What are national socialism and fascism?

This board is open for all subject matters. Post information and discussion materials about open-debate and censorship on other boards (including this one) here. Memory Hole 2 is a RODOH subforum for alternate perspectives.
Werd
Posts: 10153
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: What are national socialism and fascism?

Post by Werd »

Alonso wrote:
Tue Oct 15, 2019 10:37 am
While this subject is still not clear for me, I'd like to venture a tentative one line description of the three main modern political ideas. Please note that this is exclusively about the ideas, not about how they are actually implemented in the real world:
  • Communism (and similar ideas): Tries to provide a decent standard of living for almost everybody at the expense of political dissidents.
  • Fascism (and similar ideas): Tries to provide a high standard of living for the people of a nation at the expense of political dissidents and people of other nations.
  • Capitalism (and similar ideas): Tries to provide a very high standard of living for the wealthy at the expense of everybody else.
Oh boy. :roll:
blake121666 wrote:
Tue Oct 15, 2019 12:15 pm
You are comparing dissimilar things. Are you a teenager, Alonso?
He either has the education of one, or a VERY PISS POOR adult education.


Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH, kindly contact Scott Smith. All contributions are welcome!


User avatar
Sandhurst
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2019 6:07 pm
Location: Ocean floor
Contact:

Re: What are national socialism and fascism?

Post by Sandhurst »

One organization estimated that in 2015, 13.5% of Americans (43.1 million) lived in poverty. Yet other scholars underscore the number of people in the United States living in "near-poverty," putting the number at around 100 million, or nearly a third of the U.S. population. Only 17% of the Soviets lived below the poverty line. More than one-fifth of the Russian population now lives in poverty, according to a new study by a research institute with ties to the Kremlin. The US cannot crow. To recap
  1. United States 13.5%
  2. Soviets 17%
  3. Federation 20%
  4. National Socialist 0%

By 1939 there was virtually no official unemployment in National Socialist Germany. Poverty was eliminated.
It is estimated there were only 350,000 not in work.
Image
Image
"Never argue with the data." - Sheen, Jimmy Neutron

Alonso
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: What are national socialism and fascism?

Post by Alonso »

Once again, my tentative one line descriptions of the three main modern political ideas is about the IDEAS. It is NOT about how those IDEAS are actually implemented in the real world. In my previous message I wrote that in bold, but it looks like that didn't get the message across. Now I'm writing it in bold, italics, underlined and capitals. Hope that's enough this time.

Also once again, these descriptions are about people, not about citizens. The citizens perspective might be interesting, but it doesn't say much about how these ideas apply to the population at large.

Regarding which of these ideas is best, by all means feel free to use this thread to discuss that. In my view, however, the concept of "best" doesn't even have a meaning in this context, and that's why I haven't said anything in that regard nor will I say it.

Regarding the education each one has, I'd say the choice between insulting and being respectful is more telling than anything else.

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3385
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: What are national socialism and fascism?

Post by blake121666 »

Alonso wrote:
Tue Oct 15, 2019 11:01 pm
Once again, my tentative one line descriptions of the three main modern political ideas is about the IDEAS. It is NOT about how those IDEAS are actually implemented in the real world. In my previous message I wrote that in bold, but it looks like that didn't get the message across. Now I'm writing it in bold, italics, underlined and capitals. Hope that's enough this time.

Also once again, these descriptions are about people, not about citizens. The citizens perspective might be interesting, but it doesn't say much about how these ideas apply to the population at large.

Regarding which of these ideas is best, by all means feel free to use this thread to discuss that. In my view, however, the concept of "best" doesn't even have a meaning in this context, and that's why I haven't said anything in that regard nor will I say it.

Regarding the education each one has, I'd say the choice between insulting and being respectful is more telling than anything else.
I don't know why I have to point this out to you but "citizens" == the "people" within the political systems being discussed ("the population at large"). Any other "people" you might be concerned about are outside the scope of what we are discussing. Wherever I wrote "citizen", simply substitute "people" or "the population at large". There are no "people" who are not "citizens" within my description of these particular political ideologies.

EDIT: And the implementations are what we are talking about. The "ideas" of fascism are any ideology employed - but typically involve an extreme nationalism (ideologically defined as its wont). Haven't you understood that by now? Just look into the wikipedia entries of these things you wish to know about.

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9352
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: What are national socialism and fascism?

Post by been-there »

.
NATIONAL-SOCIALIST GERMAN WORKER's PARTY

Nationalism for Hitler and the NSDAP meant preserving the racial purity of what they regarded as the Germanic Volk within German territory.
They were big on the then world-popular concept of Eugenics.

Socialism
They wanted to eliminate and replace the old nepotist/aristocratic, plutocratic capitalist order with a meritocratic, socialist capitalism that rewarded industry and innovation done for the benefit of all.
That is what the slogan 'Arbeit macht frei' is all about.
And incidentally, that is why delinquents and criminals who were sent to concentration camps were paid for their enforced labour. Jews sent to Auschwitz and other Labour camps (arbeitslager) were paid, first in ordinary money and later in camp currency. This is another of the deceits-by-omission that the holocaust narrative has deceitfully eliminated from the collective consciousness.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Image

Image

In September of 1936 the great British statesman and well-respected Liberal Leader and ex-PM David Lloyd-George visited Hitler. He was extremely impressed with what he personally witnessed in Germany. His account of that visit is now rarely repeated for the masses. When it is, it is deceitfully presented as an abberation caused by a gullible person being duped. The accuracy of his account is an embarassment to the current world order, which is why it is never mentioned.
Here are some excerpts from it, concerning the NSDAP's application of Nationalist Socialism:
David Lloyd-George wrote:I have just returned from a visit to Germany. In so short a time one can only form impressions or at least check impressions which years of distant observation through the telescope of the Press and constant inquiry from those who have seen things at a closer range had already made on one's mind.

I have now seen the famous German Leader and also something of the great change he has effected. ...there can be no doubt that he has achieved a marvelous transformation in the spirit of the people, in their attitude towards each other, and in their social and economic outlook. He rightly claimed at Nuremberg that in four years his movement has made a new Germany.

It is not the Germany of the first decade that followed the war — broken, dejected, and bowed down with a sense of apprehension and impotence. It is now full of hope and confidence, and of a renewed sense of determination to lead its own life without interference from any influence outside its own frontiers.

There is for the first time since the war a general sense of security. The people are more cheerful. There is a greater sense of general gaiety of spirit throughout the land. It is a happier Germany. I saw it everywhere, and Englishmen I met during my trip and who knew Germany well were very impressed with the change.

One man has accomplished this miracle. He is a born leader of men. A magnetic, dynamic personality with a single-minded purpose, a resolute will and a dauntless heart. He is not merely in name but in fact the national Leader. He has made them safe against potential enemies by whom they were surrounded. He is also securing them against that constant dread of starvation, which is one of the poignant memories of the last years of the War and the first years of the Peace. Over 700,000 died of sheer hunger in those dark years. You can still see the effect in the physique of those who were born into that bleak world.

The fact that Hitler has rescued his country from the fear of a repetition of that period of despair, penury and humiliation has given him unchallenged authority in modern Germany.

As to his popularity, especially among the youth of Germany, there can be no manner of doubt. The old trust him; the young idolize him. It is not the admiration accorded to a popular Leader. It is the worship of a national hero who has saved his country from utter despondency and degradation.

It is true that public criticism of the Government is forbidden in every form. That does not mean that criticism is absent. I have heard the speeches of prominent Nazi orators freely condemned. But not a word of criticism or of disapproval have I heard of Hitler. He is as immune from criticism as a king in a monarchical country. He is something more. He is the George Washington of Germany—the man who won for his country independence from all her oppressors.

To those who have not actually seen and sensed the way Hitler reigns over the heart and mind of Germany this description may appear extravagant. All the same, it is the bare truth. This great people will work better, sacrifice more, and, if necessary, fight with greater resolution because Hitler asks them to do so. Those who do not comprehend this central fact cannot judge the present possibilities of modem Germany.

...This is the new temper of the German youth. There is almost a religious fervour about their faith in the movement and its Leader. That impressed me more than anything I witnessed during my short visit to the new Germany. There was a revivalist atmosphere. It has had an extraordinary effect in unifying the nation.

