Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LIBERALS and NAZIS (Send this to your left wing acquaintances)

Posted on 05/25/2004 12:35:08 AM PDT by Capitalism2003

"We ask that the 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 its confines and be for the good of all. Therefore, we demand: … an end to the power of the financial interests. 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 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 entire 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 clubs concerned with the physical education of youth. We 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."

– From the political program of the Nazi Party, adopted in Munich, February 24, 1920


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last
The similarities between the National Socialist (Nazi) platform and the modern liberal/socialist agenda are truely astonishing. Nationalization of business, forced profit sharing, outlawing all profits during wartime, abolition of all income not earned directly from work (via high capital gains/inheritance taxes), the state shall provide a "livelihood for its citizens", old age insurance funded by government, price caps, price controls, rent controls, laws against speculation.."communal" rent free living areas, an end to the "materialistic" world order, free higher education focusing on "civic affairs" (humanities, political science--the left's favorite (and useless) subjects to learn), labor laws, censorship against news media that don't tow the line (libs demanding "fairness doctrine, increased penalties/regulation against clear channel, newscorp, etc)...bottom line, "common good..."common interest" before individual interest, and a strong central government to make these goals come true...mainly through economic coercion and force. The left wing parties of TODAY condemn individual achievement at every turn. Their aim is to remove every reason for individuals to excel in this society, and to create a class of dependent people subservient to the almighty state. They justify economic oppression in the name of "social justice" or the promoting "common good." Much like the Nazis, they support extreme infringements on personal liberties. Like the Nazis, they favor MASSIVE taxation, massive regulation, and often support government takeover of entire industries (Hellarycare in 92, etc

No further words are necessary...just read closely.

"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

(Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)

[Below is the 25 of the NSDAP Program - This is basically the National Socialist German Workers Party Platform. It included measures that in effect would redistribute income and war profits, profit-sharing with large industries, nationalization of trusts, extensive development of old-age pension (just like FDRs Social Security Program), and free education. Clearly this demonstrates Hitler was indeed a left winger and here is startling proof.]

---------------------------------------------------------

The 25 points of the NSDAP Program were composed by Adolf Hitler and Anton Drexler. They were publically presented on 24 February 1920 "to a crowd of almost two thousand and every single point was accepted amid jubilant approval." (Mein Kampf, Volume II, Chapter I) Hitler explained their purpose in the fifth chapter of the second volume of Mein Kampf:

[T]he program of the new movement was summed up in a few guiding principles, twenty-five in all. They were devised to give, primarily to the man of the people, a rough picture of the movement's aims. They are in a sense a political creed, which on the one hand recruits for the movement and on the other is suited to unite and weld together by a commonly recognized obligation those who have been recruited.

Hitler was intent on having a community of mutual interest that desired mutual success instead of one that was divided over the control of money or differing values.

THE COMMON INTEREST BEFORE SELF-INTEREST - THAT IS THE SPIRIT OF THE PROGRAM. BREAKING OF THE THRALDOM OF INDIVIDUAL INTEREST - THAT IS THE KERNEL OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM.

In these straightforward statements of intent, Hitler translated his ideology into a plan of action which would prove its popularity with the German people throughout the coming years. For many, the abruptness of its departure from the tradition of politics as practiced in the western world was as much of a shock as its liberal nature and foresight of the emerging problems of western democracy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Programme of the German Workers' Party is designed to be of limited duration. The leaders have no intention, once the aims announced in it have been achieved, of establishing fresh ones, merely in order to increase, artificially, the discontent of the masses and so ensure the continued existence of the Party.

1. We demand the union of all Germany in a Greater Germany on the basis of the right of national self-determination.

2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in its dealings with other nations, and the revocation of the peace treaties of Versailles and Saint-Germain.

3. We demand land and territory (colonies) to feed our people and to settle our surplus population.

4. Only members of the nation may be citizens of the State. Only those of German blood, whatever be their creed, may be members of the nation. Accordingly, no Jew may be a member of the nation.

