Hitler Was a Socialist!!!

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow

I dare you to disprove those things I listed that you left out of the quote.

i have been disproving them with FACTS...

All those things you mentioned YOU MADE UP...

I posted what Hitler said in speeches...what he did, and what he was...

You are trying to claim the contrary with made up lies YOU MADE UP...

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Disprove them then. One after the other. I issue the challenge. Get all your supposed points collected and go through my list of facts and disprove them one after the other. I dare you.

Hitler is trolling you from the grave. Here is another quote of Hitler's and I think he may have had you in mind:

I have not come into this world to make men better, but to make use of their weaknesses.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow

We do know his intent.. because we saw it come to fruition. I feel like I am talking to a child. You are the one making him out to be something he is not. He was a manipulator and his words are still manipulating you to this moment which is hilarious to me.

And YOU knew better than Hitler what he was?...

And we have to take YOUR word instead of see what he did, and what he said?...

How CONVINIENT that people like YOU ALWAYS claim "communists and socialist dictators were not really socialist or communists"...and then YOU make up lies to try to redeem a system that has only brought death and missery to the world...

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


His brand of "socialism" is like no other. He united Germany,based on creed,race,hate. Its the underlining message that you fail to understand. The NAZI party was ruled by fear. Nationalistic pride was first and foremost the message to a strong united Germany.It wasn't EVERYONE is welcome to our socialistic utopia. How anyone could call him a real socialist,is beyond me,although I guess if you want to call a united Germany,socialistic,you have me there. Semantics is what I see.

ETA,I also stated he was a mix of everything,Right Left,which ever suited his purposes.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


I'm done talking to you. The only one that is lying here is you. You are lying about me, you are making generalized and insulting statements. I think you are handicapped in some way. No point in arguing with someone that isn't capable of learning. I have no agenda, I don't like socialism, I am a libertarian. I am only speaking the truth. You however have an agenda so you are incapable of speaking the truth or having a rational debate.
Feel free to disprove those points if you dare. I know you wont, because you can't.
Until you can do that (the impossible) then we have no reason to talk.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Are you out of your mind?... I have been disproving them with FACTS...

HItler caused destruction?...SO DID EVERY LEFTWING DICTATORS IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD...

If anyone is trolling it is you...

ACCEPT the fact that he was a LEFTWINGER...a SOCIALIST...

Hitler controlled the means of production even when he allowed SOME people to have their "corporations/businesses", but Hitler and the Nazi controlled them, they could even shut them down if these people did not do as commanded...

It is the same as in other socialist/communist states...

In Cuba for example the communist party allows some farmers to till a piece of land, and in essence they are partly owners of that land, but the farmers MUST produce what the communist party tells them they MUST produce...

Hitler's Youth is the SAME movement as the socialist/communist youth of other socialist dictatorships...

EVERYTHING hitler did fell under the auspices of socialism

“The German national intellects secretly whispered to each other again and again the suspicion that we were fundamentally also only a variety of Marxism, perhaps even merely disguised Marxists or [international] Socialists. For to this day these heads have not grasped the difference between Socialism and Marxism. Adolf Hitler

Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of his nation; whoever has understood our great national anthem, Deutschland, Deutschland, über Alles, to mean that nothing in the wide world surpasses in his eyes this Germany, people and land, land and people — that man is a Socialist.

Hitler had a deep hatred of the Social Democratic party, which he believed "fostered class conflicts at the expense of national unity" (Bullock 42). In Mein Kampf, he outlines his distaste of the Social Democratic movement, being turned off by their hostility towards the maintenance of Germanism in Austria (31) and their opposition to social demands by the working class (35-36). The Social Democratic Party remained antagonistic and disparaging to Hitler; he believed that "...the working men were the victims of a deliberate system for corrupting and poisoning the popular mind, organized by the Social Democratic Party's leaders, who cynically exploited the distress of the masses" for their political gains (Bullock 38). Hitler was also critical of the Social Democrats for their dependence on internationalization and foreign trade. With this in mind, it is no wonder that Hitler believed that Jews were the leaders of Social Democracy and therefore to be hated (Hitler, Mein Kampf 43).

Hitler's meaning of socialism, therefore did not refer to a specific economic system, but to "an instinct for national self-preservation................................

Adolf Hitler's Views and Opinions of Democracy

reply to post by sonnny1


For crying out loud... Marxism is NOT the only form of socialism that exists... Of course HItler's opinions of socialism differed from Marxism, and other socialists... Just like Lenin, and Stalin differed in opinion as to what form of socialism/communism should exist...

Socialists/communists have turned on each other throughout the WHOLE history of socialism... They arrested other socialists/communists who did not agree with them, and even MURDERED other socialists/communists that didn't agree with them...

Just because Hitler's opinions on socialism differed from other socialists and from communists doesn't make him any less socialist than he was...

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Read the Link. Im not going to argue either with you. You have your mind made up on your Opinion. Its obvious that Hitlers socialism was not socialism. It was a name placed on madness,but your too busy fighting his good fight. Carry on...........................

In light of Hitler's anti-democratic stance, substantial contradictions arise. He named his party the 'National Socialist Party', yet he conveniently ignored the fact that socialism and communism both stem from Marxism, a political philosophy he hated (Miller and Minsky 15). Furthermore, the phrase National Socialist implies conflicting ideologies: the right wing nationalist and the left-wing socialist. There were indeed socialist clauses in the 25-Point program, yet most of them were not implemented after Hitler came to power (Grunfeld 112). Hitler can be viewed a hypocrite concerning his chief ally during World War II: he, known as the "prophet of Aryan greatness" (Brogan 512), took Japan as his country's main ally. This may have been surprising, given Japan's lack of Aryans. Hitler was drawn more to Japan's strict military operations and extreme nationalism than to their racial makeup.

LINK

Originally posted by sonnny1

His brand of "socialism" is like no other. He united Germany,based on creed,race,hate. Its the underlining message that you fail to understand. The NAZI party was ruled by fear. Nationalistic pride was first and foremost the message to a strong united Germany.It wasn't EVERYONE is welcome to our socialistic utopia. How anyone could call him a real socialist,is beyond me,although I guess if you want to call a united Germany,socialistic,you have me there. Semantics is what I see.

ETA,I also stated he was a mix of everything,Right Left,which ever suited his purposes.

edit on 6-12-2011 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)

And Stalin's national socialism was very similar to Hitler's. Joseph Stalin wanted Russia (Soviet Union) to strengthen internally, just like Hitler wanted.

Socialism in One Country was a theory put forth by Joseph Stalin in 1924, elaborated by Nikolai Bukharin in 1925 and finally adopted as state policy by Stalin. The thesis held that given the defeat of all communist revolutions in Europe from 1917–1921 except in Russia, the Soviet Union should begin to strengthen itself internally.

Though promoted at the time as an ideology of necessity, not core belief, the theory came to define the course of political construction within the Soviet Union throughout its history. Today the expression is largely used as one of approbation since its thesis is held to be antithetical to Marxist Socialism by Trotskyists and others.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by sonnny1

Read the Link. Im not going to argue either with you. You have your mind made up on your Opinion. Its obvious that Hitlers socialism was not socialism. It was a name placed on madness,but your too busy fighting his good fight. Carry on...........................

And Hitler's socialism was the only one placed on madness?...

Which socialism was not "placed in madness" Mao's? Lenin's? Stalin's? castro's?...

You tell me which socialist dictatorship was not "placed on madness"...

I know that LEFTWINGERS try to claim that Hitler, and even every other form of socialism was not real socialism or even communism....

It is like the modern KKK claiming that Hitler was not evil, and he didn't cause genocide...

IT's a DENIAL because LEFTWINGERS think they know what's best for the rest of the world...and they DON'T...

Socialism, and every variation of it will only bring dictatorships, chaos, death, suffering like it has been causing...

.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

 

Hitler controlled the means of production even when he allowed SOME people to have their "corporations/businesses", but Hitler and the Nazi controlled them, they could even shut them down if these people did not do as commanded...

