What do you fear if Hillary gets elected? - Page 4

SMH. I want you to focus on one long word - research.

This idea that Hitler was a socialist which Prager is posting about is neither new nor original. It is the typical blogosphere "scholarship" which is to say, it's propaganda.

Let's start with the word Nazi which "proves" that they must have been socialists. These people think they are clever by point out that Hitler's party, the Nazi party, was the National Socialist German Workers' Party. Then I came along and did what others have done to make them look uneducated and silly. I present the following: Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo and German Democratic Republic. They are/were all great examples of democracies, no? They must have been since that was part of their names.

Also, one day Prager will collect social security and on that day I suppose he will become a socialist.

Now, there are the quotes. Here's one from Mein Kampf, which I had the displeasure of reading:

"The fact that we had chosen red as the colour for our posters sufficed to attract them to our meetings. The ordinary bourgeoisie were very shocked to see that, we had also chosen the symbolic red of Bolshevism and they regarded this as something ambiguously significant. The suspicion was whispered in German Nationalist circles that we also were merely another variety of Marxism, perhaps even Marxists suitably disguised, or better still, Socialists. The actual difference between Socialism and Marxism still remains a mystery to these people up to this day. The charge of Marxism was conclusively proved when it was discovered that at our meetings we deliberately substituted the words 'Fellow-countrymen and Women' for 'Ladies and Gentlemen' and addressed each other as 'Party Comrade'. We used to roar with laughter at these silly faint-hearted bourgeoisie and their efforts to puzzle out our origin, our intentions and our aims.

We chose red for our posters after particular and careful deliberation, our intention being to irritate the Left, so as to arouse their attention and tempt them to come to our meetings--if only in order to break them up--so that in this way we got a chance of talking to the people. "

Hitler said a lot of things to gain power. He came across as sympathetic to the socialist cause in order to get their support.

Conservative parties in Germany supported the Nazis because they saw them as being opposed to Marxism. The socialist and communist parties in Germany opposed the Nazis. The Nazis did not nationalize businesses except for the private railways and that was because of the war. Many businessmen in Germany got wealthier because of the Nazis. The only reason there was government involvement in industry was because of the war and they needed to coordinate their efforts. The same thing happened in the US as well during the war effort. Hitler also outlawed trade unions.

One huge deficiency in the thinking of these people who try to paint Hitler as a socialist is that they forget context. They are judging Hitler based on their definitions, their modern day definitions. Marx wrote in the middle of the 19the century. He was reacting to what he saw...then. People today define Marxism not by what Marx wrote, since very few have even read anything he wrote, but by what they saw much later. They look at the creation of the USSR which took place years after Marx was dead and then look to Stalin who came into power even later. That is how they define Marxism since they believe that Stalin must have been following what Marx wanted. Marx was in favor of democracy, Stalin, and I believe Lenin as well, was not.

Marx was already dead when Hitler was born. People assume that when Hitler uses the word socialism or socialist he is using it the way that Marx would have which is a mistake. They also assume that Hitler was using it how it used today. Why? Because they believe, or want others to believe, that "our" definition of socialism was Marx's definition which in turn was Hitler's definition. The funny thing is that Europeans, and Marx was a European writing in Europe about what he saw in Europe, look at how Americans use the words socialism, Marxism, communism, liberal, left, right, etc., and think we are uneducated idiots talking about something we know very little about.

Again, because this needs to be repeated. Hitler was a European. In Europe their concepts of right wing, liberal, socialist and left wing are different from ours. These Americans with their blogs who want to call Hitler a leftist and socialist are not using the words the way they were used during Hitler's time nor how they are currently used in Europe. These "scholars" are trying to fit a man who lived in a different world at a different time into their modern day box.

Bravo, noitsyou, well described post. TY for injecting some clarity into the histrionics.

That her head is going to spin as in the exsorcist....and it won't stop, lol...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OY1gAqq4iFA&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Noitsyou, if anyone uses public schools, fire department, police department, post office, library, military, public roads and highways, bridges, garbage collection, farm subsidies, veterans health care, national weather service, to name a few, guess what, they are enjoying socialism.......

Mindhunt what you are describing are not solely benefits of socialism. All those things can be and are even more enjoyed in capitalism or some of them   even were more or less enjoyed in feudalism or slavery ....I mean this not as an offense,.. but let me say that the problem is that you, same as most, do not understand what is socialism. Most think that socialism is striving for common good and helping each other. Of course that is not true. Socialism is about control of means of production, transportation, services and private property. Socialism is dictatorship of proletariat. The services which you are describing do not make socialism they are just used by socialism ( and other regimes) to lure people to vote for the leftist candidates.

 I have lived in socialism and I assure you that all those services which you seem to cherish so much were of hideous quality  in despicable array or non existent in socialist countries I know.   Capitalism provides much better services which you describe than any socialism preset or past. For example :  Look at Socialist Venezuela. Country of amazing natural resources . One of the richest countries in oil,  diamonds, bauxite (aluminum) , gold, iron ore, natural gas...... Yet this country was brought to its knees by socialism facilitated by Hugo Chavez.    Not that long time ago Venezuela was net exporter. And now Venezuela  is literally starving and collapsing under  inflation reaching an all time high of 180.90 percent in December of 2015. 

The definition of socialism does not fit Hitler.

Cuba still has excellent hospitals.

I understand the political view of socialism which I do not entirely agree with.  On the other hand the United States is not exactly a true democracy either since our electoral college votes for us supposedly based on what we the people want.  I don't agree it goes with the will of the people anymore than politicians never lie.

Many many countries live under socialism. None of those countries are what you think Hans. Our neighbor Canada being one of them. You can only compare Hilter to Hitler. Stalin to Stalin because those 2 zealots are not like the rest. USA is a semi-socialist society. While I do not agree with every detail of socialism, it has its good points.