National Socialism....

[Obsidian]

Now, before I start, I AM NOT A NAZI NOR DO I EVER PLAN ON BEING ONE!!!!!!!

with that settled.

Have any of you read Hitlers 25 points? I did a while ago, and if you censor out the racist anti-semantic parts, they make a fair amount of sense.
My question is, why is there no national socialist party that does not adhere to the old Nazi principles of Aryan perfection?
Or is it any real party is just to afraid of being called on it and having all the bad publicity of being called Nazis?

[Alienbob]

dirty nazi.

[fable]

@Obsidian, is there a concise but fairly accurate summary of these points that you could post?

[Morlock]

Quote:

Originally posted by Obsidian My question is, why is there no national socialist party that does not adhere to the old Nazi principles of Aryan perfection? Or is it any real party is just to afraid of being called on it and having all the bad publicity of being called Nazis?

National Socialism and Nazism are not the same thing.
Just as Communisim or Marxism and Leninism or (the more extreem) Stalinisim are not the same thing.

The difference is that IMO communism is a not bad system, if it works, it says everyone does the same amount of work- everyone get the same amout of mony,assets etc. this was Carl Marx's idea when he wrote the communist manifesto. (With Friedrich Engles)
Leninism is the powerful take what they want, imprison who they don't want and leave the rest to the public.
Stalinism in Leninism to the extreem. Stalin could have become the next Hitler (Think Red Alert) and already had a plan for the murder and deportarion of the jews in Moscow when he died.

My point is National socialism sounds like a swell idea.
But Hitler did not lead a national socialistic party, starting the second he took office in 1933, he lead a dictatorship. Which meens he can not be seen on any level or scale as a model for socialism, national or personal.

Obviously no one is going to form a party named the NAZI party. NAZI is by definition bad.
Look at Neo-Nazis. They are not for socialism, they are for the exact same things that Hitler was! they are for eradication of all blacks, jews and for world dominated by The Aryan race!

[fable]

Stalin could have become the next Hitler...

Stalin actually killed more than 8 million Soviet citizens before he entered WWII (thanks to Hitler's strategic ineptitude). Among the highlights was the so-called "False Famine" of 1932, in which most food was shipped out of the Ukraine, while the inhabitants were informed that the entire nation was starving. (It wasn't. Stalin simply didn't trust the Ukrainians, and wanted fewer of them.) Then, there was the "Bardic Festival" of 1936, when all the blind bards of the Soviet (bards in old Russia, as in Ireland and Greece, for example, were usually blind) were invited into a huge, long, low building, constructed in old style, to peform and receive awards. Once they were inside, the doors were locked, and the place burnt down. (Bards were the custodians of oral tradition, and to Stalin, that meant anti-Red.)

His last major blunder before Hitler began the Second Front was to conduct a purge (tens of thousands) of his best army officers, under the mistaken belief that they were planning a rebellion.

He didn't need to become the next Hitler. He was the perfect Stalin.

[Morlock]

I also saw something recently in the paper that Stalin had a lot of the survivors of the October revolution (1917) that were in the czar's secret police killed- because aparently he was part of the czar's secret police till just before the communist revolution- so he didn't want it to get out that he was once an enemy to communism. Of course he also locked up any possible compitition for leadership, Trotzky being the most famous example.

[Shadow Sandrock]

I'm for democracy. Whoohoo.

[Morlock]

Quote:

Originally posted by Shadow Sandrock I'm for democracy. Whoohoo.

I don't remeber who said this, but I think it was some southamerican premeir:
"We are going to change this country into a democracy, and whoever opposes we will kill, we will crush"

[Sailor Saturn]

Quote:

Originally posted by Morlock I don't remeber who said this, but I think it was some southamerican premeir: "We are going to change this country into a democracy, and whoever opposes we will kill, we will crush"

There's the difference between Democracy and Tyranny. Tyranny would be "I am going to change this country into a (insert government type here), and whoever opposes I will kill, I will crush."

[mediev]

Nazism is fascism. Fascism is NOT a good thing; it's characterised as an extreme reactionary capitalist system; most of what you'll read on nazism or fascism will focus more on race relations than class relations, which deserve examination. The first of those in Hitler's (or mussolini's) labor camps were the german social democrats (communists) and other leftists. Rosa Luxemburg, the leader of the german communist party, was knocked unconcious and shot in the head, then thrown into the river by hitler's goons. So in short, while fascism uses a lot of "socialist" rhetoric to build a mass movement, in reality it smashes labor and working class organizations (it was actually viewed as a very good thing by most western leaders, believing it was the ideology that would destroy communism...though they would change their minds when german tanks were on their borders). Racism and anti-semitism are tools to break the population, divide it on racial grounds, so that the unity required to overthrow dictatorship is never achieved.

As for leninism, leninism is not in the slightest way stalinism. Stalinism declares that socialism can be achieved in a single country, while leninism shows (correctly, in the spirit of marxism), that socialism CANNOT exist without the efforts of the proletariat (workers) of several advanced, industrialised countries. Accompanied with stalinist "theory" are brutal, brutal tactics. Stalin executed (or imprisoned in labor camps) almost every political opponent (note: the charges against the political leaders were outragous and most certainly false), mostly old bolsheviki (the communist party that led the russian workers to victory over the provisional government in the october revolution). Estimates of those killed under stalinism differ drastically...anything from 6 million to 60 million (which probably includes casualties from world war 2, in which russia bore the bulk of the german offensive, with some 30 million casualties, more than the allies combined).
Edit: fixed casualty numbers.

The soviet (soviet means 'council' in russian, and they were the worker's and soldier's councils, elected by the workers and soldiers themselves, that lenin stressed were the foundations of russian democracy) government established by lenin and the bolshevik party acted remarkably; although many mistakes were made, it managed to endure a lengthy civil war (with the "whites", a collection of various national armies opposed to the soviet government, versus the "reds" who were the soviets) and terrible famines. After lenin's death, the policies of the USSR would change dramatically, leading to the "counterrevolution" lead by Joseph Stalin, who would assume dictatorship in the late 1920s, after defeating the "left opposition", a collection of old bolsheviki opposed to the Stalinists, which was led by Leon Trotsky (bolshevik leader during the october revolution and leader of the Red Army that defeated the whites in the civil war).

The Red Army was one of the best in the world until it was purged by Stalin.

I'm new here, by the way :P

[der Moench]

Quote:

Originally posted by mediev Nazism is fascism. Fascism is NOT a good thing; it's characterised as an extreme reactionary capitalist system ... <snip>

First: Welcome!

Second: You can't seriously be saying that fascism = nazism, and that nazism is capitalistic? Yes, the nazis routed the communist party in Germany, but then they proceeded to control nearly every aspect of the economy from the top down - that is in no way shape or form capitalism. Please clarify.

[mediev]

Of course nazism is fascism. Looking at "Webster's New World Dictionary", it defines fascism as "a system of government characterized by rigid one party dictatorship, forcible suppression of opposition, private economic enterprise under centralised government control, beligerent nationalism, racism, militarism, etc."

Taking a brief look at hitler's rise to power, it's very apparent he was financed by big business. Hitler could best be described as a "front man", the face of fascism, who was really controlled by the richest capitalist industrialists. Heywood Broun described it as "a government which is run by a small group of large industrialists and financial lords", and that Hitler's power was "derived from the large munitions and steel barons of germany".

I was trying to find the exact quote from Mussolini, who's sort of the pioneer of fascist theory, where he describes fascism as a 'pure dictatorship of the elite and wealthy', but I can't find :\
Edit: Mussolini calls the fascist state the "corporate state", one which is supported by the elements of racism and militarism present in fascist society.

Palme Dutt describes fascism as "the open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinist and most openly imperialist elements of finance capital."

No, fascism is not capitalism; otherwise it would not be fascism. But it was, and is, extreme capitalist exploitation, a dictatorship of the richest through a powerful state, in which all opposition (usually labor) is smashed. A world in which "through clever and constant application of propaganda people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise." - Adolf Hitler.

[Aegis]

Mediev sure made one hell of a first entrance! Welcome!

[der Moench]

@mediev: you are correct to point out that Hitler used "big business" in his rise to power and his subsequent militarization. However, he also used labor, and every other sector of society. He promised everything to everyone, and the majority were willing to believe and support him.

But whether or not he was supported by "big business, " that still does not indicate that nazism was a "capitalistic" economy. It was not. The state directed all matters of production.

I do not know what your definition of capitalism is, but if it simply involves "big business" getting rich, well, then, I guess we are looking at this subject from two very different points of view.

[Trym]

@ mediev

Rosa Luxemburg was not killed by Hitler's goons. She was a famous left-extreme politician in the Weimarer Republic. In the early 20ies she took part in the "Spartakus-uprising" of the Spartukus-Bund, a very militant leftist organisation. This rebellion was put down by the social democratic government of Friedrich Ebert. The German army, reduced to 100.000 men by the Treaty of Versailles, was not able to achieve this on it's own, so the government decided to call in Freikorps units (Free Corps, nationalistic paramilitary forces). Rosa Luxemburg was shot by Free Corps' officers and thrown into a channel in Berlin.

Leninism is not the slightest way Stalinism? There are some ideological differences, yes, Lenin did not have as many people killed as Stalin. Nonetheless, Lenin was a brutal dictator. (During Lenins dictatorship at least 200.000 people were killed for political reasons. Thus, when Stalin seized power killing opponents (or those believed to ) was considered an adequate measure of politics by the leadership of the communist party.
Lenin was by no means a democrat. Neither he himself nor the communist party was ever voted into power. Do you know, what "bolsheviki" actually means? Minority! Lenin simply overthrew the Kerenski government that had taken power after the deposition of the Czar. Lenin claimed that he knew what the the peoply really wanted (=communism), even if wouldn't know that by themselves at that point of time. Later on the would understand...