Catholic and Protestant, Prussian and Bavarian, employer and workman, rich and poor, have been consolidated into one people. Religious, provincial and class origins no longer divide the nation. There is a passion for unity born of dire necessity.

The divisions which followed the collapse of 1918 made Germany impotent to face her problems, internal and external. That is why the clash of rival passions is not only deprecated, but temporarily suppressed.

Public condemnation of the Government is censored as ruthlessly as it is in a state of war. To a Briton accustomed to generations of free speech and a free Press this restraint on liberty is repellent, but in Germany, where such freedom is not as deeply rooted as it is here, the nation acquiesces not because it is afraid to protest, but because it has suffered so much from dissension that the vast majority think it must be temporarily called off at all costs.

Freedom of criticism, is therefore for the time being in suspense. German unity is the ideal and the idol of the moment, and not liberty.

I found everywhere a fierce and uncompromising hostility to Russian Bolshevism, coupled with a genuine admiration for the British people with a profound desire for a better and friendlier understanding with them. The Germans have definitely made up their minds never to quarrel with us again. Nor have they any vindictive feelings towards the French...

But there is a real hatred and fear of Russian Bolshevism, and unfortunately it is growing in intensity. It constitutes the driving force of their international and military policy. Their private and public talk is full of it. Wherever you go you need not wait long before you hear the word "Bolschewismus," and it recurs again and again with a wearying reiteration.

Their eyes are concentrated on the East as if they were watching intently for the breaking of the day of wrath. Against this they are preparing with German thoroughness. This fear is not put on. High and low they are convinced there is every reason for apprehension. They have a dread of the great army which has been built up in Russia in recent years.

An exceptionally violent anti-German campaign of abuse printed in the Russian official Press and propelled by the official Moscow radio has revived the suspicion in Germany that the Soviet Government are contemplating mischief against the Fatherland. Unfortunately the German leaders set this down to the influence of prominent Russian Jews, and thus the anti-Jewish sentiment is being once more stirred up just as it was fading into turpitude. The German temperament takes no more delight in persecution than does the Briton, and the native good humor of the German people soon relapses into tolerance after a display of ill-temper.

We can all recall the time when Moscow, through its official publications, Press and radio, made atrocious personal attacks on individual British Ministers — Austen Chamberlain, Ramsay MacDonald and Churchill — and denounced our political and economic system as organised slavery.

We started this campaign of calumny by stigmatising their leaders as assassins, their economic system as brigandage, their social and religious attitude and behavior as an orgy of immorality and atheism. This has been the common form of diplomatic relationship between Communist Russia and the rest of the world on both sides. We must not forget that even when we had a Russian Minister here we actually sent the police to raid one of the official buildings of the Russian Embassy to rummage for treason in their hampers of frozen butter.

No one imagined that was intended as a preliminary or a provocation to war on either side. The slinging of scurrilities between Germany and Russia is only the usual language of diplomacy to which all countries have been accustomed during the last 20 years where Communist Russia is concerned. It is important we should realise for the sake of our peace of mind that a repetition of this unseemly slanging match does not in the least portend war. Germany is no more ready to invade Russia than she is for a military expedition to the moon.

What then did the Führer mean when he contrasted the rich but under-cultivated lands of the Ukraine and Siberia and the inexhaustible mineral resources of the Urals with the poverty of German soil? It was simply a Nazi retort to the accusation hurled by the Soviets as to the miseries of the peasantry and workers of Germany under Nazi rule.

Hitler replied by taunting the Soviets with the wretched use they were making of the enormous resources of their own country. In comparison with the Nazi achievement in the land whose natural wealth was relatively poor.

He and his followers have a horror of Bolshevism and undoubtedly underrate the great things the Soviets have accomplished in their vast country. The Bolsheviks retaliate by understating Hitler's services to Germany. It is only an interchange of abusive amenities between two authoritarian Governments. But it does not mean war between them.

I have no space in which to give a catalogue of the schemes which are being carried through to develop the resources of Germany and to improve the conditions of life for her people. They are immense and they are successful. I would only wish to say here that I am more convinced than ever, that the free country to which I have returned is capable of achieving greater things in that direction if its rulers would only pluck up courage and set their minds boldly to the task.

~~ Source: Daily Express, September 17, 1936, pp. 12-17

Here is another account given by Mr. Lloyd-George in an interview to another newspaper in the same week as the one above:
“Germany does not want war, but she is afraid of an attack by Russia, and is suspicious of the Franco-Russian Pact. I have never seen a happier people than the Germans, and Hitler is one of the greatest of the many great men I have met.”

People worship Hitler
“Germany does not want war. Hitler does not want war. He is a most remarkable personality, one of the greatest I have ever met in the whole of my life, and I have met some very great men.”

“Affection is a quite inadequate word to describe the attitude of the German people towards Hitler. It amounts almost to worship. I have never seen anything like it. Some men I met who are not Nazis told me that they did not know what the country would have done without him. They are inclined to blame Hitler's supporters for some of the things which they do not approve, but there is no whisper of criticism of Hitler. It is just like our motto, “The King can do no wrong.'”

Mr Lloyd George was asked, “How do you reconcile that attitude towards Hitler with the suppression of the trade unions and the freedom of expression of opinion?”

“I cannot explain it,” he replied. “I am merely stating the facts, but you must remember that the Germans are a highly disciplined people, and have always been so. They are far more accustomed to discipline than we are, and I think that the restrictions in existence in Germany at the present time would have a far greater effect upon people of this country than upon Germany.”

A great misfortune
“I have always thought, and still think, that the persecution of Jews in Germany has been a great misfortune. But Germany is not the only country that has persecuted Jews. We must not forget the pogroms in Russia and in other European countries.”

Giving his impression of the German people of today, he said: “I have never seen a happier people. The feeling of depression and gloom which has oppressed them in post-war years has completely disappeared. The are today a very gay people. That is not merely my own opinion. Since I returned from Germany I have had letters from Englishmen who have been in the habit of visiting Germany on business or holiday, and they all confirm my own view.”

“One of the foremost impressions which I derived from my visit was the universal desire to remain on terms of closest friendship with Great Britain. I found that among everyone I met, from Hitler down to the working men with whom I spoke. Everywhere Britain is held in deepest respect, and there is a profound desire that the tragic circumstances of 1914 should never be repeated.”

Economic recovery
Mr. Lloyd George was profoundly impressed by the economic recovery of Germany. “We hear a great deal,” he said, “of the efforts that Germany is making in the direction or re-armament, but little is said of the colossal schemes that are being pushed through for the development of the internal resources of the country, and the improvement of the conditions of the working population.”

“I saw a good deal of the latter, and I was enormously impressed by the boldness and beneficence of the German plans. The Germans are reclaiming over 4,000,000 acres of land which was either completely waste or barely cultivated at all. They are building millions of houses for their working population, and everywhere they are constructing settlements for their town workers outside the city boundaries, with gardens attached to each house.”

“The new roads which they are constructing are magnificent. By these and similar means they have reduced unemployment from 6,000,000 to 1,000,000 in three and a half years. Whatever we may think of Hitler and the present regime, that in itself is a very great achievement.”
Image
Image
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Alonso
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: What are national socialism and fascism?

Post by Alonso »

been-there wrote:
Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:48 am
Socialism
They wanted to eliminate and replace the old nepotist/aristocratic, plutocratic capitalist order with a meritocratic, socialist capitalism that rewarded industry and innovation done for the benefit of all.
What is this socialist capitalism about? I just had a cursory look at Mein Kampf and Hitler seems to criticize and shun capitalism every time he mentions it. (I'm aware that Hitler's political views evolved after Mein Kampf, but I don't know where to find information about those changes). My general impression from my very limited knowledge is that Hitler and the NSDAP were against capitalism, at least within Germany.

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9352
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: What are national socialism and fascism?

Post by been-there »

This is a complex subject, as there is so much misinformed opinion out there on it, based on contradictory and confused definitions of key tems. Much opinion has been formed from a free-market, plutocratic capitalist mind-set out of bias, fear and loathing of 'communist' idealogy, informed by horror and disgust at Maoist and Stalinist implementation of some of these political and economic ideologies.

Americans in particular — in my experience — have litle understanding of socialist capitalism, despite the decades of succesful implementation of it in Scandinavian countries over decades, resulting in the highest standards of living and longevity in known history.
They wrongly assume that Socialism ONLY refers to Marxist Socialism. They appear to be unable to appreciate any difference between 'communism' and 'socialism'.
This is in my opinion a considerable intellectual handicap that has infected the minds of many, which explains why so many people deny that the NSDAP were Socialists, despite it being in their name. The fact that the National Socialists feared and fought the ideology of the the Bolshevik Socialist Communists has led many academics to conclude therefore that the National Socialists were not 'real' Socialists.
It is a peculiar denial of obvious reality. Just look at the NSDAP manifesto and its 25 points!

Pehaps you have been influenced by American definitions and misunderstandings, Alonso?

Here are two examples of academia that gets some things right, but arrives at false conclusions due to negative indoctrination.
German socialism, as Mises defines it, differs from what he called “socialism of the Russian pattern” in that “it, seemingly and nominally, maintains private ownership of the means of production, entrepreneurship, and market exchange.” However, this is only a superficial system of private ownership because through a complete system of economic intervention and control, the entrepreneurial function of the property owners is completely controlled by the State. By this, Mises means that shop owners do not speculate about future events for the purpose of allocating resources in the pursuit of profits. Just like in the Soviet Union, this entrepreneurial speculation and resource allocation is done by a single entity, the State, and economic calculation is thus impossible.

In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living. The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants. This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.”

Nazi Socialism — was never Marxist, but was based on the theories of the original German socialists who directly influenced Marx’s later ideas — as “capitalists.”
Did you thoroughly read the quotes I gave from Hitler clarifying his form of National Socialism?
To properly understand Hitler and NSDAP socialism requires for many, a herculean effort to overcome decades of negative conditioning and indoctination.
That needs to be recognised first before it can be remedied.
Those people who are unable to recognise their own conditioning can never outgrow it. For them, the limitations that their upbringing, education and indoctrination has exerted over their understanding is indetectable and therefore irrepairable.
From the very outset of his rule, Hitler, whose main short-term goal was the economic revival of Germany with the help of German nationalist bankers and industrialists, won popular support of the nation. Hitler adopted an aggressive full-employment campaign. Between January 1933 and July 1935 the number of employed Germans rose by a half, from 11.7 million to 16.9 million. More than 5 million new jobs paying living wages were created. Unemployment was banished from the German economy and the entire nation was productively engaged in reconstruction. Inflation was brought under control by wage freeze and price control. Besides this, taking into account the lessons learned during 1914-18, Hitler aimed at creating an economy that would be independent from foreign capital and supply, and be well protected from another blockade and economic war. For Germans, all of the above was proof that Hitler was the one who had not only brought Germany out of economic depression but would take it directly to prosperity with new pride. German popular trust in the Führer rose dramatically.

...Unlike elitist Italian Fascism, Nazism had a high regard for the German peasant. Unlike Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, while imposing sweeping government control over all aspects of the economy, was not a corporate state...

In four short years, Hitler's Germany was able to turn a Germany ravaged by defeat in war and left in a state national malaise by the liberal policies of the Weimar Republic, with a bankrupt economy weighted down by heavy foreign war debt and the total unavailability of new foreign capital, into the strongest economy and military power in Europe. How did Germany do it? The centerpiece was Germany's Work Creation Program of 1933-36, which preceded its rearmament program. Neo-liberal economists everywhere seven decades later have yet to acknowledge that employment is all that counts and living wages are the key to national prosperity. Any economic policy that does not lead to full employment is self-deceivingly counterproductive, and any policy that permits international wage arbitrage is treasonous. German economic policies between 1930 and 1932 were brutally deflationary, which showed total indifference to high unemployment, and in 1933 Hitler was elected chancellor out of the socio-economic chaos.

The financing of Nazi economic-recovery programs drew upon sovereign credit creation techniques already experimented prior to Hitler's appointment as chancellor. What changed after 1933 was the government's willingness to create massive short-term sovereign credit and the its firm commitment to retire in full the debt created by that credit. Short-term sovereign credit was important to change the general climate of distrust on government credit. The quick rollover of short-term government notes created popular trust within months in German sovereign credit domestically.

