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

Skip to comments.

HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST
John J. Ray ^ | unknown | John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.)

Posted on 05/27/2004 6:32:13 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last

1 posted on 05/27/2004 6:32:15 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: backhoe; Howlin
Long read, but I think worth it.
2 posted on 05/27/2004 6:33:09 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Couldn't find this posted on FR.


3 posted on 05/27/2004 6:33:46 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; Luis Gonzalez; William Wallace
FYI
4 posted on 05/27/2004 6:34:19 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Fascinating stuff (all of it)--thank you for posting!


5 posted on 05/27/2004 6:35:26 AM PDT by ECM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Hitler was a socialist. It can't be said ENOUGH!


6 posted on 05/27/2004 6:35:58 AM PDT by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
Tell any of the history challenged leftist clowns out there that Nazi is an abbreviation of National Socialist in German and they look at you like you just said the earth was flat.
7 posted on 05/27/2004 6:40:11 AM PDT by CrazyIvan (Death before dishonor, open bar after 6:00)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Bump for later read.


8 posted on 05/27/2004 6:41:46 AM PDT by randog (Everything works great 'til the current flows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
Impossible. Hitler was a right wing nut case almost as bad as George W. Bush!

All the liberals say this so it must be true. They're all too dumb to realize that Nazi is an acronym for National Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or National Socialist German Worker's Party.

9 posted on 05/27/2004 6:47:01 AM PDT by COEXERJ145
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Mother of God.

There are parts of this that will make Dr. Ray the 901st file.

Save this somewhere, before it goes down the Memory Hole.


10 posted on 05/27/2004 6:47:25 AM PDT by Old Sarge (It's not Bush's fault - It's THE MEDIA'S fault!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
Yawn. Is there really anyone who doesn't know Hitler was a socialist? I mean what part of National Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiters Partei (National Socialist German Workers Party) is unclear?

Without wasting a lot of time on the article, one thing stood out as wrongheaded: the discussion about Hitler and the Nazis being "middle class". There was no "middle class" in the American sense in Germany. Rather, there was (1) the aristocracy, (2) the bourgeoisie (non-noble rich, owners of significant businesses, etc., living primarily on undearned incomes), (3) the petit bourgeoisie or, to use the German term, Kleinbuerger, (4) the working class (the vast majority in urban areas, (5) peasants (farmers ranging from prosperous Frei Baueren with large farms to landless agricultural laborers, and (6) a relataively small lumpenpoletariat. The closest thing to what we would call "middle class" in this country would be the kleinbuerger (which would include most white collar workers and professionals) and the upper third of the working class (master and journeymen in trades, etc.).

11 posted on 05/27/2004 6:50:01 AM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo Arabiam Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
Not if you read " The Three Faces of Fascism" (THE difinitive work on Nazism) by Ernst Nolte.
12 posted on 05/27/2004 6:55:13 AM PDT by SMARTY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145

There are still some who claim the German Democratic Republic in East Germany was communist. Can't they read?


13 posted on 05/27/2004 6:58:39 AM PDT by Kleon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Dr. Ray is an amiable fellow. I e-mailed him some questions about fascism a few months ago and he responded to all by the next day. This fellow is one of the good guys.


14 posted on 05/27/2004 6:58:42 AM PDT by sergeantdave (Gen. Custer wore an Arrowsmith shirt to his last property owner convention.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

bttt


15 posted on 05/27/2004 6:58:59 AM PDT by bassmaner (Let's take the word "liberal" back from the commies!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CrazyIvan
Tell any of the history challenged leftist clowns out there that Nazi is an abbreviation of National Socialist in German and they look at you like you just said the earth was flat.

I had a professor who told me that Hitler was just fooling the people. He said he was a Socialist so that they would vote for him -- but in reality all his policies were evil right-wing policies.

