, none of which are/were "democratic", contained neither grapes nor nuts, and do not place ten thousand people on the stage. The fact that some body calls itself "socialist" -- or "democratic", or "brothers" --- doesn't make them so. I can call myself a tangerine; the language allows me to make the claim. But the laws of biology don't allow me to BE a tangerine.

"Nazi", for its part, has become a separate term in itself, having nothing to do with the original German derivation, nor are we conversing IN German anyway. And even if we were, Nazi is a shortened form of National, not a shortened form of "socialist".

I'm sorry, but I don't know what to make of your comments. I don't because your first paragraph makes the point that terms have meaning that has nothing to do with whether one applies or accepts that meaning.

The fact that some body calls itself "socialist" -- or "democratic", or "brothers" --- doesn't make them so.

Then, in the next paragraph, you contradict that very idea.

even if we were, Nazi is a shortened form of National, not a shortened form of "socialist".

Now, I don't speak German, so maybe that's why it doesn't make sense to me that "Nazi" be a short form of "National" and not a short form of "Nationalsozialistische," which seems, even as non-speaker of German, to quite clearly indicate both "national" and "socialist." It seems to me the "na" is the shorthand for "national" and the "zi" is the shorthand for socialist. "Nationalsozialistische" doesn't really lose anything in the translation to English; there's are reason "National-Socialist" is hyphenated, that is to say, meaning is connected to the fact that it is. (See also/instead: What Is a Compound Adjective? Definition & Examples) Essentially, the meaing is that "National-Socialist" is the same thing in English as "Nationalsozialistische" in German, and every other way of combining those two words is not.

(Can I tell when someone does indeed mean "National-Socialist," rather than some other combination of that term, and thus has mispunctuated their writing? Only when they write enough that the context of what they mean becomes clear, no matter the words they write or punctuation they use or don't. When they don't write enough, their meaning is ambiguous. Make of that what you will, but the fact is that I've never learned how to read minds, but I have learned how to read what folks write.)

Pogo likes to pretend she is the board intellectual.

Who the fuck are you even talking about being a "board intellectual?
Rosie?

Honey you think YOU are. You're just a wannabe.

Then why did you use the pronoun "she"?
Are you fuckin' stoopid? I mean this is pretty basic stuff. Most people have it down by like, age three.

Take your own advice, I know exactly what is happening.

Evidently not.

 

[Votto]

The problem with Hitler was that he was a cutting edge progressive. He was huge environmentalists, big on animal rights, and embraced Keynesian Economics that FDR and the left love today. In fact, Keynes once said that Hitler proved his economic theory before he had a chance to write about it and ranted and raved about all the success he was having and wished the same could be done in the US.

Well, close to a century later Keynes is finally getting his dream come true.

 

[Pogo]

The problem with Hitler was that he was a cutting edge progressive. He was huge environmentalists, big on animal rights, and embraced Keynesian Economics that FDR and the left love today. In fact, Keynes once said that Hitler proved his economic theory before he had a chance to write about it and ranted and raved about all the success he was having and wished the same could be done in the US.

Well, close to a century later Keynes is finally getting his dream come true.

Ummmm....... no Spunky, the problem with Hitler was that he was a megalomaniac asshole bigot who intimidated, invaded and exterminated people. The depths of your ignorance never cease to astound.

 

[Votto]

The problem with Hitler was that he was a cutting edge progressive. He was huge environmentalists, big on animal rights, and embraced Keynesian Economics that FDR and the left love today. In fact, Keynes once said that Hitler proved his economic theory before he had a chance to write about it and ranted and raved about all the success he was having and wished the same could be done in the US.

Well, close to a century later Keynes is finally getting his dream come true.

Ummmm....... no Spunky, the problem with Hitler was that he was a megalomaniac asshole bigot who intimidated, invaded and exterminated people. The depths of your ignorance never cease to astound.

The problem is a centralized system that allows that to happen.

If you have such a system, it's not a matter of if, but when.

Men like Hitler are a dime a dozen

Before the war, Keynes bragged that his economic policies are best carried out under a dictatorship than a democracy.

 

[Pogo]

The problem with Hitler was that he was a cutting edge progressive. He was huge environmentalists, big on animal rights, and embraced Keynesian Economics that FDR and the left love today. In fact, Keynes once said that Hitler proved his economic theory before he had a chance to write about it and ranted and raved about all the success he was having and wished the same could be done in the US.

Well, close to a century later Keynes is finally getting his dream come true.

Ummmm....... no Spunky, the problem with Hitler was that he was a megalomaniac asshole bigot who intimidated, invaded and exterminated people. The depths of your ignorance never cease to astound.