5. Non-citizens may live in Germany only as guests and must be subject to laws for aliens.

6. The right to vote on the State's government and legislation shall be enjoyed by the citizens of the State alone. We demand therefore that all official appointments, of whatever kind, whether in the Reich, in the states or in the smaller localities, shall be held by none but citizens.

We oppose the corrupting parliamentary custom of filling posts merely in accordance with party considerations, and without reference to character or abilities.

7. We demand that the State shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens. If it should prove impossible to feed the entire population, foreign nationals (non-citizens) must be deported from the Reich.

8. All non-German immigration must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who entered Germany after 2 August 1914 shall be required to leave the Reich forthwith.

9. All citizens shall have equal rights and duties.

10. It must be the first duty of every citizen to perform physical or mental work. The activities of the individual must not clash with the general interest, but must proceed within the framework of the community and be for the general good.

We demand therefore:

11. The abolition of incomes unearned by work.

The breaking of the slavery of interest

12. In view of the enormous sacrifices of life and property demanded of a nation by any war, personal enrichment from war must be regarded as a crime against the nation. We demand therefore the ruthless confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).

14. We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.

15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municiple orders.

17. We demand a land reform suitable to our national requirements, the passing of a law for the expropriation of land for communal purposes without compensation; the abolition of ground rent, and the prohibition of all speculation in land. *

18. We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Common criminals, usurers, profiteers, etc., must be punished with death, whatever their creed or race.

19. We demand that Roman Law, which serves a materialistic world order, be replaced by a German common law.

20. The State must consider a thorough reconstruction of our national system of education (with the aim of opening up to every able and hard-working German the possibility of higher education and of thus obtaining advancement). The curricula of all educational establishments must be brought into line with the requirements of practical life. The aim of the school must be to give the pupil, beginning with the first sign of intelligence, a grasp of the nation of the State (through the study of civic affairs). We demand the education of gifted children of poor parents, whatever their class or occupation, at the expense of the State.

21. The State must ensure that the nation's health standards are raised by protecting mothers and infants, by prohibiting child labor, by promoting physical strength through legislation providing for compulsory gymnastics and sports, and by the extensive support of clubs engaged in the physical training of youth.

22. We demand the abolition of the mercenary army and the foundation of a people's army.

23. We demand legal warfare on deliberate political mendacity and its dissemination in the press. To facilitate the creation of a German national press we demand:

(a) that all editors of, and contributors to newspapers appearing in the German language must be members of the nation; (b) that no non-German newspapers may appear without the express permission of the State. They must not be printed in the German language; (c) that non-Germans shall be prohibited by law from participating financially in or influencing German newspapers, and that the penalty for contravening such a law shall be the suppression of any such newspaper, and the immediate deportation of the non-Germans involved.

The publishing of papers which are not conducive to the national welfare must be forbidden. We demand the legal prosecution of all those tendencies in art and literature which corrupt our national life, and the suppression of cultural events which violate this demand.

24. We demand freedom for all religious denominations in the State, provided they do not threaten its existence not offend the moral feelings of the German race.

The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not commit itself to any particular denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health only from within on the basis of the principle: The common interest before self-interest.

25. To put the whole of this programme into effect, we demand the creation of a strong central state power for the Reich; the unconditional authority of the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and its organizations; and the formation of Corporations based on estate and occupation for the purpose of carrying out the general legislation passed by the Reich in the various German states.

The leaders of the Party promise to work ruthlessly -- if need be to sacrifice their very lives -- to translate this programme into action. ___________________________________________-

As you can see, the official Nazi platform is an almost word for word copy of what leftist parties around the globe are promoting TODAY. Astonishing really. Please send some of the quotes above to your liberal friends and ask them how it feels to support the same tyrranical policies promoted by Adolf Hitler. I would love to hear the responses.

1 posted on 05/25/2004 12:35:08 AM PDT by Capitalism2003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: DimitryShostakovich

Socialists (known today oxymoronically as "liberals") also support the killing of millions of people. Ever hear of Stalin? Mao?

The Nazi platform and the modern Democrat platform are so similar because the ideological roots are the same. The former is national socialism, the latter transnational socialism.

Were it an exaggeration to make the comparison, I'd be relieved. Sadly, it is not.


