Althouse: "A prominent far-right leader who dismissed the Nazi era as mere bird poop on Germany’s 1,000-year history was swimming in a lake near his house one evening recently..."

June 7, 2018

"A prominent far-right leader who dismissed the Nazi era as mere bird poop on Germany’s 1,000-year history was swimming in a lake near his house one evening recently..."

"... when a man on the shore grabbed his clothes. The thief’s parting words: 'Nazis don’t need bathing fun!'... The episode unleashed plenty of schadenfreude, and some criticism, on social media. Images of a dripping [Alexander] Gauland being escorted back to his house while wearing only a colorful pair of patterned swimming shorts spread rapidly, and a hashtag was born: #bathingfun."

NYT.

The thief's remark is translated from the German, which was "Nazis brauchen keinen Badespaß!" In case you want to do your own translating.

316 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 316 of 316

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: It isn't really "crony capitalism" when the German government was the one reaping the benefits of ownership.

What bullshit. You expect any of us on the left to be dumb enough to deny that there were wealthy capitalists individually profiting handsomely off of Hitler's regime and his war machine? Go watch Schindler's List. What you're doing here is pretending that tax-free societies with unfunded governments can actually exist, and blaming the Third Reich for not being yet another one of these imaginary inventions you right-wingers keep dreaming of. Get a clue.; 6/7/18, 6:44 PM
Matt Sablan said...: So, we have a couple of potential theories.

1. Hitler, actually a far-right politician, accidentally Scooby Doo'ed himself into socialism when committing his evil acts.

2. Hitler was exactly what he said he was: a power hungry totalitarian willing to use any tool that came to his hand, often using socialism and nationalism as bludgeons to consolidate power.

3. Hitler was exactly what his party appeared to be: Nationalists who looked to strengthen and consolidate power within the state using socialism, often trying to appear benign by nominally leaving allies in charge while using the power of the government to run the economy.

Of just these three, I'm supposed to believe the first one? Why should I believe the most ridiculous theory when better ones are at hand?; 6/7/18, 6:46 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: The Nazis industrialized without the industrialists - right. Lol!; 6/7/18, 6:47 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "Go watch Schindler's List."

... The point of Schindler's List is that Oscar Schindler is a hero for standing up to the government by rejecting how the government wanted him to use money, wealth and power and rebelling against them at personal cost. The entire point is that he *broke the government's control* over him and chose to use his money selflessly instead of giving in to the government's will.

Not only that, you ignore *why* the government entrusted him with the job. It wasn't because he was just some rich guy. He reached his position of power *because he had been a spy for the German government.* They thought they could trust him.; 6/7/18, 6:49 PM
Matt Sablan said...: (Or Oskar Schindler, since I am bad at spelling.); 6/7/18, 6:49 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Hitler was exactly what his party appeared to be: Nationalists who looked to strengthen and consolidate power within the state using socialism...

Using socialism?

I thought he was using vegetarianism.

Or was it his anti-smoking policy that made him a genocidal fascist thug? Maybe the Volkswagen Beetle had something to do with it.

I can never keep track.; 6/7/18, 6:50 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Also: The German government *is exactly who profited off of Schindler's Jewish workers.* Of course, this was because Schindler was bribing them and buying things on the black market to supply them, but if he had been one of Hitler's willing executioners, the government would have been profiting off of their forced labor.; 6/7/18, 6:50 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Still waiting for right-wingers to provide me this evidence of how businesses were banned under Hitler and no industrialists got wealthy industrializing the country and regime. Also waiting to how all that massive redistribution that never really happened to any appreciable extent happened, other than the property "redistributed" from the Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, communists and Slavs that his goons stole and liquidated.

Stop being an ass.; 6/7/18, 6:53 PM
buwaya said...: "there were wealthy capitalists individually profiting handsomely off of Hitler's regime and his war machine?"

Indeed. This is the inevitable result of a state-run or state-mediated, or semi-socialist regime. Any one.

Consider that the French state made Marcel Dassault and his son Serge, who passed away this March, immensely wealthy through its favoritism amid various nationalizations and mergers, Serge leaving a fortune of $27 Billion. Consider the integration of Elf or Total or BNP into the French state.

Its the same thing the Nazis were doing for the Krupp and IG Farben, which was not all that different from what the German Imperial government was doing before then.; 6/7/18, 6:54 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: Michael, the historians I linked to: Ian Kershaw, Richard J Evans and the journalist William Shirer have pretty much said you're full of shit. I’m quite sure they’ve read the 25 point program Hitler delivered at the Hofbräuhaus on 24 Feb 1920.

Obviously, you’ve not read any of Ian Kershaw or Richard Evans works and your ignorant stubborness tells the tale. You’re nothing more than a pretentious jerk.; 6/7/18, 6:54 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Also: The German government...

Yes. War is profitable both for regime and contractor, as everyone already knows. Next.; 6/7/18, 6:55 PM
Michael said...: There were a number of industrial concerns in Germany that profited mightily from the war and a goodly number of US firms that did so as well. But just as in England and the US the German govt very much had its hand on the production throttle.; 6/7/18, 6:55 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "I’m quite sure they’ve read the 25 point program Hitler delivered at the Hofbräuhaus on 24 Feb 1920."