The problem is a centralized system that allows that to happen.

If you have such a system, it's not a matter of if, but when.

Men like Hitler are a dime a dozen

Before the war, Keynes bragged that his economic policies are best carried out under a dictatorship than a democracy.

Once again Spunkles ------ no. HItlers are not a "dime a dozen".

Nor is the tenacity with which you continue to dig your own hole.

 

[Votto]

The problem with Hitler was that he was a cutting edge progressive. He was huge environmentalists, big on animal rights, and embraced Keynesian Economics that FDR and the left love today. In fact, Keynes once said that Hitler proved his economic theory before he had a chance to write about it and ranted and raved about all the success he was having and wished the same could be done in the US.

Well, close to a century later Keynes is finally getting his dream come true.

Ummmm....... no Spunky, the problem with Hitler was that he was a megalomaniac asshole bigot who intimidated, invaded and exterminated people. The depths of your ignorance never cease to astound.

The problem is a centralized system that allows that to happen.

If you have such a system, it's not a matter of if, but when.

Men like Hitler are a dime a dozen

Before the war, Keynes bragged that his economic policies are best carried out under a dictatorship than a democracy.

Once again Spunkles ------ no. HItlers are not a "dime a dozen".

Nor is the tenacity with which you continue to dig your own hole.

Look at NK, Moa, Stalin, Saddam, Chavez, and the list goes on and on.

Yea, yea they are. There is nothing special about him.

Do you think Hitler was special because of the genocide? Have you ever done a study of recorded human genocide? There is nothing special here either.

In fact, you might come to the conclusion that genocide is simply human nature.

 

[Pogo]

 

[usmbguest5318]

I thought we already agreed on and was in fact the first point I made upon arrival here. And in fact am still having to make since the intellectually foot-in-mouthed are still at it, having come late to the thread and not bothering to read it first.

I guess I missed that post. Sorry. The first of yours in this thread that I read is the on to which I responded.

FWIW, my thread posting and reading generally consists of reading an OP and responding to it. I may read/reply to a post that appears right after I click "Post Reply" and that looks interesting (or too inane to ignore), but if I come to a thread after it's got a plethora of posts, no, I'm not reading through all that stuff. That said, for the most part, I don't peruse threads looking for what the population of responders have had to say. There're just far too many posts that, while often enough innocuous, are so unremarkable that it's not worth culling through them to find that one "pearl" hidden in the miasma of bêtise.

 

[Pogo]

I thought we already agreed on and was in fact the first point I made upon arrival here. And in fact am still having to make since the intellectually foot-in-mouthed are still at it, having come late to the thread and not bothering to read it first.

I guess I missed that post. Sorry. The first of yours in this thread that I read is the on to which I responded.

FWIW, my thread posting and reading generally consists of reading an OP and responding to it. I may read/reply to a post that appears right after I click "Post Reply" and that looks interesting (or too inane to ignore), but if I come to a thread after it's got a plethora of posts, no, I'm not reading through all that stuff. That said, for the most part, I don't peruse threads looking for what the population of responders have had to say. There're just far too many posts that, while often enough innocuous, are so unremarkable that it's not worth culling through them to find that one "pearl" hidden in the miasma of bêtise.

Eloquently put, but just for clarity, my reference to "coming late to the thread and not bothering to read it first" is a direct callout of Votto, the author of the ingoramitudinous dump directly going on at the time, not a reference to you. I thought that was obvious but it does require awareness of contemporaneous posts.

 

[Coyote]

National Socialist Party of Germany (NAZI), quotes about Nazi:
We ask that government undertake the obligation above all of providing citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living. The activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the interests of the community, but must take place within the confines and be for the good of all. Therefore, we demand: ... an end to the power of financial interest. We demand profit sharing in big business. We demand a broad extension of care for the aged. We demand ... the greatest possible consideration of small business in the purchases of the national, state, and municipal governments. In order to make possible to every capable and industrious [citizen] the attainment of higher education and thus the achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an all-around enlargement of our system of public education.... We demand the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents.... The government must undertake the improvement of public health -- by protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor -- by the greatest possible support for all groups concerned with the physical education of youth. [W]e combat the ... materialistic spirit within and without us, and are convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only proceed from within on the foundation of The Common Good Before the Individual Good.

Leave it to Socialists to disavow those who call themselves socialists and implement socialist policies.

Hilarious!

"Hilarious" might describe a wag who could have learned, just from this thread alone, that Nazis opposed socialists, sought to overthrow them running the country, organized the SA (storm troopers) to intimidate them, and tossed them into Dachau as soon as they came to power.

