- Joined
- Mar 30, 2016
- Messages
- 92,555
- Reaction score
- 22,200
- Location
- Chicago
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Citations ? So the National Socialist Workers party - aka Nazi party didn’t like the bourgeois Bolshevik’s ? It doesn’t change the fact they called themselves socialists, acted like socialists, governed like socialists and went around condemning capitalism .
I’m a King. lol by your logic that should work.
Hitler once said to Otto Wagener that the problem with the politicians of the Weimar Republic was that they “had never even read Marx.” He believed that the problem of German Communists was that they didn’t understand the difference between principles and tactics. He referred to them as mere pamphleteers, whereas “I have put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun.” He stated plainly that “the whole of National Socialism” was based on MarxThey were pro capitalist which is why the large capitalists were backing them
Hitler once said to Otto Wagener that the problem with the politicians of the Weimar Republic was that they “had never even read Marx.” He believed that the problem of German Communists was that they didn’t understand the difference between principles and tactics. He referred to them as mere pamphleteers, whereas “I have put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun.” He stated plainly that “the whole of National Socialism” was based on Marx
Hitler had the support of capitalists because he was pro capitalistHitler once said to Otto Wagener that the problem with the politicians of the Weimar Republic was that they “had never even read Marx.” He believed that the problem of German Communists was that they didn’t understand the difference between principles and tactics. He referred to them as mere pamphleteers, whereas “I have put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun.” He stated plainly that “the whole of National Socialism” was based on Marx
And yet you can’t . Because you are wrong.Hitler had the support of capitalists because he was pro capitalist
Your attempts to pretend that they weren't fail because reality disproves your silly claim
And yet you can’t . Because you are wrongHitler had the support of capitalists because he was pro capitalist
Your attempts to pretend that they weren't fail because reality disproves your silly claim
Hitler was very much supported by big business and industrialist capitalists.
View attachment 67482400
George Sorros is a ? Who supports leftwing Socialism. And your point is?Hitler was very much supported by big business and industrialist capitalists.
View attachment 67482400
George Sorros is a ? Who supports leftwing Socialism. And your point is?
I've not limited the definition of anything to "fit" my world view. Small government conservatives are who they are. Modern American liberals are who they are. And Nazis were who they were. Which of those terms do you think I somehow defined so narrowly as only to match only my worldview?Or course, but that's because your diary is not an accurate reflection of reality.
The Nazis had no qualms with the idea of privately owned enterprises competing in a market environment, nor did they object on any principle to private ownership of land or capital.
The Nazis objected to the capitalism and international commerce under the auspices that they thought they were controlled by Jews for the benefit of international Jewery, and the detriment of the German people.
Commercial competition among privately owned firms was the norm in Nazi Germany. Thats how the majority of Nazi infrastructure projects and military development went. Your inevitable counter "No, the Nazis could force companies to do what they told or forces them to comply with government decree", the same is true of many other states; you run afoul of US commercial law you will find yourself fined and potentially arrested.
Your argument about political similarities only works because you are insisting on a definition that fits your own worldview, not the objective reality. It's as intellectually dishonest as if I we're to say "the right wing is defines by intolerance to different ideas, ergo all bigots are right wing"
I've not limited the definition of anything to "fit" my world view. Small government conservatives are who they are.
Modern American liberals are who they are. And Nazis were who they were. Which of those terms do you think I somehow defined so narrowly as only to match only my worldview?
No, not just there, but now you're having to change your argument. First I was redefining terms and now, suddenly, you're saying people like me don't exist."Small government conservatives" exist as you think they do only in your mind.
I will go so far as to say more of them should exist, yes.All of them, really. You only want to view conservatism as you think it *should* exist, while the Nazis and liberals exist in a way you find convenient.
And there's another parallel, George Soros and Jeffrey Epstein.The Nazis ran on a political platform that said their way of life was under attack by a shadowy international clique of wealthy people who were using their money and influence to undermine their culture and society.
Sounds like you're defining the right to fit your world view.That describes the increasingly vocal "alt right" to a T, and while that doesn't make them the equivalent of Nazis, it perfectly illustrates where the relationship lies.
No, not just there, but now you're having to change your argument. First I was redefining terms and now, suddenly, you're saying people like me don't exist.
I will go so far as to say more of them should exist, yes.
And there's another parallel, George Soros and Jeffrey Epstein.
Sounds like you're defining the right to fit your world view.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?