Posted on 02/03/2008 10:03:48 PM PST by neverdem
COULD something like it happen again? That is invariably the first question that comes to mind when recalling that Hitler was given power in Germany 75 years ago last week. With the world now facing such great tensions and instability, the question seems more obvious than ever.
Hitler came to power in a democracy with a highly liberal Constitution, and in part by using democratic freedoms to undermine and then destroy democracy itself. That democracy, established in 1919, was a product of defeat in world war and revolution and was never accepted by most of the German elites, notably the military, large landholders and big industry.
Troubled by irreconcilable political, social and cultural divisions from the beginning, the new democracy survived serious threats to its existence in the early postwar years and found a semblance of stability from 1924 to 1928, only to be submerged by the collapse of the economy after the Wall Street crash of 1929.
The Nazis’ spectacular surge in popular support (2.6 percent of the vote in the 1928 legislative elections, 18.3 percent in 1930, 37.4 percent in July 1932) reflected the anger, frustration and resentment — but also hope — that Hitler was able to tap among millions of Germans. Democracy had failed them, they felt. Their country was divided, impoverished and humiliated. Scapegoats were needed.
It was easy to turn hatred against Jews, who could be made to represent the imagined external threat to Germany by both international capitalism and Bolshevism. Internally, Jews were associated with the political left — Socialist and Communist — which was made responsible by Hitler and his followers for Germany’s plight.
Increasingly, Hitler seemed to a good third of the German electorate the only hope to putting the country back on its feet, restoring pride and bringing about national...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Don't bet on it.
Marge Schott thought he was initially good for The Fatherland
“Does any one know if this is taught in high school?”
Depends on the school, doesn’t it?
Some schools do a good job of teaching. Some schools manage to only be centers for radical revolutionary indoc.
I’m not all that educated, which is probably obvious. But, from my perspective, most of the tribulations of the 20th century in europe have been about either trying to hold onto a reasonable facsimile of feudalism or reinvent a replacement for a recently discarded form of feudalism.
I really doubt that the average EUnix can conceive of any form of governance that isn’t some construct of the lord > peasant relationship.
Hahahahaha! My stepson graduated last year and my son is a freshman. Nope, they watch videos like "An Inconvenient Truth" and learn about Martin Luther King, Jr., Harriet Tubmans, multiculturalism, agitprop on the Vietnam war and all about the environment and diversity. School today is NOTHING like it was when most of us were there.
NYT article conveniently leaves out the crucial role the communists played in destroying the chances for success of a free German republic after WWI.
The Nazis rose from obscurity to become a powerful party primarily because of the threat presented by the strength of the communists, which the Nazis were a reaction to. The communists were a serious threat to take over Germany through violence, and the Nazis met the violence of the communists with violence of their own. The communists actually managed to seize control of Bavaria for a brief period, communist soviets took control of some German Navy ships in the immediate aftermath of the war, and there were pitched battles in the streets of Berlin between communists and nazis. Had there been no serious threat of violent revolution from the communists, Germans would never have turned to the Nazis in such numbers, and the Nazis would have remained an extremist fringe party.
Not surprising that the only mention by the NYT of the communists is in a passing reference in discussing the anti-semitism of the Nazis.
The one thing that is certain is that if the leadership vacuum continues then it will be filled. We have small men seeking leadership who seem to be driven by ambition but not principle who seem ashamed to speak of their country with pride and defend it against slander at home and abroad. All we need is a man who speaks proudly and clearly and rallies the hearts of those he speaks to. Right now though it is difficult we have a generation that does not understand patriotism, they look to government as an endless source of solutions and fixes not realizing that the government is not a God and is not there to fix our lives.
People starved of leadership will dine with the devil if he points the way.
The funny thing is, is that after the first war, Corporal Adolph Hitler was assigned by the army to infiltrate a supposed left-wing radical group, the German Workers Party. He liked what he was hearing, and eventually took over the party and used it to become chancellor of Germany and then Fuhrer. Joseph Stalin had a similar experience.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_inspection_of_the_German_Workers%27_Party
Gimme a break. Imagined? After two communist attempts at a takeover, one in 1848 and another via Polish Jewess, Rosa Luxembourg and the Spartakusbund in Berlin in the 1920s, the fear of communists in Germany was hardly imagined, never mind the revelation of the Balfour Declaration. The Bund der Gerechten, an apostate Jewish group had funded Karl Marx' authorship of the Manifesto. Marx was taught communism by Moses Hess! The Bund was funded by some of the largest Jewish banking families in Europe. BOTH Lenin and Hitler had received funding from the Schiff family.
This history is detailed by Orthodox Jewish Rabbi and former head of the Supreme Rabbinical Court in the United States, Marvin S. Antelman in his thoroughly documented two-volume work, To Eliminate the Opiate. I recommend it highly.
Wrong. The abomination that was the precursor of the UN - The League of Nations. A global ass boil right up until the UN tool over.
This is true, by design, as an end to the national sovereignty.
After all these years I’m still not clear on the difference between communists and nazis.
???
I thought the Jews represented the greedy shopkeepers...small business, and banking system.
Communists are murderous totalitarian enemies of freedom, while the Nazis are racist murderous totalitarian enemies of freedom.
Cooperation here means POLICE, not PEACE. See: Charter of the United Nations Chapter VII
OK, I think I understand.
The international bankers are of a different makeup; they are Sabbateans, an apostate branch of Judaism with nothing but contempt for the Torah-observant Jews. The latter take it on the chin for the behavior of the elitists who have their own Kabbalistic Torah Atzilut.
This is backward. It was Hitler’s party which was socialist
Really? Maybe you should ask the people of Sudan, Zimbabwe, Somalia, Rwanda, and a few other African countries about that.
Democracy has created a monster in America.
The have-nots can vote and expect to use their numbers to make the more fortunate pay their bills.
There was a reason once only property owners could vote.
and I could go on but I won’t....
it’s all part of a hard reckoning
toss in that it’s now a sin to be a member of a racial, ethnic or religious majority in American culture and that bullying minorities expect their pound of flesh and no accountability of their own.
it’s a veritable mess.......and youngsters simply don’t have a clue...this is all they have ever known.
Amerika...land of the whiney yet earnest
On the contrary, Russian communism, the granddaddy of them all, took a back seat to no one when it came to untermenschen (sp?). Their spawn -- China, N. Korea, Cambodia,E. Germany, etc.-- were as unapologetic, unrestrained racists as their situations allowed.
Yeah, they want a pound of flesh, but the deal is off once there is a drop of blood. I don’t think they understand that part yet.
Certainly the threat of communism was quite real, although the cure was as bad as the disease (and no thanks are due to Hitler that only part of Europe suffered the disease as well). But capitalism would have been Germany’s salvation if it had been tried.
Hitler used the terms Jews and Bolsheviks and Mensheviks interchangeably.
i think it went more psycho than that though....i think he resented them from having been around many Jews in his youth (supposedly his family had worked for Jews at times) and having less money than they did....and they weren't real Germans to him....they were interlopers and anti-pluralists to him.....not really that complicated.
that is not really accurate...that’s a favorite canard here to try to shake Nazism from any rightist connection....it’s more nuanced than that
in some ways Nazis implemented State control bigtime but they were not collectivists by a long shot nor did they adhere to each according to his needs...except maybe their slave labor...just to feed and house them
they were rightist culturally by the definition of their day.....very nationalistic...
and snappy dressers.....
thats just the basics
It’s like Hillary & Obama.
This is backward. It was Hitler’s party which was socialistNope. Stupid Goldberg, people are still parroting his pap.
Really? Maybe you should ask the people of Sudan, Zimbabwe, Somalia, Rwanda, and a few other African countries about that.Apples and oranges. What made the Nazis special was that they applied industrial principles to genocide(i.e. they actually had scientists *studying* how to commit genocide more effectively). That's what makes them different and terrifying.
ding ding ding. Somebody that gets it.
We homeschool our kids, so yes. But in government school? Doubt it.
Interesting that even today the statists talk as if the only choice is between some form of communism and fascism (with many statists favoring communism without the “mistakes” of Stalinism — this time they will get it right, yawn). The totalitarian mindset has completely taken over. Their outlook starts and stops with Lenin (even though Lenin inspired both Stalin and Hitler). The idea of a market economy under the rule of law is an alternative they don’t even see, and it is not taught in school.
Communists = Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot. All the intellectuals and factory owners are rounded up and shot.
Nazis = Hitler. All the intellectuals and factory owners who don't do as they are told are shot.
Nazi beliefs tie in a lot more explicit racism (literally, not the Dem cheap shot). Eugenics, master race, that kind of thing; and Nazis allowed a middle class.
Cheers!
the victors always get to write (or rewrite) the history.
The problem is that "Left" at the time was defined as "pro-Soviet", while "Right" was defined as anything that was "anti-Soviet", so you would have Jeffersonians and Nazis being termed equally "Rightist"
In reality, the only problem that the Nazis had with the Soviets was that THEY wanted to be in charge of a world-controlling super-state. And do you really think the Soviets were not nationalistic? You seriously think Stalin and his buddies would have been in favor of sharing power with Communists from all over the world on an equal basis?
The American Republic is the only thing which could bring together the diverse colonial interests and eliminate grudges after the Revolutionary War. It’s a pity we didn’t have enough faith to impose such a system in Iraq.
I guess Bremer and the Euro-butt sniffers at State find the parliamentary model more elegant and civilized.
No, they teach democracy is the ultimate goal and solves all problems.
Bingo! You should have seen our campus newspaper last week. Other than the sports coverage and a couple of articles about new construction on campus, it was like a MoveOn.org press release. Special reports on diversity (there’s never enough), the gay & lesbian & transsexual community, the anti-war movement. There was a long letter to the editor from a professor accusing the Republicans of being reverse Robin Hoods who rob from the poor and give to the rich. There was a political cartoon about sinister right-wingers torturing innocent Muslims and then destroying the evidence. There was the usual hand-wringing about racism, sexism, homophobia, classism, etc.. The only controversy is the on-going debate over whether we need a woman or a black president to revolutionize America and make us fairer, more diverse, more tolerant, more peaceful & loving, less offensive to foreign nations. Young people are inundated with this stuff from the moment they start school or start watching television.
Our Founding Fathers didn't have to deal with people who were willing to strap bombs to mentally impaired girls and then send them out to blow up innocent men, women, and children.
Huh? Local grudges become politically irrelevant in a Federal system.
That would be one less irritant.
Facists (including Nazis) use nationalistic and racist attacks on Jews, blacks, homosexuals and anyone of faith.
Communism has an internationalist facade (”we are all brothers regardless of race or nationality”) while killing Jews, blacks, homosexuals and anyone of faith.
Other than that, they are both totolitarian regimes where the govenment controls every aspect of life, including the economy, distribution of wealth to social behavior. They are two sides of the same Marxist, revolutionary, utopian coin.
They felt Soviet collectivism was a product of inferior peoples.
The Nazis were not collectivists.
Nazis- Authoritarian
Soviets-Totalitarian
Pol Pot and some Mao Years and North Korea- even more Totalitarian
the circular political paradigm we all know is where right meets left between Authoritarianism and Collectivism is at this juncture where we are talking about.
the only thing Socialist about the Nazis really was their name. they were the essence of Facists more than they were Socialists by a long shot
I grant that state control as in a police state is part of Fascism obviously
what some here like to view as far far right political example would be some uber libertarian utopia.....something we have never had an example of to judge from
so far in human history when the right veers off the reservation, it’s into Fascism or Authoritarianism...all rationalized of course, not far right Freedom.
and that is how political writers since Hobbes have treated it too.
BTW...Stalin most certainly made alliances and shared world power with other Commies all over the world....a main reason we worked to stop them.
so did the Nazis.
Russian nationalism was an answer to Nazi aggression more than a product of it’s own like Nazism’s blood creed. There was no blood creed for Soviets, just territory.
It’s just my opinion but lumping Nazis and Soviets together is simply very inaccurate. Both were entirely different political systems foisted on their populaces by much different motivations and world views and ideologies. Nazism was at it's heart a response to Bolshevism as much as it was to Versailles
Great analysis. You should post more often.
“Nope. Stupid Goldberg, people are still parroting his pap.”
Hitlers party was the National socialists party. Their acronym was- Nazi
Are you talking about partition or are you talking about expecting all the religious and ethnic factions who hate each others’ guts to live together within one federalist system?
The Founding Fathers succeeded because we didn’t have universal suffrage back then, and the only people who could vote were reasonable individuals, not violent, hate-driven extremists or people expecting handouts from the government.
I’m talking about a Federal system, with certain powers to the central gov’t, all others to the provinces or individual people.
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.