But of course that would have required actual work.

We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.
Adolf Hitler

thats been debunked more times than the crowd size of trumps inaugural address

historyandpolitics77: "We are socialists ...." Debunked
"We are socialists ...." Debunked

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler, Quoted in John Toland, "Adolf Hitler", p224.
Put into Google Hitler and socialist, and you're bound to come up with various websites with the above quote. Because of the way in which it get's used, i regard it as hitler's "There is no such thing as society" moment. What i mean is, A quote which is Always taken out of context to further a false point.

So what is the context you may ask? I provide the answer below.

It was to only try and wean some of the working class support over to him that he made references like he did to socialism. And that never really worked, the Nazis always had the least support from the working class. In that particular section of the book Toland is discussing Hitler's use of propaganda and his oratory style. He starts out by stating that the Berlin Nazi party (or Gau) was in disarray at this time and Goebbels was sent to straighten out the situation. He found that "The thousand party members under his jurisdiction were opposed on the streets by overwhelming numbers of Communists and Social Democrats." The course of action they decided on was to do everything they could to pick fights and to basically 'Red Bait' the Leftists in order to enflame violence, and to use propaganda to confuse the masses to try and weaken the real Left. "Goebbles decided it was now time to broaden the base of membership and to do that he had to attract the attention of the jaded public, "Berlin needs its sensations as a fish needs water", he (Goebbels) wrote" (ibid p223) So the best way they decided to inflame the situation was for violent action "SA troops deliberately sought out physical combat with the Reds," (Ibid p224) and for Hitler to give a speech on May Day. And not only that, but to give speeches in meeting halls that were taken over from the Communists. ""Making noise" he (Hitler) once said, "is an effective means of opposition"" (Ibid p224) And that is the true light that the quote must be taken as, making noise to provoke. False propaganda meant to inflame. Fights were started and the Newspapers proclaimed that there was this little known party, as it was not very large in Berlin at the time, fighting the Communists and Socialists. "The publicity was meant to be derogatory but in the next few days 2600 applications for membership were received," (Ibid p224) So this all served their purpose. And Toland, immediately after using the quote, and in the very next sentence of the same paragraph states, "This was followed by a long dissertation on Lebensraum, in Hitler's continuing effort to pound this concept into the membership. Sixty-two million Germans he said, were crowded into an area only 450,000 kilometers square. "This is a ridiculous figure when one considers the size of other nations in the world today." There were two solutions: either decrease he population by "chasing our best human material out of Germany" or "bring the soil into consonance with the population, even if it must be done by war. This is the natural way which Providence has prescribed." (Ibid p225)

Notice a couple of things here, first that he only uses one line calling himself a socialist and this is meant to inflame the Socialists and the rest of the Left, just get publicity and to confuse those that may not know the reality behind their party. The latter of which Hitler makes clear in his detailed policy of Lebensraum which has nothing to do with socialism. So not only does he merely state without any justification that he is a socialist, he makes it clear that his policy is not a socialist one but a racial and colonial one. So Hitler does not at all expound on the socialist statement, but he goes into detail on Lebensraum, which makes it clear that there is no real socialism behind his 'socialist' statement but there is to his expansionary and racist policies. "Again and again he hammered at race and the fact that Germany's future lay in the conquest of eastern territories. Over and over he preached his pseudo-Darwinist sermon of nature's way: conquest of the weak by the strong." (Ibid p226) As an honest reading of Toland would indicate; something that those that use this quote like Ray has obviously not done, but had probably only acquired it from a cheap Web search, probably from a Heritage institute or Glen Beck site; The mentioning of 'Socialist' was only propaganda. It is part of a larger section by Toland treating that subject and the attempt by the Nazi to develop support while weakening the other parties. Except for the racial policy and expansion, Hitler, when the party was first building its support, would say anything, no matter how disingenuous, to try and be attractive to every segment of the political society.


QUOTE]

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word 'Nazi' is a German abbreviation for 'National Socialist' (Nationalsozialist) and the full name of Hitler's political party (translated) was 'The National Socialist German Workers' Party' (In German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei).
Dr. John Joseph Ray

Amazing. Having been called out for failing to read the thread he proceeds to dig himself even deeper, burrowing into the depths of yet more points already refuted as soon as the dead-end thread opened. See "Pennsylvania Dutch" (who are not Dutch), the "People's Democratic Republic of Korea" (which is not democratic), "10,000 Maniacs (whose membership has never approached ten thousand), and Post "Grape Nuts" (which contains neither grapes nor nuts in any form). Oh and also see the "Gymnastic and Sports Division", which is what Hitler called his brownshirts --- whose job was to go out and beat up socialists ---- Dumbass.