3 posted on 05/25/2004 12:46:34 AM PDT by thoughtomator (Any "church" that can't figure out abortion and homosexuality isn't worthy of the appellation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
May 19 '04... hmmmmm...

Interesting takes you have in your short post history:

"Like it or not, the war on terror has a lot to do with how we are viewed. It is because we are viewed so negatively that terrorist attacks are perpetrated against us."

(re: John Kerry)
"Stick to policy. Stop digging up worthless stuff about his military career 30 years ago. It just seems shameless."
4 posted on 05/25/2004 12:50:00 AM PDT by kenth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich

Economic oppression inevitably leads to political oppression. That is my point.

The modern left and the left of Hitler's day are in agreement on the need to drastically curtail economic liberty and discourage individual achievement. They both support centralized planning and large infringements on economic liberty. The average American will work 25 YEARS of his life for the STATE. The modern left justifies (and tries to EXPAND) this type of slavery. With this in mind, I don't think there are limits to what they will do in the future.

I didn't even mention the similarities libs have with Hitler on gun control...

Oh, and I'm willing to bet Kerry will do everything in his power to destroy Fox News and talk radio once he gets his hands on the reins of power. The left is determined to silence the opposition.


5 posted on 05/25/2004 12:50:46 AM PDT by Capitalism2003 ("Greedy capitalists get money by trade. Good liberals steal it." – David Friedman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich

When did the nazis take power, when did they start the mass extermination, and what happened in between? The point that nazis were socialists is a point well taken. What comparison would you have him make? The STASI ?


6 posted on 05/25/2004 12:52:25 AM PDT by agitator (...And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003
Actung! Mein Fuhrer, vat vill ve do ven ven fundeng for za Amerikkorps program unts? Ve must act immediattly! If ve doont act fast ve even mite lose ze Hope Scholarships! Zend Goebbels immediately! Ze is the most hotsie-totsie Nazi zat I've vever seen!

On a slightly more serious note, I believe that the government regulatory programs initiated by the National Socialist Party in pre-war Germany were merely an extension of the Bismarckian predilection for the ideology of corporatism.

If I'm not mistaken, Bismarck was the original paleo-con.

No?

7 posted on 05/25/2004 12:52:28 AM PDT by The Scourge of Yazid ("Why don't we just ask Gerard? Gerard knows everything.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich

NAZIism was rather unusual for a varient of fascism. While most fascist leaders killed those who opposed them, large scale democide was rarely an objective.

As such, the complaint that current Leftist thought and NAZIism are uncomparable due to NAZI genocide is a fair argument. However, if we look at fascism as a whole and the modern Left that complaint goes away.

Further, I would say the pattern of Leftist thought since the fall of the communism in the Soviet Union has been unquestionably in the direction of fascism. Can you seriously argue that Oswald Mosely, for example, would not be happy with the effort to integrate Europe into one state of a supremely questionable democratic nature?


8 posted on 05/25/2004 12:52:53 AM PDT by swilhelm73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
What you fail to mention is that the "left" can't wait to have the power to use these same parameters to eliminate those of us on the right!

Shame on You!

9 posted on 05/25/2004 12:55:13 AM PDT by JDoutrider (In God We Trust...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: ItsonlikeDonkeyKong
If I'm not mistaken, Bismarck was the original paleo-con.

American and European conservatives are rather dramtically different, and especially not-British ones of more then 50 years ago. The root of the issue is what they seek to conserve.

Bismarck invented the modern welfare state to gain the support of the lower classes to maintain the monarchy (a fact lost on most ignorant leftists). Basically the left of his time agreed to trade voting rights for limited socialism.

While Bismarck was trying to conserve the monarchy, the predecessors of the current American conservative movement, who were called *liberals* at the time, were creating, expanding, and maintaining the free society and representative government as described in the US Constitution.

So modern American conservatives conserve freedom. Rather different from the monarchists of 1800s continental Europe.
12 posted on 05/25/2004 1:01:25 AM PDT by swilhelm73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: swilhelm73

bttt


14 posted on 05/25/2004 1:10:13 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
"With that in mind, your comparison falls flat, and is worthless, and shameless. Enough with the nazi comparisons."