It seems to me that it is a matter of definition. People who advocate real socialism define it as "workers owning the means of production". According to what you posted above it doesn't fit that definition. If Hitler owned the means of production then it wasn't real socialism. Just like the economic model in the US isn't "real capitalism".

People can call themselves anything they like. They could also be lying. I mean was Jim Jones a "real christian" just because he called himself one? His actions said otherwise. Same deal with Hitler.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


no no no no

No one said we want the dictatorship alive.

Thats not true

Well...That makes Barry Hussein Harrison J. Bounel Barack Soetoro Obama "Bi-Sexual-In-Chief" a Marxist.

The Enemy 'WITHIN"

OMG Obama is on the TV right now, badmouthing capitalism saying it doesn't work and praising Theodore Rosevelt for his progressive NEW NATIONALISM.

en.wikipedia.org...

Roosevelt made the case for what he called the New Nationalism in a speech in Osawatomie, Kansas, on August 31, 1910. The central issue he argued was government protection of human welfare and property rights,[1] but he also argued that human welfare was more important than property rights.[1][2] He insisted that only a powerful federal government could regulate the economy and guarantee social justice,[1] and that a President can only succeed in making his economic agenda successful if he makes the protection of human welfare his highest priority.[1] Roosevelt believed that the concentration in industry was a natural part of the economy. He wanted executive agencies (not the courts) to regulate business. The federal government should be used to protect the laboring men, women and children from exploitation.[3] In terms of policy, Roosevelt's platform included a broad range of social and political reforms advocated by progressives.[4][5][6]
In the social sphere the platform called for
A National Health Service to include all existing government medical agencies.
Social insurance, to provide for the elderly, the unemployed, and the disabled.
Limited injunctions in strikes.
A minimum wage law for women.
An eight hour workday.
A federal securities commission.
Farm relief.
Workers' compensation for work-related injuries.
An inheritance tax.
A Constitutional amendment to allow a Federal income tax.
The political reforms proposed included
Women's suffrage.
Direct election of Senators.
Primary elections for state and federal nominations.
However, the main theme of the platform was an attack on the domination of politics by business interests, which allegedly controlled both established parties. The platform asserted that
To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.[7]
To that end, the platform called for
Strict limits and disclosure requirements on political campaign contributions.
Registration of lobbyists.
Recording and publication of Congressional committee proceedings.
The book The Promise of American Life, written in 1909 by Herbert Croly, influenced Theodore Roosevelt. New Nationalism was in direct contrast with Woodrow Wilson's policy of The New Freedom, which promoted antitrust modification, tariff reduction, and banking and currency reform.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


You still have not explained how Obama is a conservative right winger. To claim that Hitler was a right winger and that Obama is also a right winger and then not present any evidence helps to explain your motives here. You are not here for topical discussion, you are here to hate on republicans and conservatives, you claim that anyone and everyone that people dislike are republicans, so please go ahead have one more chance to explain yourself.

reply to post by thehoneycomb


I said Obama panders more to the right. Every citizen within the two party citizen lies in the right. Dems are more towards the middle (left side of the right I guess) and republicans are about half way across to far right. This is because despite their platforms they reside and support a capitalist system. If there was a real left movement in this country it would be a very different place/

"Socialism is as socialism does" Forrest Gump

An inherent aspect of fascist economies was economic dirigisme,[3] meaning an economy where
the government exerts strong directive influence, and effectively controls production and
allocation of resources. In general, apart from the nationalizations of some industries,
fascist economies were based on private property and private initiative, but these were
contingent upon service to the state.

secure.wikimedia.org...

Hitler was a socialist

reply to post by Semicollegiate


Except as time went on he changed from that to a more capitalist approach. He did what served him best at the time. He was not a socialist because his ideology was not socialist. It was what ever served the goal the best.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


So you saying Hitler was not a socialist because of what he said or wrote at varios times.

Wouldn't Hitler be a socialist because he was the leader of a socialist system that he put the entire energy of his life into creating and directing?