Naziism is a far-right movement. That's where it started and that's where it lives. And no amount of whining on a political message board about "ignorance is strength" is going to wipe out known history, so put a lid on it.

The righwing doesn't like to own up to it's extremists. They'd rather just call them all left. Much more convenient.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I mention anything about "collectivists" or make any statement in the first person at all. You pulled all that entirely out of your ass

I don't know why, but many people who post here exhibit a penchant for inferring and ascribing to others things that were neither implied, said or intended. It may in some instances be that they made a valid inference, but as one of my signature quotes states, "When pontificating and sharing your analysis, providing citations ...will help convince them that you have thought seriously about the matter under discussion." Merely quoting a whole damn post containing multiple points does not a citation make; that's merely a response, and it certainly doesn't constitute "analysis."

I don't know how people come to perceive they can have an effective, efficient, and purely written adult discussion with total strangers and not do so, but apparently lots of folks think one can.

 

[asaratis]

the only people who call the nazis socialist are other nazis

Nazis are fascist fools!

 

[Pogo]

I mention anything about "collectivists" or make any statement in the first person at all. You pulled all that entirely out of your ass

I don't know why, but many people who post here exhibit a penchant for inferring and ascribing to others things that were neither implied, said or intended. It may in some instances be that they made a valid inference, but as one of my signature quotes states, "When pontificating and sharing your analysis, providing citations ...will help convince them that you have thought seriously about the matter under discussion." Merely quoting a whole damn post containing multiple points does not a citation make; that's merely a response, and it certainly doesn't constitute "analysis."

I don't know how people come to perceive they can have an effective, efficient, and purely written adult discussion with total strangers and not do so, but apparently lots of folks think one can.

That one came waddling in waving the old "it's in the name" canard, a fallacy already exposed as such; then he wafted over to the old "Hitler was a leftist" revisionism and got spanked there too --- then, not to be outdone by himself, proposed that Hitler's negative was "Keynesian economics" and that he was "a dime a dozen". Then he ran away.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I thought we already agreed on and was in fact the first point I made upon arrival here. And in fact am still having to make since the intellectually foot-in-mouthed are still at it, having come late to the thread and not bothering to read it first.

I guess I missed that post. Sorry. The first of yours in this thread that I read is the on to which I responded.

FWIW, my thread posting and reading generally consists of reading an OP and responding to it. I may read/reply to a post that appears right after I click "Post Reply" and that looks interesting (or too inane to ignore), but if I come to a thread after it's got a plethora of posts, no, I'm not reading through all that stuff. That said, for the most part, I don't peruse threads looking for what the population of responders have had to say. There're just far too many posts that, while often enough innocuous, are so unremarkable that it's not worth culling through them to find that one "pearl" hidden in the miasma of bêtise.

Eloquently put, but just for clarity, my reference to "coming late to the thread and not bothering to read it first" is a direct callout of Votto, the author of the ingoramitudinous dump directly going on at the time, not a reference to you. I thought that was obvious but it does require awareness of contemporaneous posts.

my reference to "coming late to the thread and not bothering to read it first" is a direct callout of Votto,

Okay. I'm fine with that. "Coming late to the thread and not bothering to read it first" is something I do, and I wanted to be clear about owning that I do and the consequences of doing so. I am aware that doing so means at times I will miss relevant information a person with whom I engage already shared.

You could as well have said the same thing of me (a post of mine) and easily have been correct. Indeed, had I realized you'd already written about the irrelevance of the extant etymology of "Nazi," I suspect we probably would not have had the "digression" we did. That's my fault for not having read your earlier posts. I'm fine with taking that "heat."

 

[Pogo]

"Hilarious" might describe a wag who could have learned, just from this thread alone, that Nazis opposed socialists, sought to overthrow them running the country, organized the SA (storm troopers) to intimidate them, and tossed them into Dachau as soon as they came to power.

But of course that would have required actual work.

We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.
Adolf Hitler

thats been debunked more times than the crowd size of trumps inaugural address

historyandpolitics77: "We are socialists ...." Debunked
"We are socialists ...." Debunked

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler, Quoted in John Toland, "Adolf Hitler", p224.
Put into Google Hitler and socialist, and you're bound to come up with various websites with the above quote. Because of the way in which it get's used, i regard it as hitler's "There is no such thing as society" moment. What i mean is, A quote which is Always taken out of context to further a false point.

So what is the context you may ask? I provide the answer below.

It was to only try and wean some of the working class support over to him that he made references like he did to socialism. And that never really worked, the Nazis always had the least support from the working class. In that particular section of the book Toland is discussing Hitler's use of propaganda and his oratory style. He starts out by stating that the Berlin Nazi party (or Gau) was in disarray at this time and Goebbels was sent to straighten out the situation. He found that "The thousand party members under his jurisdiction were opposed on the streets by overwhelming numbers of Communists and Social Democrats." The course of action they decided on was to do everything they could to pick fights and to basically 'Red Bait' the Leftists in order to enflame violence, and to use propaganda to confuse the masses to try and weaken the real Left. "Goebbles decided it was now time to broaden the base of membership and to do that he had to attract the attention of the jaded public, "Berlin needs its sensations as a fish needs water", he (Goebbels) wrote" (ibid p223) So the best way they decided to inflame the situation was for violent action "SA troops deliberately sought out physical combat with the Reds," (Ibid p224) and for Hitler to give a speech on May Day. And not only that, but to give speeches in meeting halls that were taken over from the Communists. ""Making noise" he (Hitler) once said, "is an effective means of opposition"" (Ibid p224) And that is the true light that the quote must be taken as, making noise to provoke. False propaganda meant to inflame. Fights were started and the Newspapers proclaimed that there was this little known party, as it was not very large in Berlin at the time, fighting the Communists and Socialists. "The publicity was meant to be derogatory but in the next few days 2600 applications for membership were received," (Ibid p224) So this all served their purpose. And Toland, immediately after using the quote, and in the very next sentence of the same paragraph states, "This was followed by a long dissertation on Lebensraum, in Hitler's continuing effort to pound this concept into the membership. Sixty-two million Germans he said, were crowded into an area only 450,000 kilometers square. "This is a ridiculous figure when one considers the size of other nations in the world today." There were two solutions: either decrease he population by "chasing our best human material out of Germany" or "bring the soil into consonance with the population, even if it must be done by war. This is the natural way which Providence has prescribed." (Ibid p225)

Notice a couple of things here, first that he only uses one line calling himself a socialist and this is meant to inflame the Socialists and the rest of the Left, just get publicity and to confuse those that may not know the reality behind their party. The latter of which Hitler makes clear in his detailed policy of Lebensraum which has nothing to do with socialism. So not only does he merely state without any justification that he is a socialist, he makes it clear that his policy is not a socialist one but a racial and colonial one. So Hitler does not at all expound on the socialist statement, but he goes into detail on Lebensraum, which makes it clear that there is no real socialism behind his 'socialist' statement but there is to his expansionary and racist policies. "Again and again he hammered at race and the fact that Germany's future lay in the conquest of eastern territories. Over and over he preached his pseudo-Darwinist sermon of nature's way: conquest of the weak by the strong." (Ibid p226) As an honest reading of Toland would indicate; something that those that use this quote like Ray has obviously not done, but had probably only acquired it from a cheap Web search, probably from a Heritage institute or Glen Beck site; The mentioning of 'Socialist' was only propaganda. It is part of a larger section by Toland treating that subject and the attempt by the Nazi to develop support while weakening the other parties. Except for the racial policy and expansion, Hitler, when the party was first building its support, would say anything, no matter how disingenuous, to try and be attractive to every segment of the political society.


QUOTE]

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word 'Nazi' is a German abbreviation for 'National Socialist' (Nationalsozialist) and the full name of Hitler's political party (translated) was 'The National Socialist German Workers' Party' (In German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei).
Dr. John Joseph Ray

Amazing. Having been called out for failing to read the thread he proceeds to dig himself even deeper, burrowing into the depths of yet more points already refuted as soon as the dead-end thread opened. See "Pennsylvania Dutch" (who are not Dutch), the "People's Democratic Republic of Korea" (which is not democratic), "10,000 Maniacs (whose membership has never approached ten thousand), and Post "Grape Nuts" (which contains neither grapes nor nuts in any form). Oh and also see the "Gymnastic and Sports Division", which is what Hitler called his brownshirts --- whose job was to go out and beat up socialists ---- Dumbass.

Naziism is a far-right movement. That's where it started and that's where it lives. And no amount of whining on a political message board about "ignorance is strength" is going to wipe out known history, so put a lid on it.

The righwing doesn't like to own up to it's extremists. They'd rather just call them all left. Much more convenient.

And far less work to just parrot a myth, punctuated with "because I said so, I don' need no steenking link", than to actually do one's homework. It's the path of least resistance.

It's rhetorically analogous to the welfare leech they claim to despise -- take a handout from some blogger from parts unknown instead of doing one's own research.