-- Eh, I wouldn't say that. A lot of Civil War Historians don't seem to have read the Cornerstone Speech and insist slavery played almost no role in the Civil War.; 6/7/18, 6:56 PM
buwaya said...: "The Nazis industrialized without the industrialists"

The Nazis had an 7-year run, at best, in peacetime economics. German industry pre-existed the Nazis almost entirely, the legacy of the German industrial revolution of the 19th century-1914. The Nazis created very little.; 6/7/18, 6:57 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Hey Sablan - do let me know when you uncover all that massive evidence of the worker's co-ops that flourished and redistributed all German profits during the war while keeping the owners from profiting.

That would have been some cover-up.; 6/7/18, 6:57 PM
Michael said...: Inga
I not only have read them, I actually own them. They are here in my library. Read. But don't take Hitler's word for it. LOL.

But whatever you do, don't actually read the 25 point program. It would confuse you.; 6/7/18, 6:59 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "Still waiting for right-wingers to provide me this evidence of how businesses were banned under Hitler and no industrialists got wealthy industrializing the country and regime."

-- That's a strawman and also ignores things like the Herman Goring Ironworks and that by 1943, nearly 500 companies were owned by the German government.; 6/7/18, 7:00 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: @ Matthew

So, we have a couple of potential theories.

1. Hitler, actually a far-right politician, accidentally Scooby Doo'ed himself into socialism when committing his evil acts.

2. Hitler was exactly what he said he was: a power hungry totalitarian willing to use any tool that came to his hand, often using socialism and nationalism as bludgeons to consolidate power.

3. Hitler was exactly what his party appeared to be: Nationalists who looked to strengthen and consolidate power within the state using socialism, often trying to appear benign by nominally leaving allies in charge while using the power of the government to run the economy.

Of just these three, I'm supposed to believe the first one? Why should I believe the most ridiculous theory when better ones are at hand?

Worth a big hearty repeat.

#1! #1! +Trump is a Nazi; 6/7/18, 7:00 PM
buwaya said...: A war economy anywhere is government directed.

Britain and the US took "socialist" control of their economies, imposing central planning even pre-war to a degree, and completely so throughout the war. Germany began even earlier, but was a laggard in imposing complete economic control on the British model until they were on the back foot in the war.; 6/7/18, 7:01 PM
wholelottasplainin said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/7/18, 7:01 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Oh. Wait.

I get it now, that I see the workers' co-op comment. The issue is that I'm talking about socialism -- the thing that everyone understands -- but I'm being asked to compare it to this sudden new definition of socialism. Well, OK. You're new definition of socialism, which morphs as needed, probably isn't what Hitler was doing, since part of its definition appears to be "not what Hitler did."; 6/7/18, 7:02 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Michael's having trouble discerning what ideas Hitler flirted with early on and may have kept for propaganda value vs. those that were actually part of the core program he needed to run.

It's like he didn't realize that when Trump ran for president he said he wouldn't cut Medicare. Or that he'd invest in public works. Or that he wouldn't be a neocon warmonger. Wow. It's like every American right-wing politician lies in campaigns to get elected but Michael thinks Hitler must have been the most honest-to-goodness boy scout of the bunch. Maybe the Holocaust didn't even happen - given Hitler's silence about it. He said they'd go to Madagascar, right?

Dumbass.; 6/7/18, 7:02 PM
buwaya said...: And it would be absurd to say that favored German industrialists came off better than favored American industrialists during the US war economy.; 6/7/18, 7:04 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "Britain and the US took "socialist" control of their economies, imposing central planning even pre-war to a degree, and completely so throughout the war."

-- I mean, yes and no. Looking at Detroit and the industry there during WW2, you can see that the American government was very, very careful not to go too far, and after the war, to walkback as much as it could. The government, during war, definitely becomes a major stakeholder, but the U.S. Constitution has a lot of built in protections that will keep America from going as far as other nations have gone, or if it does, allows citizens to recoup their losses. It isn't perfect, but I don't think you could really call it a "socialist" system.; 6/7/18, 7:04 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: -- That's a strawman and also ignores things like the Herman Goring Ironworks and that by 1943, nearly 500 companies were owned by the German government.

Well, totalitarians do like to increase their control now, don't they? I don't suppose you figure Trump wants a hand in anyone's business, do you? He seems to be telling them all what to do already. Guess that makes him a socialist.

But he'll still let his industrialist friends get insanely rich off the game and so did Schickelgruber. Hello.; 6/7/18, 7:04 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Well, I tried. But since President Pee-Pee Tape is just tossing up strawmen, there's not much point in wasting posts there.; 6/7/18, 7:05 PM
wholelottasplainin said...: Blogger Jay Elink said...
“Nazism represented an extreme form of nationalism. Hitler preached to his people: "Your life is bound up with the life of your whole people. The nation is not merely the root of your strength; it is the root of your very life."

[Hitler] asked his people to acknowledge their profound dependence upon Germany, declaring:

Our Nation is not just an idea in which you have no part; you yourself support the nation; to it you belong; you cannot separate yourself from it.

*******************************************************************
Mussolini: "Everything Within the State, Nothing Against the State, Nothing Outside the State."

