Posted on 10/17/2007 12:07:00 PM PDT by Verdelet
A quarter of Germans believe there were at least some positive aspects to Nazi rule, a poll showed today.
The finding comes after a popular talk show host was fired for praising Nazi Germany’s attitude toward motherhood.
Germans were asked whether National Socialism had some “good sides (such as) the construction of the highway system, the elimination of unemployment, the low criminality rate (and) the encouragement of the family”.
A quarter of those who responded said “yes” – but 70% said “no”.
Stern magazine commissioned the survey after Germany’s NDR public broadcaster fired talk show host Eva Herman last month following her statement on the Third Reich.
She was reported as saying that while there was “much that was very bad, for example Adolf Hitler”, there were good things, “for example, the high regard for the mother” under the Nazis.
I think they had the same philosophy towards unions that the communists have always had when they've been in power. Unions are a competing power base.
I think the biggest factor in the economic turnaround for the German economy was the change in monetary policy. Hitler paid the Versailles reparation I believe only one year, then stopped. After that the Nazis quit printing money and reigned in credit expansion.
There was at least a 10% exchange TOWARDS the Social Democrats and Communists from the Leftists and Centrists. In general, some leftists and centrists becamse Social Democrats, and some Social Democrats became Communists. Similarly, rightists and nationalists drifted off to become Nazis.
My point was that the Nazis were a socialist party
This is a popular party line among conservatives, but it really isn't true. The Nazis were at heart corporatist. They did not believe in nationalizing the economy or socializing ownership of private property so they were not true socialists as most people understand it. They believed in guided/controled capitalism, where the Krupps and Bayers and Farbens kept their ownership and managerial control, but where they cooperated much more closely with the national government in achieving goals directed by Berlin rather than simply following the whims of the Frankfurt financial community.
The word socialist in the Nazi party name should not be thought of like Marxian socialism, but more like the "socialism" behind the Christian Social Party of the Hapsburg Empire and interwar Austria or the Christian Social Union of modern Bavaria - i.e. social concern for the welfare of the people, specifically of ethnic Germans in the case of the Nazis.
and enjoyed their greatest electoral success in the districts where the socialist message was and is most popular. Is that not true?
Yes, but its misleading. To Social Democrats lost votes to the Communists in these districts, while partys like the National Peoples Party and German Peoples Party saw their voters become Nazis. As the socialists splintered between the Social Democrats and Communists, removing the Socialist plurality, the Nationalists and Rightists were uniting as Nazis granting them the new plurality.
The failure of the Nazis to gain a plurality in southern and western Germany (which are now Christian Democrat strongholds) is because the Catholic Center party maintained its hold on a plurality of the electorate there, preventing the unification of the nationalist and rightist voters from becoming the new pluarality.
There was certainly movement between parties, but movement from one side of the ideological spectrum to the other was more rare. The placement of Nazis as a "rightist" party ultimately comes from the main source of their support, their own self-perception, and the perception of the other parties of the time. As you probably know, the terms leftist and rightist come from the practice of leftists being seated on the left side of parliaments, and rightists on the right side. The Nazis were seated to the furthest right as far as possible from the Communists who were on the furthest left, because that is where they and everyone else thought they belonged. Modern political science thought may disagree by classifying parties based on support or opposition to individual freedom instead of by degrees of nationalism or internationalism, but that was not the case in the 1920's and 1930's. Then the Nazis were thought of as being at the most extreme right. We should simply not make the mistake of assuming that the extreme right of 1930's Germany has any relation at all to the right of 2000's America. A modern American Conservative, plopped down into the environment of 1930's Germany, would probably find himself supporting either the Catholic Center Party or the German National Peoples Party - partys of what was then the center-right. OTOH, those modern Americans most at home in the Nazi Party would probably be the Liberal/RINO Republicans who believe in a busybody big government and Democrats of the Democratic Leadership Council wing of the Democrat Party (as opposed to the Democratic Socialists of America wing, which would have a strong affinity for the Social Democrats - i.e. the modern centrists. Leftists of today are of course still the same leftists of yesteryear.
During the 1933-1937 period, 460,000 more marriages occured in Germany than the 1928-1932 period, and 1.25 million more children were born in that period than in the previous period. Annual births went from under 1 million per year in 1932 and before to around 1.25 million per year in 1933 and after. This is mostly an effect of restoring prosperity. And the growth is even more astonishing considering that the people coming of marriage age in the 1930's were the generation born during WWI, when the birth rate was down from millions of men being off in France and Russia fighting.
And Senator Patty Murray said that Bin Laden built hospitals.
That was one of the biggest advantages Nazi Germany had over France and Britain. The Allies didn’t reproduce as rapidly as the Germans did.
But corporatism is a form of socialism. The German government set prices, governed the availability of raw materials, and decided what could be produced. The government also took over the banks and regulated the availability of capital. The German companies of the period retained private ownership only in name. There has been an unceasing attempt by the left since the end of the war to paint the Nazis as a right wing movement serving the interest of German big business but it just isn't so. I recommend German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler if you can find it in stock. It's an excellent book by an old Yale historian.
The word socialist in the Nazi party name should not be thought of like Marxian socialism, but more like the "socialism" behind the Christian Social Party of the Hapsburg Empire and interwar Austria or the Christian Social Union of modern Bavaria - i.e. social concern for the welfare of the people, specifically of ethnic Germans in the case of the Nazis.
Sorry but that's no so. The Nazis were in favor of state control of economic resources and Hitler said so on many occasions. Hitler was happy to let nominal control of industries stay in private hands only so long as they served the interests of the state. For a discussion of the economic policies of Hitler I highly recommend The Economic Doctrine of the Nazis by Hans-Hermann Hoppe. (The link is an mp3 audio file. It's about 30 minutes.)
Something is terribly wrong with our education system evidenced by this thread which demonstrates how few people know very much about Germany from 1914 on through the years.
We need to learn so much more so that we do not repeat the mistakes they made and also to see whether some of the good things they did do,can or should be tried again.
Like,how did they get out of their impossible financial situation as well as the incredible decadence,they experienced in the twenties?
So is that why Hitler conquered them ?
“Like,how did they get out of their impossible financial situation as well as the incredible decadence,they experienced in the twenties?”
By creating huge national debt and organizing lots of (often sensless) jobs, this however caused overindustrialization and soon overheating of economy. National debt was firstly fixed by nationalization of segments of economy then by looting Jews, finally by starting a war.
If not for war then 3rd Reich wouldn’t last so long as the way is always the same:
->Low Economic Growth-Idustrial Boom-Overheating-Reducing investments-Recession
Conquered polls?
Ok, but you shouldn´t forget to mention that there were many people well aware of the cruelty of Hitler and his followers. The SA fought bloody fights with the communists and democrats on the streets, and everybody knew that. They also treated the Jews in a shameful way long before 1933. Many honest people regarded the Nazis as evil, rightly so, and that´s why the NSDAP never gained more than 43% of the votes. The “laws” made shortly after Hitler´s appointment to Chancellor have shown the path to a dictatorship. The inability of the democratic powers to prevent this, is the reason why approximately 60 million people died between 1939 and 1945.
High stepping marchers, great shines on jackboots!
I learned something new about the Autobahn the other day. My neighbor travels to Germany about every six months. He said that the sections with no speed limit are becoming shorter every time he goes there. It seems they are becoming too expensive to maintain so the Germans are reducing them.
That's why I wrote: "Yes a few prescient souls saw where things were headed already in 1933". In general, the Communists and Socialists were not voting for Hitler because they were opposed to his views, not because they opposed creulty - far from it.
The SA fought bloody fights with the communists and democrats on the streets, and everybody knew that.
Yes, but there had been continual political street violence though since 1918 with the Communist uprisings.
They also treated the Jews in a shameful way long before 1933.
Mostly in the early 1930's when they were already a major party and had begun to gain local control of various areas. This was concurrent with their rise in popularity.
Many honest people regarded the Nazis as evil, rightly so, and that´s why the NSDAP never gained more than 43% of the votes.
Most of these people were members of the Catholic Center Party, and the occasional honest Social Democrat that wasn't a Fabian Socialist. The Communists thought him evil too, but they have a very peculiar definition of evil. The 43% vote for Hitler was a strong message that nearly everyone else had fallen behind his ranks who was not a Communist/Socialist or Catholic.
The “laws” made shortly after Hitler´s appointment to Chancellor have shown the path to a dictatorship. The inability of the democratic powers to prevent this, is the reason why approximately 60 million people died between 1939 and 1945.
Well really, 60 million people died because the powers on all sides wanted them too as they saw it furthering their strategic goals. It wasn't as though Britain and France accidentally declared war on Germany for invading Poland (but not Russia for doing the same plus invading Finland and the Baltic states) due to subterfuge or confusion. And then America did not just accidentally spend 4 years sending war material to Murmansk, Arkanghelsk, and Vladivostok to prop up Stalin because our ships couldn't find a clear path for Liverpool. And the western demand of unconditional surrender wasn't accidentally uttered even though it meant a fight to the death by Germany and thus lots more bloodshed. Roosevelt and Churchill made a calcuated decision that in their geopolitical view it was better to let Russia expand her domination of the Eurasian landmass than to allow Germany to smash her and become the leading European power, and that the smashing of Germany was also worth the destruction of the British Empire due to the benefit of keeping London, Washington and New York on top of the balance of power and world finance, and America and Britain as the leading industrial powers in the post-war world for at least a 15 year headstart over those powers that would be crippled by the war (Germany and Russia, also Japan).
Don't forget that even today 62 years on, Germany is nothing more than an occupied banana republic protectorate of America. I know we don't call it that, but that is the reality of our staioning massive numbers of troops in your country and exercising military control over the air and seas of Germany. We only signed a peace treaty in 1990.
The opportunity to avert mass bloodshed was there in 1939 by not backing up Col. Beck's regime in Poland and allowing Hitler to settle his last revaunchist claims vis-a-vis Danzig and the Corridor, and it was there again in 1943-1944 by cooperating with Stauffenberg and Co. instead of demanding they also unconditionally surrender as if they were Hitler and Co. It was never there though in preventing war between Germany and Stalin - that was an unavoidable catastrophe that would have occurred even if Hitler had never invaded, because Stalin was planning his own invasion of the west and had the men and war material to accomplish it by 1941 had Germany remained militarily impotent. After all, we all know how poorly France, Poland, and Italy did at holding off invasions during this period. There was nothing but Germany to stop Stalin once he had Russia ready to fight.
Yah. I always thought his invasion of Poll-land was a significant historical moment.
( If it weren’t for bad puns I’d make no puns at all ;-)
Huh, I hadn’t heard that. I’ve never actually driven the Autobahn myself, but it is a magnificent example of quality road work from what I’ve seen written.
Well, I read your post as if you agree with my lines. You certainly raise some interesting points regarding the war, and those points you made should be read more often in history books - but that doesn´t take away the guilt of the Nazis and their followers for the war and the atrocities being committed by the Germans during and before WW2.
Germany isn´t a protectorate of the US. Not since 1990, and not before. It was and is in Germany´s own interest to have a intensive cooperation with America, for its own security. Had Germany chosen NOT to cooperate with the US, and had the US compelled Germany to do so, THEN we could speak of a protectorate. But a country that forms and expresses its own will by democratic elected governments is not a protectorate. You could have seen that in 2003, when Schröder wrongfully decided not to side with the coalition of the willing, and you can see that in the fact that it´s Germany (since 1955) that controls its seas, airspace and the military driving/marching through it. Of course, Germany is embedded in NATO, but so are the US, too. I´m sure you know that German soldiers exercise on US soil.
Thinking about Europe and the world wars, I come to the conclusion that America should have stayed out of WW1. That would have meant an armistice between equals in central Europe, and had not lead to the awful treaty of Versailles, which undoubtly was a major reason for the rise of the Nazi party.
The Nazis started a war with Poland, and a war with the Soviet Union. The British and French started a whole European theater war. The Nazis then piled it on by declaring war on America after the Japanese attack, surely one of the strangest geopolitical moves of all time.
Thinking about Europe and the world wars, I come to the conclusion that America should have stayed out of WW1. That would have meant an armistice between equals in central Europe, and had not lead to the awful treaty of Versailles, which undoubtly was a major reason for the rise of the Nazi party.
Even without US intervention, Europe was so wrecked by 1917 that the dire economic crisis of the 1920's in Germany may still have occurred. It did not help that the Communist Bacillius had already been unleashed in spring of 1917 by Germany. Europe's chance for peace was in 1914 at the onset of the stalemate and again in 1916 when the duration and cost of the stalemate was clear. Europe did not want to listen to Pope Benedict and Kaiser Karl I von Hapsburg, so she reaped the whirlwind. One cannot but be amazed at the stupidity of Europeans in 1914, who threw away an amazing civilization of peace and progress for the barbarism of 1914-1990.
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.