Your defense of the rhetorical devices of the liberals falls equally flat. The NAZI political platform cited here was the platform they used before they undertook the "systematic extermination of millions of people".

The comparison is relevant. The two parties have similar political platforms, it is logical they have similar goals.

15 posted on 05/25/2004 1:13:49 AM PDT by Justa (Politically Correct is morally wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich

I guess it comes down to the definition of "mainstream liberals". Do you consider ANSWER, MoveOn.org, NARAL, the NEA, and similar groups to be in that category?


16 posted on 05/25/2004 1:13:56 AM PDT by thoughtomator (Any "church" that can't figure out abortion and homosexuality isn't worthy of the appellation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
use such a comparison as a shameless rhetorical device is disrespect to the many people who were killed by the nazis.

Mainstream liberals do not have enough in common with nazis to warrant such a comparison.

Yes, it is shame less (there is no shame necessary).

Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and their elitist ilk would have ALL CONSERVATIVES KILLED, without blinking an eye, if it would further their own power. They are poverty pimps and use the "comman man/woman" as mere stepping stones to acheive their EVIL, SELFISH AGENDA.

17 posted on 05/25/2004 1:15:30 AM PDT by jamaly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jamaly

Looking at #11 onward, the words could be taken almost verbatim from American socialist websites. No doubt, left-wing authoritarianism is alive and well.


18 posted on 05/25/2004 1:21:29 AM PDT by Capitalism2003 ("Greedy capitalists get money by trade. Good liberals steal it." – David Friedman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73
I never quite understood the appeal of monarchical conservatism. Especially in nations that would otherwise be liberal democracies, such as the United Kingdom.

I understand the necessity in backward, underdeveloped countries such as Afghanistan, Nepal, the smaller Gulf states, etc., but I don't see how having Queen Elizabeth II as your head of state is really doing the Canadians or Australians any favors.

I agree with your assessment of the Continental divide over the definition of conservative principles.

Le Figaro?

Give it a rest! These guys are only conservatives in comparison with the Jose Bove, anarchistic freaks who serve as their political counterparts on the "left."

Most of the European parliamentary parties who are labeled "conservative", e.g. the People's Party, the Freedom Party, Umberto Bossi's Northern League, are in fact, merely right-wing. There is a significant difference between the two terms.

The media should know that by now.

19 posted on 05/25/2004 1:24:19 AM PDT by The Scourge of Yazid ("Why don't we just ask Gerard? Gerard knows everything.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator

To: DimitryShostakovich
"Nazis supported the systematic extermination of millions of people."

What do you call the liberal New York Times covering up for Stalin's mass murders? What about liberal coddling of mass-murdering communists like Mao? Or their continuing love affair with Castro?

Liberals have facilitated the murder of 100 million people this past century.

It's actually an insult to nazis when they are equated with liberals.

21 posted on 05/25/2004 1:38:26 AM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
There's one big difference between Liberals and nazis though:
Nazis supported the systematic extermination of millions of people.

Pardon me, but what the hell do you think abortion is?

22 posted on 05/25/2004 1:41:57 AM PDT by Prime Choice (John Kerry is a butthead! ...or worse, a used car salesman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
Another big difference between Nazis and Liberals:
The Nazis supported a massive military, which was used to conquer much of Europe.
Liberals do not support a massive military.

No? They sure don't seem to mind the U.N. being in control of the militaries of various nations...including the United States military. If that isn't "supporting a massive military," then what is?

23 posted on 05/25/2004 1:44:02 AM PDT by Prime Choice (John Kerry is a butthead! ...or worse, a used car salesman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
This may be a little off-topic; but what's the dope on Shostakovitch?

Communist apparatchick?

Subversive poet?

Average Dimitry looking to keep his head down so that Stalin doesn't have it decapitated?

I'd really be interested in knowing the true story behind this man's cryptic life.