Hitler told German industrialists in May 1933 that economic recovery required action by both the state and the private sector. The government's role was limited to encouraging private-sector investment, mainly through tax incentives. He expressed willingness to provide substantial public funding only for highway projects, not for industry. Investment was unlikely if consumers had no money to spend or were afraid because of job insecurity to spend money to buy products produced, and Hitler understood that workers needed decent income to become healthy consumers. Thus full employment was the kick-start point of the economic cycle...

Hitler stressed on May 31, 1933, that the Reich budget must be balanced. A balanced budget meant reducing expenditures on social programs, because Hitler intended to reduce business taxes to promote needed private investment. To avoid reducing social programs, a large work programme without deficit spending had to be financed outside of the Reich budget. Hitler resorted to "pre-financing" (Vorfinanzierung) by means of "work-creation bills" (Arbeitsbeschaffungswechseln), a classic response of using monetary measures to deal with a fiscal dilemma.

http://www.henryckliu.com/page105.html
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Alonso
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: What are national socialism and fascism?

Post by Alonso »

Thank you for your very informative posts, been-there.
been-there wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:56 am
Pehaps you have been influenced by American definitions and misunderstandings, Alonso?
Of course I have! Who on planet Earth hasn't?!
been-there wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:56 am
Did you thoroughly read the quotes I gave from Hitler clarifying his form of National Socialism?
I did, several times, actually. They are englightening, but too brief to provide a full picture.
been-there wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:56 am
To properly understand Hitler and NSDAP socialism requires for many, a herculean effort to overcome decades of negative conditioning and indoctination.
That needs to be recognised first before it can be remedied.
Those people who are unable to recognise their own conditioning can never outgrow it. For them, the limitations that their upbringing, education and indoctrination has exerted over their understanding is indetectable and therefore irrepairable.
I couldn't agree more. I have received as much negative conditioning and indoctination as every other person I know. I do have the advantage that I'm aware of it, though.
been-there wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:56 am
Unlike elitist Italian Fascism, Nazism had a high regard for the German peasant. Unlike Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, while imposing sweeping government control over all aspects of the economy, was not a corporate state
I'm quite interested in this contrast. Could you elaborate or maybe provide a link with more information?

User avatar
Mark Caine
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:13 pm
Contact:

Re: What are national socialism and fascism?

Post by Mark Caine »

In the first video TIK explains the Fascist Third Way. I have not watched the Mussolini video yet.

Why Franco & Spain stayed out of WW2 | TIK Q&A 28
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d7Kcf_pPiM



National Socialism WAS Socialism | Rethinking WW2 History
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlXqFgqOviw




A Short History of Mussolini and Fascism | TIKhistory WW2 Q&A 18
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06vJY9nLMXU

User avatar
VFX
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:54 pm
Location: München, Deutschland
Contact:

Re: What are national socialism and fascism?

Post by VFX »

Alonso wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 4:46 am
What is this socialist capitalism about?
It is about forming a new form of economics without the people who have corrupted a system as they have done with many things.
Keep in mind that there is not just one form of National Socialism; there became a rift almost resulting in a Reich civil war after the "Night of the Long Knives". This was instigated by the Führer, his will and authority known as "Hitlerism"; other National Socialists who believed in Government Socialism were sidelined. Whether or not Hitlerism is National Socialism is another matter but he was its face. The other faction which still continues today are the Strasserists for which the SA or Sturmabteilung followed for the most part.
Pure Strasserists in exile from Hitlerism formed the "Black Front" The Combat League of Revolutionary National Socialists (German: Kampfgemeinschaft Revolutionärer Nationalsozialisten, KGRNS), more commonly known as the Black Front (German: Schwarze Front), was a political group formed by Otto Strasser after his expulsion from the Nazi Party (NSDAP) in 1930. The Sturmabteilung blundered along as we have always done in exile but believe we have a voice.
Der Nationalsozialismus ist ein Protest gegen jeden Staat, der ihnen die Würde verweigert.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests