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
No further words are necessary...just read closely.
(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.
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.
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.
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 ?
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.
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?
Shame on You!
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.
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?
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.
Looking at #11 onward, the words could be taken almost verbatim from American socialist websites. No doubt, left-wing authoritarianism is alive and well.
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.
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.
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.
Pardon me, but what the hell do you think abortion is?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
"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
'We have to tolerate dictators!'---Joe Kennedy
'Ol fat Ted didn't fall far from the tree did he?
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
The left substitutes government for god. They believe govt is the be all and the end 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.
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.
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.
Yawn. ANd should I mention race and sexual preference based marriage. If that is not genocidal policy, then what is.
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.
bump for later read
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.
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.
And so it is that we are choking.
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.
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.
Thanks for the ping!
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
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.