Inga, compare and contrast. Then tell us why American conservatives have always sought to rein in the power of the state, if fascism is "right wing".; 6/7/18, 7:08 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: They're not straw men. They directly address your cover-up of what Hitler and his regime was. And what it was not: i.e. post-war France, post-war Scandinavia, post-war Germany, post-war all of Western Europe. Real social democracies/"socialist countries" and not one whose only redistribution regime consisted of redistributing the stolen and looted property of all his "undesirable" Jews. Speaking of which, how much did he charge them after Kristallnacht, BTW?

Seriously. Get a clue.; 6/7/18, 7:11 PM
Matt Sablan said...: If you've read Shirer, what do you make of Hitler's decree that disbanded small corporations and made it impossible to establish new ones without meeting a money threshold, essentially destroying 20% or so of small corporations, or of the 1933 law that compelled companies to join Nazi cartels, or the 1934 law that forced companies into partnerships with the Nazi regime?

Which is part of the point: Yes. In name, businesses were owned by individuals; but in actuality, the government's heavy hand was on the wheel. Now, again, there was some prioritization going on at the time, so you might try and argue the government wasn't a completely socialist paradise, you can't pretend that it was in no way, no how socialist.; 6/7/18, 7:11 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Ah. Strawmen and Real Scotsman.; 6/7/18, 7:12 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Also: Nazi Germany's only redistributionist policy wasn't just looting from undesirables. But, since you said that, it makes it clear *you haven't read your history at all*.; 6/7/18, 7:13 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Western Europe's post-war welfare states/social democracies were a direct attempt to prevent a descent into the fascist thugocracy that inter-war Germany became and the war-strewn hellhole it made out of the rest of Europe. Looky there! It worked.

A neglected working class either goes socialist or it goes racist. That's the entire point. You either admit to him that a capitalist took most of his labor or an immigrant (or I guess a Jew or a Muslim) did. That's how it goes. All your other blathering misses the point entirely.; 6/7/18, 7:14 PM
Matt Sablan said...: (Also, fun fact I just learned, after glancing at Wikipedia: "In real terms this meant that wages, working hours and general business practices were determined by worker councils (whose members ranged from 2 - 10) and employers, seeking a compromise." So... actually yes Pee-Pee Tape. There was something akin to a workers co-op in Nazi Germany!); 6/7/18, 7:15 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: "In real terms this meant that wages, working hours and general business practices were determined by worker councils (whose members ranged from 2 - 10) and employers, seeking a compromise." So... actually yes Pee-Pee Tape. There was something akin to a workers co-op in Nazi Germany!)

Which expanded even more in the German Federal Republic. So by your illogic, today's Germany is even more Nazi than Nazi Germany.

Keep trying this thinking thing you've been embarking on. You might even stop missing the point eventually.; 6/7/18, 7:17 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "A neglected working class either goes socialist or it goes racist."

-- Ah. So we've got strawmen, real Scotsmen and false dilemmas. We're stacking up fallacies here.; 6/7/18, 7:17 PM
buwaya said...: "Ah. Strawmen and Real Scotsman."

Its an argument over taxonomies in a world of multi-dimensional continua, in order to claim the use of rhetorically-loaded words. In other words, its an argument over words. Which is a terrible problem among historians especially.; 6/7/18, 7:18 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "So by your illogic, today's Germany is even more Nazi than Nazi Germany."

-- That's such a gross misreading it isn't worth further response than: That's a gross misreading.; 6/7/18, 7:18 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: -- That's such a gross misreading it isn't worth further response than: That's a gross misreading.

No. It's a conclusion of the Nowhere Hole that your thinking goes.

You're avoiding the point. But expending much energy doing so.

The Republican version of working.; 6/7/18, 7:19 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Alright, I'll deconstruct it, since you either are deliberately not getting it, or you missed it.

The point was to show the fallacy of your thinking that because something has somewhat of the external trappings of a thing, it is inherently the same as the thing. Because you see industrialists getting rich, you think "clearly, a conservative, Capitalistic crony economic system," instead of looking at the deeper, more complicated issues. By attempting to prod you into realizing, "Wait, if there was something actually akin to workers co-ops in Nazi Germany, that doesn't mean that socialism is inherently a Nazi ideology," the goal was to get you to look *deeper* at the issue.

Instead, you just retreated to the same surface level skimming and reactionary lashing out that *missed the whole point of the statement.* It wasn't to say "workers co-ops leads to Holocausts!" It was to say "since workers co-ops don't lead to Holocausts, maybe I should realize that just because Nazis were socialist, that doesn't mean all socialists ARE Nazis."

The point went over your head, so hopefully, now that I've explained it, you get the point: Nazis were terrible people *not because they were nationalists or socialists* but because *of the horrible things they did.* Some political philosophies are distasteful, and nearly everyone can be corrupted into something terrible -- and it is good to be on the watch for philosophies that can be more easily corrupted. But the problem is *with the corruption, not the base idea.*

Nazism is evil not because it wants to centralize economic control; it is evil because of what the people who wanted that *were willing to do to get that.* There are many good people who believe in Socialism; very few of them were ardent Nazis--not due to the political beliefs but because *good people are by definition not Nazis*.

That was the deeper level thinking the comment about co-ops was supposed to get you to.; 6/7/18, 7:24 PM
buwaya said...: "A neglected working class either goes socialist or it goes racist. "

Or it doesn't. You have not exhausted the possibilities here. Its a big, big world with lots of "neglected" working classes.