24 posted on 05/25/2004 1:49:30 AM PDT by The Scourge of Yazid ("Why don't we just ask Gerard? Gerard knows everything.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ItsonlikeDonkeyKong

Well, the value a monarchy can have, IMO, is in areas where the tribe is the highest social unit most of the people have faith in.

Since the nation belongs to the monarch as a whole, the tribal structure is an impediment to his natural urges to consolidate power. This will then ideally lead to efforts to replace tribal loyalty with national loyalty. Further, the petty nobility that tends to be the scourge of such societies will be converted or replaced by a bureacracy where merit plays at least some role.

This certainly happened in Europe, though the process was neither clean nor efficient. Look at the Spanish in the Netherlands or the power plays by the Hapsburgs in Germany for just how bloody a consolidating monarch can be.

That being said, at times I think the best thing we can do in regards to Africa now is install monarchies. The problems with such an endeavor would be legion but I see no other suggestions that have much merit.

As for the larger point, traditionally there were three forces in European politics (and to a lessor extent American);

Socialists/Communists - the predecessors of the modern Left

Conservatives - monarchists and predecessors of the European Right and *perhaps* RINOs

Liberals - the predecessors of American conservatives and libertarians.

I'd really love to know how liberal came to mean socialist. In European parlance, liberal still generally means conservative/libertarian thought I see the term "liberal-left" coming into use.


25 posted on 05/25/2004 1:50:28 AM PDT by swilhelm73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
I am neither liberal nor conservative.

Riiiiiight.

Bye-bye troll...

26 posted on 05/25/2004 1:52:27 AM PDT by Prime Choice (John Kerry is a butthead! ...or worse, a used car salesman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jamaly

How right you are, my friend.... With the degree of hate this party has built up, anything is possible. Once they pack the courts with their "people", the purge would begin. Polosi has shown her true colors... her and Hillary are one and the same. The Clilntons are evil, and they have a HUGE following... enough so to overthrow this government. They will pack them any way they can...assination if need be. Hit men are available to start this removal of our conservative judges and replace them with liberals who would not hesitate to burn the constitution.... and then have a free reign to completely usurp power.


27 posted on 05/25/2004 1:52:49 AM PDT by Stretch (Stretch: The Old Geezer from Apple Va. Cal and Cumming Ga. (God's Country.) Long Live America!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73
I don't think reinstalling monarchs in the heart of Africa is the solution; just look at the only two nations there that still have regents-Lesotho and Swaziland.

Though it could prove profitable in certain circumstances; Haile Selassie was certainly a better steward of Ethiopia than Mengistu Mariam, rest assured.

The only truly conservative-or "liberal" if you prefer-parties in Europe are the remnants of the Yavlinsky/Chubais parties; extant only in the Russian oligarchs who now vie for power with Vladimir Putin, and the Pim Fortuyn bloc in the Netherlands.

28 posted on 05/25/2004 2:00:09 AM PDT by The Scourge of Yazid ("Why don't we just ask Gerard? Gerard knows everything.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
"Mainstream liberals do not have enough in common with nazis to warrant such a comparison."

As were the "mainstream" people of Germany, are the "mainstream liberals" of these United States.

Germans did, and American liberals will, allow the decimation, should their leaders choose to carry it to that extent.

After all, are the liberals crying about the slaughter of Iraqis under Saddam? Slaughters in Africa? And elsewhere in the world?

I think not.

Trolling are we?

29 posted on 05/25/2004 2:02:07 AM PDT by G.Mason (A President is best judged by the enemies he makes when he has really hit his stride…Max Lerner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73
@ swilhelm73 "I'd really love to know how liberal came to mean socialist. In European parlance, liberal still generally means conservative/libertarian thought I see the term "liberal-left" coming into use."

"If you can cut the people off from their history, then they can be easily persuaded." – Karl Marx

"The revolution will be complete when the language is perfect"--George Orwell, 1984

30 posted on 05/25/2004 2:12:48 AM PDT by Capitalism2003 ("Greedy capitalists get money by trade. Good liberals steal it." – David Friedman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003

'We have to tolerate dictators!'---Joe Kennedy
'Ol fat Ted didn't fall far from the tree did he?

Spring time
For Hillary
In Germany


31 posted on 05/25/2004 2:17:56 AM PDT by rockfish59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich; All; Eagle9; freedox; chesty_puller; GRRRRR; MouthOfTheSouth; Memother; ...
There's one big difference between Liberals and nazis though: Nazis supported the systematic extermination of millions of people.

The liberal is worse it kills something that hasnt a fighting chance THE UNBORN !At least a grown man or woman has a chance to fight even children fight to survive but the unborn isnt given a chance by these vultures
Nuff said!

32 posted on 05/25/2004 2:19:12 AM PDT by ATOMIC_PUNK (Let your opponent point to you the way to overcome him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003
I thought statment #24 was interesting, considering in particular that at first the Nazi's claim to be Socialists who worship government over God. Socialism essentially embraces "the state" as religion. The claim to be Socialist and religous at the same time is simply impossible, and we saw that the Nazi's action couldn't have anything to do with belief in God or God's law. The next statement they go on to claim that all actions are to be committed for the good of "common or collective interest" again, right back to the Socialist line of thinking. They seem to promote religion in this section as a statement for open oposition to the existence of other religions within the state. This would also seem to justify some people's thinking that the Nazi's were Christian, but then again, by the time they actually came into power following 1920, I have no doubt they no longer forwarded such claims to Christianity. Suffice to say, their actions were absolutely indicative of the opposite. Then again, if anyone runs across anything to support or dispute that, please send it to me.
33 posted on 05/25/2004 2:30:02 AM PDT by Caipirabob (Democrats.. Socialists..Commies..Traitors...Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003

The left substitutes government for god. They believe govt is the be all and the end all.


34 posted on 05/25/2004 3:11:54 AM PDT by tkathy (nihilism: absolute destructiveness toward the world at large and oneself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003; All

I don't think this proves much. If you went to the Constitutions of most communist countries, you'd probably find language embodying all sorts of rights, not much different from our own Constitution's.

Does that mean that communism and democracy are similar? Of course not. It just proves that totalitarian governments lie about their true aims.


35 posted on 05/25/2004 3:28:23 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich

One could point out that the Nazis supported the extermination of people who, by their standards, were less than human.

The Jews, the gypsies, etc.

They managed what, six to ten million? Not counting war dead?

Modern liberals have concluded, in general, that an unborn child is less than human. Since 1973 they've managed what? Thirty-five million?

I know that the liberals are behind in the 'yearly' column, but they've made up for short annual returns with an extended culture of death that continues to reap 1.2-1.3 million dead per year.

So yeah, some people can see a political party with a socialist bent that identifies sub-human humans and makes their destruction a pillar of their political identity as similar to NAZIism.

IMHO, of course.


36 posted on 05/25/2004 4:30:44 AM PDT by Mr. Thorne ("But iron, cold iron, shall be master of them all..." Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
There's one big difference between Liberals and nazis though: Nazis supported the systematic extermination of millions of people.

Yawn. Abortion, population control, one child policy, population control through female infanticide (source of children) etc...

Liberals are full steam ahead toward extermination of groups which do not obligate.

37 posted on 05/25/2004 5:28:49 AM PDT by JudgemAll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
There's one big difference between Liberals and nazis though: Nazis supported the systematic extermination of millions of people.

Yawn. ANd should I mention race and sexual preference based marriage. If that is not genocidal policy, then what is.

38 posted on 05/25/2004 5:29:21 AM PDT by JudgemAll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
There's one big difference between Liberals and nazis though: Nazis supported the systematic extermination of millions of people.

With that in mind, your comparison falls flat, and is worthless, and shameless. Enough with the nazi comparisons. Don't we hear liberals use those same rhetorical devices all too much?

Uhhhh, how many pro-life 'Rats are there in the House and Senate? Not that many. Has Kerry ever voted against a pro-abortion bill? Ever read much about partial-birth abortion, which is done for birth-control purposes and not for health-related issues regarding the mother as its practitioners have tried to tell us.

No, the 'Rats (with some Pubbie assistance) have condoned and facilitated the murder of far more than six million people, and its because of such conscienceless acts as this, combined with their socialist beliefs, that the comparison between the two is very valid.

The difference between how a typical Freeper would use the comparison and how the typical 'Rat makes it is simple: Freepers have something factual and logical to back it up; 'Rats are mindless and shameless bomb-throwing mud-slingers. There is no intellectual merit to almost anything they say.

39 posted on 05/25/2004 5:49:17 AM PDT by HenryLeeII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003

bump for later read


40 posted on 05/25/2004 5:55:01 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #41 Removed by Moderator

To: DimitryShostakovich

Nazis supported the systematic extermination of millions of people.

With that in mind, your comparison falls flat, and is worthless, and shameless. Enough with the nazi comparisons.
.........................

You left yourself wide open on this one, Dimitry, unless you don't think unborn babies are people.


42 posted on 05/25/2004 6:47:23 AM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich
...There's one big difference between Liberals and nazis though:
Nazis supported the systematic extermination of millions of people.


Liberals are better because Nazis were just more direct about their intentions? (Wouldn't it be worst if Liberals were destroying all these people accidently?)
43 posted on 05/25/2004 6:52:29 AM PDT by Joe_October (Saddam supported Terrorists. Al Qaeda are Terrorists. I can't find the link.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003
The problem with your argument is that Hitler betrayed almost all the socialist principles laid out above once he came to power. The true believers in National Socialism, including Ernst Roehm and the Nazi ideologue who wrote the very words you have posted, Gregor Strasser, were murdered by Hitler on the Night of the Long Knives, June 30, 1934.

Hitler was backed by all the major capitalist industrialists in Germany throughout the existence of the Third Reich. He consolidated his power as Chancellor by gaining the support of the conservative faction in German government led by Franz von Paten. The only private property at risk in the Nazi era belonged to the Jews. Private enterprise flourished under the Nazis and strikes were outlawed. Hardly the record one would expect of socialists.

For the Nazis, ideology on paper was one thing, actual governing philosophy something else entirely. Hitler did not go to the working man to build his war machine. He went to the capitalists.

In such a well researched and well known area of history it behooves no one to distort the facts. The proper way to understand National Socialism is to always put the emphasis on the first word -- nationalism. The Nazis were German racial chauvinists of the first rank. Hitler's committment to socialism was always secondary, and, as we saw, easily disposed of when he felt it was convenient to do so.

44 posted on 05/25/2004 12:07:19 PM PDT by beckett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
Communism will never be accepted in the United States, but under the guise and name of "liberalism" it will easily be swallowed.

And so it is that we are choking.


45 posted on 05/25/2004 12:13:35 PM PDT by unixfox (Close the borders, problems solved!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DimitryShostakovich

You are wrong. In practice, all socialism becomes national socialism. The Soviet Union talked a good game, but was really just a front for Russian nationalism.


46 posted on 05/25/2004 12:18:57 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Uday and Qusay are ead-day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73
I'd really love to know how liberal came to mean socialist.

FDR and the intellectuals of the 1930s are usually credited with pulling off that remarkable feat of legerdemain. They were uncomfortable calling themselves socialist given Norman Thomas' failure to capture to the American imagination with the term, and of course to call themselves communists was anathema. So in all the trendy periodicals and opinion pieces written by guys like John Dewey and Sidney Hook, they started to assign themselves the designator "liberal." Unfortunately it stuck, even though, as you say, it really doesn't apply.

A lot of the sophistry, nonsense and evil born in the 1930s, that roiling decade of hard economic times, is still with us today.

47 posted on 05/25/2004 12:30:46 PM PDT by beckett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003
Remember, from history that the American Left (Communists) was virulently against helping Britain fight Hitler ---- until..... Hitler attacked Russia then they were mad because we weren't already in the fight.
48 posted on 05/25/2004 5:19:04 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country. What else needs to be said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ATOMIC_PUNK

Thanks for the ping!


49 posted on 05/25/2004 9:35:11 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: beckett

The lure of socialism for the ruling class has always been the godlike power and condecention. The weight of socialism always rests upon the shoulders of the working class


50 posted on 05/25/2004 11:00:14 PM PDT by bad company
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson