Is Conservatism Dead in America?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Hitler was bitterly opposed to Marxism and Communism and his party was allied with conservative, nationalist parties that largely shared his ideology. No amount of attempts to re-write history can change these facts.

“Our socialism goes far deeper … Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings.” – Adolf Hitler

“Bolshevism preaches international class conflict … National Socialism aims at bridging over and equalizing unfavourable contrasts in social life, and in uniting the whole population in collaborative work.” – Adolf Hitler

“The greatest nationalism and the truest socialism are the same: the spirit of simple service to the community.” – Rudolf Hess

“National Socialism places no value upon a purely theoretical rule of the working class, but lays all the more value on the practical improvement of their conditions of life.” Adolf Hitler

The National Socialist state guarantees that nobody would have to worry about the necessities of daily life, that nobody would be hungry or homeless, that everyone who needs a living wage would be given a way to earn one. Beyond this, its emphasis remains on raising the quality of the people themselves and encouraging unity between them. A society of less selfish, more empathic people would in the first place be less inclined to spend its time worrying about class differences, or indeed to pursue more wealth than is required to live a simple life, so that any disparities in wealth would be minor anyway. This in turn would be a society which its constituent individuals would spontaneously feel proud to serve.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
“Our socialism goes far deeper … Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings.” – Adolf Hitler

“Bolshevism preaches international class conflict … National Socialism aims at bridging over and equalizing unfavourable contrasts in social life, and in uniting the whole population in collaborative work.” – Adolf Hitle ...[text shortened]... rn would be a society which its constituent individuals would spontaneously feel proud to serve.

You can't argue with zealots - that is why the radicals in the Republican Party have just about killed it.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
“Our socialism goes far deeper … Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings.” – Adolf Hitler

“Bolshevism preaches international class conflict … National Socialism aims at bridging over and equalizing unfavourable contrasts in social life, and in uniting the whole population in collaborative work.” – Adolf Hitle ...[text shortened]... rn would be a society which its constituent individuals would spontaneously feel proud to serve.

Wow, you sound like a fan!

Originally posted by kmax87
Wow, you sound like a fan!

LOL No.

Jesus, not this Nazi = Socialist = Obama tripe again.

Originally posted by normbenign
I do hope that Congress remains in opposition to Obama if he is reelected, and that if a Republican gets the nod, that he not have both houses of Congress, especially if he is a RINO, like both Gingrich or Romney.

What, Gingrich is a RINO now? The extremist who in 1996 led Barry Goldwater to declare that he and Bob Dole were the new liberals in the Republican Party?

Originally posted by utherpendragon
“Our socialism goes far deeper … Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings.” – Adolf Hitler

“Bolshevism preaches international class conflict … National Socialism aims at bridging over and equalizing unfavourable contrasts in social life, and in uniting the whole population in collaborative work.” – Adolf Hitle ...[text shortened]... rn would be a society which its constituent individuals would spontaneously feel proud to serve.

Those quotes rather obviously show that what Hitler meant by "socialism" has nothing whatsoever to do with what the original meaning of the term. Conspicuously absent is the heart of socialism; worker ownership of the means of production.

Here's some unpleasant facts for the claim that Hitler was a "leftist":

The idea that workers controlled the means of production in Nazi Germany is a bitter joke. It was actually a combination of aristocracy and capitalism. Technically, private businessmen owned and controlled the means of production. The Nazi "Charter of Labor" gave employers complete power over their workers. It established the employer as the "leader of the enterprise," and read: "The leader of the enterprise makes the decisions for the employees and laborers in all matters concerning the enterprise." (1)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

rior to the Nazi seizure of power in 1933, worker protests had spread all across Germany in response to the Great Depression. During his drive to power, Hitler exploited this social unrest by promising workers to strengthen their labor unions and increase their standard of living. But these were empty promises; privately, he was reassuring wealthy German businessmen that he would crack down on labor once he achieved power. Historian William Shirer describes the Nazi's dual strategy:

"The party had to play both sides of the tracks. It had to allow [Nazi officials] Strasser, Goebbels and the crank Feder to beguile the masses with the cry that the National Socialists were truly 'socialists' and against the money barons. On the other hand, money to keep the party going had to be wheedled out of those who had an ample supply of it." (2)

Once in power, Hitler showed his true colors by promptly breaking all his promises to workers. The Nazis abolished trade unions, collective bargaining and the right to strike.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm


Sounds like Wisconsin ...............................................

Originally posted by no1marauder
Those quotes rather obviously show that what Hitler meant by "socialism" has nothing whatsoever to do with what the original meaning of the term. Conspicuously absent is the heart of socialism; worker ownership of the means of production.