Among other things wrong with this, most of the world is intensely racist by default, especially the working class, by any US standard. Humans don't need much to be be racist, or ethnic chauvinists, its a default condition. The US is an extreme outlier in this, by being far less racist and chauvinist.

The US working class gets endless rhetorical beatings and is constantly drenched in acid for being far, far less racist or chauvinist than can reasonably be expected from the usual human standard. One can say that the unique virtues of the American people attract the most vicious hatred, because they are of course imperfect.; 6/7/18, 7:30 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: “But whatever you do, don't actually read the 25 point program. It would confuse you.”

Apparently it resonates with you.; 6/7/18, 7:31 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/7/18, 7:32 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Because you see industrialists getting rich, you think "clearly, a conservative, Capitalistic crony economic system,"

Maybe it wasn't completely that, but it clearly wasn't a system defined by whatever socialism it flirted with to a degree nowhere near as great as the post-war, non-Nazi actual socialist countries that implemented said socialism much more comprehensively, did.

So we're saying the same thing, but you're taking a longer time admitting that for Hitler socialism was either an afterthought or a marketing gimmick - which every historian agrees about.

Maybe you think these are quibbles around the edges. They're not. The right-wing linguistic boner of associating Nazism with socialism as some sort of actual tautology is real and it is damaging to the American labor economy and polity.; 6/7/18, 7:33 PM
Matt Sablan said...: That is not what I'm saying. Try reading it again, because I won't explain it again.; 6/7/18, 7:33 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: And Michael if you had read Ian Kershaw and Richard Evans instead of just bragging that you own their books, you would not continue to make your ignorance so obvious. They clearly say Hitler wasn’t a socialist and Naziism wasn’t an outcropping of socialism.; 6/7/18, 7:34 PM
pacwest said...: I'm late to the conversation, and haven't read all the comments, but I did want to say this: Inga is right. White supremacists are one of the largest threats to our country right now. We should hunt down all 500 of them immediately. Who knows what damage they can do if left unchecked.

!!; 6/7/18, 7:39 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Oh right. You're saying something even worse: That Nazis were motivated by socialism first and racism second. That genocide and exclusion and hate were merely a means to an economic end.

This is even worse bullshit.

The centerpiece of their regime was the idea of racial superiority. The economics were a clear afterthought.

In this, they are not unlike the American right. The American right believes in social Darwinism, and its far right believes in a race-struggle for superiority.

Give me a class struggle over that bullshit any day.

This is why the right is not a natural fit for socialism.

Again you're missing the point.; 6/7/18, 7:39 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Strike two.; 6/7/18, 7:40 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Right wingers believe that if they're physically powerful enough then economic superiority will follow. No need to superimpose economic theories on what are essentially theories of race and physical might. To do so is just window dressing.; 6/7/18, 7:41 PM
Michael said...: Inga

Splendid. Do some of your classic cutting and pasting. Give us Evans view.; 6/7/18, 7:41 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: “German historian and National Socialism expert Joachim Fest characterizes this repurposing of socialist rhetoric as an act of “prestidigitation”:

This ideology took a leftist label chiefly for tactical reasons. It demanded, within the party and within the state, a powerful system of rule that would exercise unchallenged leadership over the “great mass of the anonymous.” And whatever premises the party may have started with, by 1930 Hitler’s party was “socialist” only to take advantage of the emotional value of the word, and a “workers’ party” in order to lure the most energetic social force. As with Hitler’s protestations of belief in tradition, in conservative values, or in Christianity, the socialist slogans were merely movable ideological props to serve as camouflage and confuse the enemy.”; 6/7/18, 7:41 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Inga: That quote ignores all of the information we have about Germany coalescing economic power within the state.; 6/7/18, 7:43 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: “The proof was in the pudding. Not long after acquiring the reins of power, the Nazis banned the Social Democratic Party and sent its leaders and other leftists identified as threats to the National Socialist program to concentration camps. According to the Holocaust Encyclopedia:

In the months after Hitler took power, SA and Gestapo agents went from door to door looking for Hitler’s enemies. They arrested Socialists, Communists, trade union leaders, and others who had spoken out against the Nazi party; some were murdered. By the summer of 1933, the Nazi party was the only legal political party in Germany. Nearly all organized opposition to the regime had been eliminated. Democracy was dead in Germany.”; 6/7/18, 7:43 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Nazism is evil not because it wants to centralize economic control; it is evil because of what the people who wanted that *were willing to do to get that.*

They were totalitarians. They wanted to control just about everything - starting with their country's "whiteness" genes.

The fact that you are more concerned (and think they were more concerned) with the functionings of the economy is baffling.

Your last 7 words above concede that you think what they did were means to primarily an economic end. They were not.; 6/7/18, 7:44 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Inga: Communists also ruthlessly murdered other Communists for reasons other than political ideology. That doesn't show that they weren't Socialists.; 6/7/18, 7:44 PM
Matt Sablan said...: And strike three: No. I guess you just don't get the point.; 6/7/18, 7:45 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: “Above all, the Nazis were German white nationalists. What they stood for was the ascendancy of the “Aryan” race and the German nation, by any means necessary. Despite co-opting the name, some of the rhetoric, and even some of the precepts of socialism, Hitler and party did so with utter cynicism, and with vastly different goals. The claim that the Nazis actually were leftists or socialists in any generally accepted sense of those terms flies in the face of historical reality.”; 6/7/18, 7:45 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: And strike three: No. I guess you just don't get the point.

Because you refuse to either come clean and make it, or admit the only meaning in your words:

Nazism is evil not because it wants to centralize economic control; it is evil because of what the people who wanted that *were willing to do to get that.*

This is your misinterpretation that "centralizing economic control" was the Nazis chief concern/priority.

It was not and you are wrong. Admit it or admit that what I just quoted you saying above means that anyway.; 6/7/18, 7:47 PM
Michael said...: PPPT is correct. The anti-semitism was at the heart of Hitler's vision from the beginning, the socialism was a political tool. Like all socialist systems it was all talk, there was no redistribution, most of the non racial pieces of the 25 points were honored in the breach.; 6/7/18, 7:48 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: “This is your misinterpretation that "centralizing economic control" was the Nazis chief concern/priority.”

Exactly. It was German white nationalism.

And Americans are playing with fire with their white nationalism.; 6/7/18, 7:49 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: “...the socialism was a political tool. Like all socialist systems it was all talk, there was no redistribution...

Because there was no socialism.

“The claim that the Nazis actually were leftists or socialists in any generally accepted sense of those terms flies in the face of historical reality.”; 6/7/18, 7:52 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Thank you Michael.

I guess I'm amazed to see how controversial it is on the right to admit that Hitler's Nazis' anti-semitism were the feature, and that whatever they said (or didn't really say as much about) economically was just an afterthought.

Wow. I guess my eyes are open now. I didn't know that right-wingers had such a skewed view on such a basic knowledge of what the regime was about.

Hitler didn't kill bankers. He didn't kill aristocrats. He killed Jews.

Hello.; 6/7/18, 7:52 PM
Matt Sablan said...: If there was no socialism, what do you make of the coalescing of industry within the government and forcing privately owned industries into cartels with the Nazis under threat of force and punishment?

You can say socialism wasn't a prime tenet of the Nazi party, but to pretend there was no socialism what-so-ever is just fantasy.; 6/7/18, 7:53 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "Like all socialist systems it was all talk"

-- Except for all the things they did to collect economic power within the government, yes. All talk.; 6/7/18, 7:54 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: “You can say socialism wasn't a prime tenet of the Nazi party, but to pretend there was no socialism what-so-ever is just fantasy.”
——————————————
“The claim that the Nazis actually were leftists or socialists in any generally accepted sense of those terms flies in the face of historical reality.”; 6/7/18, 7:55 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: If there was no socialism, what do you make of the coalescing of industry within the government and forcing privately owned industries into cartels with the Nazis under threat of force and punishment?

I dunno. That they probably weren't a very nice thing.

Michael's right. I'm right. But if you want to keep focusing on the economics, then return back to the first few pages of any Econ 101 textbook: Most economies are not purely capitalist or socialist, but mixed economics. In fact, almost all are mixed.

The Nazis weren't very different in that regard.

The more interesting question to me is why some people are more focused on Hitler's economic policies than his racism. Much more of his country's economic changes were driven by war, occupation, dispossession and armament than by whatever else he was up to.

You guys admit this with FDR all the time. That the war changed his economic fortunes, not his policies.

So how's it different here?; 6/7/18, 7:59 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: ...his country's economic changes were driven by war, occupation, dispossession and armament...

Oh, and slave labor. Forgot one.

Which, again, wouldn't have been possible without the racism thing.

So again, that's what almost all of it comes back to.; 6/7/18, 8:00 PM
Matt Sablan said...: No one is arguing about Hitler's racism because... no one is denying reality about it. People *are* denying the reality that he had many, many policies and programs that were left to far left. If we had Holocaust deniers here, we'd probably have to waste time dispensing with that nonsense. But as far as I know, no one is denying that.; 6/7/18, 8:01 PM
Matt Sablan said...: And again: No one is arguing that Hitler was "pure socialism," merely that he did, in fact, have several socialist policies and that he did indeed attempt to bring much of the economy under the government's control.

The fact people keep denying that reality is the problem.; 6/7/18, 8:02 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: People *are* denying the reality that he had many, many policies and programs that were left to far left.

Far to whose left? Not when compared to modern Europe.; 6/7/18, 8:05 PM
buwaya said...: "why some people are more focused on Hitler's economic policies than his racism."

Because the enemies of capitalism traditionally attack supporters of capitalism as Nazis.

Ancient argument. Takes the same form the world over, regardless of the racial/ethnic context. It is an legacy communist propaganda line from the 1930's.

The racist thing is far more recent and was restricted to the US until this decade.; 6/7/18, 8:05 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: No one is arguing that Hitler was "pure socialism," merely that he did, in fact, have several socialist policies and that he did indeed attempt to bring much of the economy under the government's control.

The fact people keep denying that reality is the problem.

Only to people who minimize his racism and genocide. Without those things, no war. No aim to control all of Europe (and then the world). And without that war, much less economic activity. No mass slave labor of camp victims. No appropriation of his Jews' wealth. No industrial-scale arms manufacturing in which to thrust the bulk of the nation's economy.

Do you minimize the economic effects of American slavery, too?; 6/7/18, 8:08 PM
buwaya said...: Paul Johnson's classic "Modern Times", 1984, was a response to exactly this.
This was before immigration and race had become a burning issue in Britain.; 6/7/18, 8:09 PM
buwaya said...: And before the British white working class began to abandon Labour.; 6/7/18, 8:09 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Ok, I'm giving up on you. No one is minimizing his racism and genocide; in fact, if you read the whole statement, the reason no one is bringing it up is that *we all agree Hitler is a racist who committed genocide.*

You're not even trying to pay attention at this point.; 6/7/18, 8:09 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Because the enemies of capitalism traditionally attack supporters of capitalism as Nazis.

Only if they're right-wing social engineers.

Like I said, the working class are either attended to by a country's elite or they either blame the bankers or the immigrants for their continued and accumulating losses in the nation's fortunes.

Take your pick.

Or I guess they could just go Asian and obediently and piously take whatever shit their elites pile on to them.

But we are Western - as is much of the world. We don't assume to believe in our own lack of agency the way your people do. No fate or karma or confucianism here.; 6/7/18, 8:11 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: We are Western. We rise up. We revolt.

We don't get mowed down by tanks in Tiananmen Square and forever forget our dreams.; 6/7/18, 8:13 PM
Francisco D said...: Matthew said ... "You're not even trying to pay attention at this point.

Back in my consulting days, a mentor once explained to s client organization why you should not promote a person who lacked insight, intellect and a well-directed sense of drive.

He said, "Never try to teach pigs to sing. It hurts your ears and frustrates the pig,"; 6/7/18, 8:16 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Never try to teach Francisco D whose quote he's stealing. It hurts his already very fragile ego and frustrates the originator of the thought that he ripped off.; 6/7/18, 8:17 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: What's the matter, Fran D.? You're another one who think that Hitler was an accidental racist and a committed socialist who just stumbled into the genocide thing reluctantly? That he was more economist than racist?

I bet your clients love to hear that shit.; 6/7/18, 8:19 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: By this time in the evening Francisco D is usually already deep in his cups.; 6/7/18, 8:20 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: Maybe next he’ll be talking about eating spleens and brains again.; 6/7/18, 8:22 PM
buwaya said...: Well, in this case, of the US working class, and those of Britain and now Italy too, they did "rise up".

The Italian case is interesting. It is a weird mix of rebellious populist ideologies coexisting in a coalition.
So you have both bankers and immigrants being reacted against simultaneously.
It certainly isn't one or the other.
And in a "socialist" welfare state second to none in its coverage.

The French did too, the old ideological parties were crushed, but it was partly palliated by Macron.
After Macron the deluge.; 6/7/18, 8:29 PM
Nonapod said...: If you accept the basic premise that any system of governance for and run by humans is susceptible to corruption eiher through exploitation of people or resources, to me it follows that a system that requires a strong centralization of power (like Communism for example) is by far the most dangerous. Putting an enormous amount of power in the hands of a just few people (a political elite or a nobel class) or a single person (a dictator or a monarch) is extraordinarily risky. You may get very lucky and have decent, honest people running things, but history has shown that odds are far moe likely that you'll get a bunch of kleptocrats or a tyrant.

Further, if you accept the premise that the most amoral capitalist businessman by himself can't hold a candle to an amoral government in terms of capaity for causing human misery, then you must concede that keeping power diffuse as possible is desireable for general human happiness. A representative republic with checks and balances, term limits, limited powers and a somewht free market and the like is probably safer and more likely to lead to prosperity than most alternatives. I believe history has born this out anyway.; 6/7/18, 8:29 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: buwaya said...
Paul Johnson's classic "Modern Times", 1984, was a response to exactly this.
This was before immigration and race had become a burning issue in Britain.

Remind me again when Enoch Powell's 'Rivers of Blood' speech was delivered.; 6/7/18, 8:30 PM
buwaya said...: And nobody much paid attention to Enoch Powell.
Then.; 6/7/18, 8:37 PM
Michael said...: 20 April 1968.; 6/7/18, 8:38 PM
Michael said...: Oh, they paid attention to Powell alright. Even in those long ago years his was wrong think and into the wilderness he went.; 6/7/18, 8:46 PM
Michael said...: Powell had, I believe, a double first in Classics. Old school education.; 6/7/18, 8:47 PM
buwaya said...: Powell swayed no votes and shifted no Tories, nor did he create a populist groundswell. Powell was the furthest thing from a populist.

He was, however, a prophet.; 6/7/18, 9:04 PM
narciso said...: The scale of germany social collapse after the first world war was staggering. After all we basically toed in vietnam. But geemany was occupird by serveral foreign powers; 6/7/18, 9:36 PM
Loren W Laurent said...: "And Michael if you had read Ian Kershaw and Richard Evans instead of just bragging that you own their books, you would not continue to make your ignorance so obvious...."

Inga: you are saying that if Michael read these authors "(he) would not continue to make (his) ignorance so obvious."

You also wrote:

"Obviously, you’ve not read any of Ian Kershaw or Richard Evans works and your ignorant stubborness tells the tale."

To my ear, these words seem to imply that you have at least some familiarity with these writers, and are vouching for their work.

But practically every quote you put up came straight from Snopes.com's single article "Were the Nazis Socialists?". (FACT CHECK: Were Nazis Socialists? - Snopes.com)

You are not even directly quoting the authors you mention, you are quoting Snopes quoting the authors: there is nothing you are saying about them that has any knowledge outside of that site's paragraphs.

When you wrote --

"“German historian and National Socialism expert Joachim Fest characterizes this repurposing of socialist rhetoric as an act of “prestidigitation"

-- you are simply pulling Fest's quote from Snope's pull-quote.

This is the argumentative equivalent of popping a pot-pie in the microwave and thinking you're the chef.

I do not mean to pick on you; not everyone needs to be a scholar on a subject to have a valid point of view.

But calling someone ignorant by way of dropping names for which you have no real familiarity is embarrassing.

Do you agree with Evan's analogy of the Witch Trials with Nazi Germany? Perhaps you could articulate about what he sees as congruent, and what he sees as deviation.

And what do you think of his views on post-modernism relative to the historian?

Do you find his usage of the Charles Manson murder case as allegory to early Nazi Germany to be profound, or a stretch?

Or should I just look it up on Wiki myself?

-LWL; 6/7/18, 9:52 PM
mockturtle said...: Ritmo asserts: Hitler didn't kill bankers. He didn't kill aristocrats. He killed Jews.

And he killed non-Jewish Poles, Russians, Gypsies, homosexuals [except for those in his coterie], Communists, the mentally and physically disabled and various religious groups.; 6/7/18, 9:54 PM
Bob Loblaw said...: And he killed non-Jewish Poles, Russians, Gypsies, homosexuals [except for those in his coterie], Communists, the mentally and physically disabled and various religious groups.

The problem with any flavor of socialism is it only works if everyone's on board. Eventually every socialist government gets around to the notion those not-on-board people are really superfluous.; 6/7/18, 9:57 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/7/18, 10:02 PM
traditionalguy said...: Inga is right. Hitler's take over said some worker party stuff to get an Army and industrial force that would go out and slaughter all non Germans and steal their stuff forever. Rinse and repeat until everyone was dead. That's all.

The Germans fell for his demonic line with an evil glee and worked and murdered for that goal until the end. That's why we still fear them.; 6/7/18, 10:03 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/7/18, 10:03 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: Did the authors I quoted via the Snopes article or who the hell ever I decide to quote from directly or indirectly NOT say what I quoted? No? Then shut up and mind your own business. Michael is a very insulting condescending person, what I say to him is mild compared what he’s said to me. He gets respect when he gives it. I accurately quoted, I don’t give a rat’s ass what vehicle I used to get at the quote.; 6/7/18, 10:05 PM
n.n said...: The National Socialists targeted Jews for redistributive change because they had too much. They targeted Jews for retributive change (e.g. abortion rites a la selective-child, Mengele clinics a la recycled-child) because of Jew privilege.

The Nazis were diversitists and judged/discriminated between individuals by the color of their skin. They were Pro-Choice in that they aborted lives deemed unworthy, inconvenient, or profitable for social justice. They were atheists with secular motives (i.e. wealth, pleasure, leisure, narcissism, control).

The National Socialists were a minority regime that pursued consolidation of capital and control. They opposed capitalism (i.e. retained earnings) and markets in order to reduce competing interests and determine who would enjoy the product of their own labor. Then there is political congruence ("=") or selective exclusion of politically unfavorable individuals, groups, etc.

The problem with left-wing regimes is that they are in practice a means to enable monopoly formation. The most progressive ideologies (e.g. South Africa) are accompanied by diversity (e.g. color judgements including racism), abortion rites (i.e. life deemed unworthy), and redistributive change that denies retained earnings (i.e. capitalism). They reduce competing interests, and the secular leaders are prone to running amuck without a population that is armed and capable of protesting their secular ambitions.; 6/7/18, 10:13 PM
Loren W Laurent said...: "Did the authors I quoted via the Snopes article or who the hell ever I decide to quote from directly or indirectly NOT say what I quoted? No? Then shut up and mind your own business."

I am not disputing the quotes. I am drawing light to you having presented it like you have familiarity with the material.

Like maybe you looked at TWO website listicles before calling someone ignorant.

"I accurately quoted, I don’t give a rat’s ass what vehicle I used to get at the quote."

Usually, when pulling extensive quotes, it is good form to reference where they are from, so that someone can see the context, get a feel for the writer's bigger picture and thoughts.

In all of those instances you never once attributed them to Snopes.

Like perhaps you were embarrassed to indicate that all of your examples were found in the manner of a lazy student quoting Melville via the first Google hit on Moby Dick.

And saying "shut up and mind your own business" DOES come off as you being a bit embarrassed.

And you seem brittle when you're embarrassed.

I can tell these things because I read a psychology article on Buzzfeed once.; 6/7/18, 10:55 PM
Loren W Laurent said...: "I can tell these things because I read a psychology article on Buzzfeed once."

It even quoted real doctors.; 6/7/18, 10:56 PM
William said...: Many disaffected Communist Party members in Germany joined the Nazis after the Communist Party was banned and its leaders eliminated. Street level Commies were quite receptive to the Nazi message and had no crisis of conscience switching over........Hitler consciously emulated the tactics of the Bolsheviks when he eliminated the Brownshirts, who were, arguably, creepier than Hitler's thugs........There was quite a lot of sotto voce cooperation between the Nazis and the Soviets even before the Molotov Ribbentrop Pact......The Soviets and the Nazis had more points of similarity than of difference. It's stupid to claim that Trump is some kind of latent Nazi, or, for that matter, that Hillary Is a closet Commie. Also, the stories about her practicing cannibalism and bathing in the blood of virgins are, so far as is known at this time, untrue or somewhat exaggerated.; 6/7/18, 10:58 PM
William said...: Sorry Inga, but Loren busted you. I thought you had read and pondered many books before reaching your conclusion. On the plus side, it was a good bluff and you really sounded scholarly and knowledgeable. That's worth something........I have read the Shirer and Bullock books. I don't claim any special knowledge but, based on my limited reading, I don't see many points of comparison between Trump and Hitler.. You could find more similarity in FDR's NRA program (no, not that NRA) and FDR's solicitation of support from southern segregationists than from any overt acts of Trump.; 6/7/18, 11:19 PM
wholelottasplainin said...: Blogger President Pee-Pee Tape said...
The Nazis industrialized without the industrialists - right. Lol!

****************************

Why not? The Soviets did it.....didn't they?; 6/7/18, 11:54 PM
Francisco D said...: Nice work Loren.

You did not even need to mention that Snopes is far from an objective or non-partisan source.

When one makes it their only source of information, there are additional problems with confirmation bias.; 6/7/18, 11:54 PM
John henry said...: "Private property" as conceived under the liberalistic economic order was a reversal of the true concept of property. 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.

Ernst Rudolf Huber, Verfassungsrecht des grossdeutschen Reiches (Constitutional Law of the Greater German Reich) 1939

John Henry; 6/7/18, 11:55 PM
John henry said...: "We are Western. We rise up. We revolt.

We don't get mowed down by tanks in Tiananmen Square and forever forget our dreams"

Some do. A higher percentage of Americans than other countries,perhaps.

Then there's others who are too squeamish to do so. Sometimes they excuse their squeamishness by pretending to be toothless.

Nobody is ever toothless. Just too squeamish to use those teeth.

It is not necessarily wrong. Claiming toothless to avoid admitting squeamishness is pretty sad, though.

John Henry; 6/8/18, 12:06 AM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Hey John Henry -

PIss off and go fuck yourself. And then jump off the highest bridge.; 6/8/18, 12:30 AM
Jon Ericson said...: Thanks for the laughs, Pedro.; 6/8/18, 2:14 AM
Roger Zimmerman said...: Actual quotes, from actual Nazis:

"'Private property' as conceived under liberalistic economic order was a reversal of the true concept of property. This "private proprerty" represented the right of the individual to manage and to speculate with inherited or acquired property as he pleased, without regard to 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."

(Ernst Huber, Nazi party spokesman; National Socialism, prepared by Raymond E. Murphy, et al; quoting Huber, Verfassungsrecht des grossdeutschen Reiches (Hamburg, 1939))

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

(Nazi head of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels; In Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom (New York: Farrar, 1941), pg. 233.)

"I have learned a great deal from Marxism, as I do not hesitate to admit. The difference between them and myself is that I have really put into practice what these peddlers and penpushers have timidly begun...I had only to develop logically what Social Democracy repeatedly failed in because of its attempt to realize its evolution within the framework of democracy. National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd and artificial ties with the democratic order."

(Hitler to Rauschning, The Voice of Destruction, pg. 186).; 6/8/18, 6:45 AM
Rusty said...: Re; Nazi industrialism. As I recall Himmler had a meeting of the major German industrialists. IG Farben, Beyer, Krupp and essentially told them that they were working for the state now. The good news was that they were free to take or take over any industries they ran accross in German occupied territory. National Socialism preceeded apace.

OOOooo, Watch out, John Henry. ritmo is pissed. Better be careful or he'll slice with his dull razor, mall ninja like wit.; 6/8/18, 6:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Michael: I not only have read them, I actually own them. They are here in my library. Read.

&

Splendid. Do some of your classic cutting and pasting. Give us Evans view.

Explaining books she hasn't read, by authors she never heard of until she went googling for what she thinks is dispositive copypasta, to people who actually know the authors and have read their books...

Are we anywhere near peak Inga, or will her dingbatic genius push her ever onward to as yet unimagined heights of glory?; 6/8/18, 8:23 AM
mockturtle said...: Eventually every socialist government gets around to the notion those not-on-board people are really superfluous.

And in its extremity, boils down to 'thee and me, and sometimes I'm not sure about thee'. Purging of all dissenters, then purging of the first ones to stop clapping after the leader speaks. It becomes a mania. We are seeing this already in our country in both #MeToo and imaginary 'racism'.; 6/8/18, 9:13 AM
Michael K said...: You could find more similarity in FDR's NRA program (no, not that NRA) and FDR's solicitation of support from southern segregationists than from any overt acts of Trump.

Fascism was quite popular in the 1930s and the NRA was almost openly fascist.

Mussolini was even in a movie with Lionel Barrymore.

Much of the Obama economy was trending fascist which is why some crony capitalists like Immelt, liked him.

My internet access is intermittent so I scroll past you-know-who even faster than usual.; 6/8/18, 9:30 AM
John henry said...: "You're so vain, you probably think thi song is about you"

Carol king

John Henry; 6/8/18, 9:32 AM
n.n said...: If the principles do not match, then you must consider your prejudice.; 6/8/18, 12:56 PM