Germany in the 1920's and early 30's had tons of Communist, Socialist, and Trade Unionist activists. The voters knew a Leftist when they saw one. And they voted for National Socialism because the policies sounded good (to them). To say (as my professor did) that the rabble were fooled by the name of the party and didn't really mean to support a Leftist is just twaddle.

16 posted on 05/27/2004 6:59:15 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (You can see it coming like a train on a track.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SMARTY

A major read...


17 posted on 05/27/2004 6:59:26 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (STAGMIRE !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
Well, I read through the first part of it, but it started to seem pointless. A few comments:

First, the title. "Hitler was a socialist". Well, duh; the name of his party was the National Socialist Party! This is a surprise, then, that he was a socialist?

Then there's this assertion:

Before we answer that question, however, let us look at what the Left and Right in politics consist of at present. Consider this description by Edward Feser of someone who would have been an ideal Presidential candidate for the modern-day U.S. Democratic party:

Followed by a description of Hitler. In reading through the 3 paragraphs that follow, it's easy to find individual characteristics that are applicable to many Democratic politicians. It's also quite possible to pick out characteristics that apply to some Republicans as well (for example, President Bush was not exactly the ideal family man up until about the age of 40). But it's quite impossible to apply the entire description to any Presidential candidate of any party, never mind their "ideal" candidate.

So we surely do need to look at the plausibility of the "insanity" claim. Do madmen achieve popular acclaim among their own people? Do madmen inspire their countrymen to epics of self-sacrifice? Do madmen leave a mark on history unlike any other? Until Hitler came along, the answers to all these questions would surely have been "no".

Uh, what? Here's a presumption that's challengable. The author himself makes the point of the difficulty of having to prove, or disprove, that a given historical figure was mad. So I can hardly accept that "the answers to all these questions would surely have been 'no'", because I would not be able to determine the mental status of any person in the past who had inspired their populace to such measures.

At that point I pretty much lost any confidence in the author, and stopped reading.

18 posted on 05/27/2004 6:59:45 AM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Amen. This can't be stressed enough. If you really seek to control other people, Socialism is the only mechanism. And it's always wrong.


19 posted on 05/27/2004 7:03:47 AM PDT by keithtoo (Please remove all Kerry-on luggage from your forehead compartments.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

VERY good piece!

National socialism is the only practicable socialism.


20 posted on 05/27/2004 7:08:23 AM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Bump for later .... thanks


21 posted on 05/27/2004 7:10:06 AM PDT by Yasotay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF

But 'JEREMIAH WAS A BULLFROG'...


22 posted on 05/27/2004 7:10:47 AM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
BUMP for latter perusal.
23 posted on 05/27/2004 7:11:16 AM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Sin Pátria, pero sin amo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
Umm, if you read the mainstream media, the answer is "yes" in regards to your question about whether or not people know Hitler was a socialist. The amount of space devoted to the Bush/Hitler comparison should make the answer obvious.
24 posted on 05/27/2004 7:11:46 AM PDT by stylin_geek (Koffi: 0, G.W. Bush: (I lost count))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican; OXENinFLA
WOW! 19 pages(including references) printed at 75% size!

Got to go fishing soon, will have to read later.

25 posted on 05/27/2004 7:15:37 AM PDT by StriperSniper (Welcome home Thomas Hamill !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge

"Mother of God. There are parts of this that will make Dr. Ray the 901st file."

It's a good thing Dr. Ray is an Aussie and not an Arky.

:)


26 posted on 05/27/2004 7:18:30 AM PDT by myheroesareDeadandRegistered
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Hayek has the high ground on this argument. It is well defended.


27 posted on 05/27/2004 7:21:56 AM PDT by steveyp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Bookmarked and Bumped


28 posted on 05/27/2004 7:25:54 AM PDT by ThomasMore (Pax et bonum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

bump for later. thx


29 posted on 05/27/2004 7:27:32 AM PDT by I-spy-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Socialism is government ownership of the means of production (land and capital equipment). Nazi Germany retained private ownership of these things under government direction of their use.

Public direction of privately held means of production is the essence of fascism, both in Italy, in Germany, and in Roosevelt's failed New Deal schemes for the industry in the NRA and agirculture in the AAA.

Perhaps more accurately, we need to say that fascism is a leftist system that is antithetical to the rightist Anglo-American free enterprise system.

Hitler was a man of the left and the englightenment.


30 posted on 05/27/2004 7:30:52 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave
Agreed.
31 posted on 05/27/2004 7:31:08 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

bump


32 posted on 05/27/2004 7:31:45 AM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
The author makes some wonderful points, this is something I have been telling people for years and he's right - they get that deer in the headlights look lol.

This is also why I worry about the current trends in the GOP. The GOP has always been the nationalist party and in the last few years appears to have jettisoned all support for traditional conservative principles of limited government, it is now only mildly less socialist than the Demcratic party. I do not liken GW Bush to Hitler like the nutsoid left has, GW is a great man, a natural leader with a solid moral compass. However once the pieces are in place - nationalism and socialism in one package - all that is needed is someone who is not a great man with a solid moral compass and all bets are off.

We are entering a period of long term conflict, the war against Islam will be long and bloody. As Orwell demonstrates unscrouplous leaders can manipulate patriotism and justify just about anything in the name of 'winning the war'. All totalitarian societies need an identifible enemy.

So what I fear is we are set up for a fascist-like fall - nationalism + socialism + war

33 posted on 05/27/2004 7:37:29 AM PDT by kjvail (Light 'em up George!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DM1

I think I heard you say this a coupla times. ;-)


34 posted on 05/27/2004 7:42:38 AM PDT by american colleen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker

That point was made in the article. Would you care to explain to me the difference between the state ownership and complete state control? I suggest that it is a destinction without merit.


35 posted on 05/27/2004 7:43:17 AM PDT by Durus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Yes, Hitler was a socialist, in fact a capital "S" socialist, But today, one cannot be "socialist" unless the socialist leadership recognizes one to be "socialist." So, I'm afraid Hitler has been repudiated by the PC grandchildren of his generation of socialists.


36 posted on 05/27/2004 7:49:16 AM PDT by Theodore R. (When will they ever learn?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Bump for later read...


37 posted on 05/27/2004 7:53:43 AM PDT by Andonius_99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CrazyIvan
Tell any of the history challenged leftist clowns out there that Nazi is an abbreviation of National Socialist in German

Add to that for the lefties who are all for the "workers" as Democrats always claim that it was the "National Socialist German Workers Party." (NSDAP - Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei).

38 posted on 05/27/2004 7:56:00 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

"Hitler was a Democrat"!


39 posted on 05/27/2004 7:58:54 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: CrazyIvan
The leftist color is red. I really hate how the mainstream media has hijacked our blue color recently, calling the socialist states the blue states. They should show the maps in red to indicate our current level of occupation.


40 posted on 05/27/2004 8:01:40 AM PDT by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
I guess that's why they called it the Nationalist Socialist Workers Party, or in it's German acronym the N.A.Z.I. party.

Doh!

41 posted on 05/27/2004 8:01:41 AM PDT by jerod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge

JR
Since Jan 7, 1998


42 posted on 05/27/2004 8:02:19 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
If this attempts to equate Nazi-ism with Enviromentalism or Conservationism, than this is a bunch of B.S.

You can disagreee with Greenpeace as most people do, but come on...

43 posted on 05/27/2004 8:17:15 AM PDT by conserv13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
Nice selective bit of the NSDAP Programme (manifesto). Here's the whole thing, and you can see how it was very palatable to the German people at the time, and some are things many of us would like today. But notice how much of it's as much nationalist as socialist.

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

Good thing, except his definition of "Germany" was pretty big.

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.

This is a result of the Treaty of Versailles, which tried to drive the German people into proverty and make it a second-class nation. We had a much better idea with the Marshall plan after WWII.

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

Lebensraum!

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.

Here's a nationalist, racist bit.

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

That's not so bad, good idea for today.

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.

The Democrats wouldn't understand the "only citizens vote or hold office" thing. I like the idea of appointing by ability rather than party affiliation, should be done here.

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.

Ah, the socialism kicks in with a nationalist bent. Remember, this was a time when few had food.

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.

Bad idea, seriously stupid and nationalistic.

9. All citizens shall have equal rights and duties.

Okay, great thing.

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.

Seriously socialist.

We demand therefore:

11-17 are just outright communist land and economic demands.

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.

A bit severe, but he was definitely for law and order (as he saw it).

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

Good, we work under common law too.

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.

Education is important, good, but with indoctrination. Although free at tax expense is going socialist.

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.

Except for the compulsory part, physical health is good, but this was in line with his creating a superior race thing.

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

Defeinitely a good idea.

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:

What follows is the standard press controls you find in any communist state. Bad idea. Except the part about preventing foreign control of German newspapers has some merit.

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.

Whoah, I thought everybody said the Nazis were godless! And here is pro-Christianity built right into their programme. But notice they are pro-Christian, but only so long as no church threatens the state. That's communist.

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.

Standard tool of fascist or communists states.

So you see in the end the NSDAP was a nice mix of a totalitarian nationalist state with a whole bunch of socialism thrown in, and a bit of religion as well.

44 posted on 05/27/2004 8:22:13 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Bookmarked and bumped for future reading.


45 posted on 05/27/2004 8:44:12 AM PDT by TBarnett34 (Go home, Cynthia McKinney!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

?


46 posted on 05/27/2004 8:55:36 AM PDT by Old Sarge (It's not Bush's fault - It's THE MEDIA'S fault!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

good read...


47 posted on 05/27/2004 9:42:04 AM PDT by jcb8199
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

The ghost of Hitler talks to Hillary disguesed as Eleanor Roosevelt.


48 posted on 05/27/2004 9:42:58 AM PDT by SpinyNorman (Kerry: the only man that can look like the front end of a horse while acting like the back end.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican

Hitler a socialist? Who knew? This will be a major news item, I bet! Or oughta be! That makes all the difference in the world. Say goodbye to socialism in Sweden, North Korea and all those other places that never ever suspected this. Wow!


49 posted on 05/27/2004 9:45:08 AM PDT by Revolting cat! ("In the end, nothing explains anything!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conserv13
If this attempts to equate Nazi-ism with Enviromentalism or Conservationism, than this is a bunch of B.S.

"Equate?" Well, not entirely. But do they share important elements? Absolutely.

The key, which this article tends to dance around, is between whether rights and authority are seen to be individual or collective. The true political spectrum (meaning the one which reasonably describes reality) focuses on this issue. Socialists are well over to the 'all rights are collective' end, whether they call themselves Fascists, International Socialists, Communists, or National Socialists. The proof of that is in the overlapping self-definitions. All the words apply to all the forms of socialism, thus you get 'communists' who are self-described as 'international socialists' who are blatantly nationalist and therefore 'national socialists' who are now called 'fascists'.

The 'greens' or other hyper-environmentalists are also well over into the 'all rights and authorities are collective' end of the spectrum - believing that everyone should be controlled by some central authority's opinion of what is environmentally sound. Their priorities may vary between economic well-being for all (the claim of socialism) or 'sustainable economies', but the key is that they think the economy (and therefore all aspects of a citizen's life) need to be centrally controlled. Hayek laid that out with unassailable clarity. And of course, Lenin recognized that it is easier to take over a revolution than to start one - or by extension - that it is easier to take over a centrally controlled economy than to force those controls on people. Hence, the greens and socialists join forces until the control is established - each thinking that in the end their detail priorities will be used for the controls.
50 posted on 05/27/2004 10:40:32 AM PDT by Gorjus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 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