Here's some unpleasant facts for the claim that Hitler was a "leftist":

The idea that ...[text shortened]... Sounds like Wisconsin ...............................................

But he said, "socialism!" Hee, hee!!!

Originally posted by normbenign
Sorry, but Hitler and his National Socialism was a Marxist/Leftist party. Today's liberal has usurped the title. The political and philosophical arguments of the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries were between liberals and collectivists/statists.

On one side was utopians like Plato, More, Hobbs and Marx and the other Montesquieu and Locke. That is that nature of the debate, where it is still argued. The question is of liberty or tyranny.

Your havin a laugh! Hitler was a fascist i.e the complete opposite of socialist/marxist. He could have called his party the 'bonzo dog doo da band' but advocated and adhered to the politcal dotrine of facism i.e top down control of the drone like masses under a strong leader/fuhrer which is diametrically apposed to grass roots collective control of economic and political power envisaged by marx.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
Your havin a laugh! Hitler was a fascist i.e the complete opposite of socialist/marxist. He could have called his party the 'bonzo dog doo da band' but advocated and adhered to the politcal dotrine of facism i.e top down control of the drone like masses under a strong leader/fuhrer which is diametrically apposed to grass roots collective control of economic and political power envisaged by marx.

And those who praise Marx are better? It seems to me that Stalin had more people murdered than Hitler.

Face it, some of the most brutal dictators of the past have their ideology based upon Marx. Although Hitler have not fully embraced Marx, he clearly was a control freak just like many Marxist dictators of the past.

Marxism is all about control and herding the populace like cattle. Hitler was not really much different.

Originally posted by whodey
And those who praise Marx are better? It seems to me that Stalin had more people murdered than Hitler.

Face it, some of the most brutal dictators of the past have their ideology based upon Marx. Although Hitler have not fully embraced Marx, he clearly was a control freak just like many Marxist dictators of the past.

Marxism is all about control and herding the populace like cattle. Hitler was not really much different.

Julie Burchill (British journalist) once said that "the gulag is Marxism gone wrong; Auschwitz is fascism gone according to plan."

It's reasonable I think to claim that Marxism simply doesn't work in the real world, that it was a flawed theory. Reasonable too to claim that attempts to implement it usually lead to totalitarianism. It remains the case that Stalinism was evidently not what Marx envisaged, whereas the Holocaust followed naturally from the premises of fascism.

Originally posted by Teinosuke
Julie Burchill (British journalist) once said that "the gulag is Marxism gone wrong; Auschwitz is fascism gone according to plan."

It's reasonable I think to claim that Marxism simply doesn't work in the real world, that it was a flawed theory. Reasonable too to claim that attempts to implement it usually lead to totalitarianism. It remains the case tha ...[text shortened]... what Marx envisaged, whereas the Holocaust followed naturally from the premises of fascism.

It seems all systems go wrong eventually. Go figure. That is why its a scary thing for that system to have increasing power over you.

Originally posted by whodey
And those who praise Marx are better? It seems to me that Stalin had more people murdered than Hitler.

Face it, some of the most brutal dictators of the past have their ideology based upon Marx. Although Hitler have not fully embraced Marx, he clearly was a control freak just like many Marxist dictators of the past.

Marxism is all about control and herding the populace like cattle. Hitler was not really much different.

stalin was'nt a marxist and marx was'nt a stalinist. Marx wrote das capital based on the industrial workers of britain it obviously did not translate to the overwhelmingly agrarian economy of russia in the early 20th century hence the horrors of forced agricultural collectivisation and slide into a dictatorship. Im not saying stalin was better than hitler they were both psychotic.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
stalin was'nt a marxist and marx was'nt a stalinist. Marx wrote das capital based on the industrial workers of britain it obviously did not translate to the overwhelmingly agrarian economy of russia in the early 20th century hence the horrors of forced agricultural collectivisation and slide into a dictatorship. Im not saying stalin was better than hitler they were both psychotic.

Listen, there is no such thing as socialism and fascism in its pure form and there never will be. However, it is painfully obvious that those ideologies tend to breed ruthless dictators.

They can both stick it up their collective arses.

Originally posted by whodey
Listen, there is no such thing as socialism and fascism in its pure form and there never will be. However, it is painfully obvious that those ideologies tend to breed ruthless dictators.

They can both stick it up their collective arses.

And american style capitalism produced a fascist government that napalm'd vietnamese women and children and as we speak operates 'gitmo' so whats yer point.