The political, religious and ideological views that drove Hilter and the Nazi regime

[Logician Man]

I have not talked politics with anyone (online or offline) for the past 2 years. Most of my personal debating one on one began approximately 6 months before the election and ended shortly after said election. My guy obviously won

I started picking up right where I left off about a month ago after a friend and I got into it (Trump vs the Left, etc) via email. That got me fired up again, so here I am!

Tell us why a self-professed Christian such as yourself uses a double standard when speaking of conservatives vs. liberals. Case in point. Trump has cheated on all 3 of his wives, had a love child with Marla Maples while still married to his first wife, and begged Marla Maples to abort his very own daughter, Tiffany. You profess to hold Christian values near and dear, and you are an avid pro-lifer...yet you refuse to call out Trump for his immoral, un-Christianlike behavior. Why is that ? And can you understand why others may perceive you to be a hypocrite for constantly bashing Dem/Liberals, yet you sit on your tongue when it comes to your own committing the very same behaviors you claim to find so detestable when those from the left allegedly do the same behaviors ?

 

[Rexedgar]

It did work out quite nicely for Kaiser Wilhelm, which was far more recent history than the Napoleonic Wars.

Then you had the truly pathetic display the Russians put on during the Winter War, which was even more recent

With all the upheaval in Russia pre-WW1, I can’t credit the Germans with total victory in the east. I am at a loss to explain the Russian results with the Finns in 1939, iirc Finland ceded some territory. Russia was probably buoyed by their relatively easy conquest of eastern Poland, as well.

 

[Iron_Merc]

Tell us why a self-professed Christian such as yourself uses a double standard when speaking of conservatives vs. liberals. Case in point. Trump has cheated on all 3 of his wives, had a love child with Marla Maples while still married to his first wife, and begged Marla Maples to abort his very own daughter, Tiffany. You profess to hold Christian values near and dear, and you are an avid pro-lifer...yet you refuse to call out Trump for his immoral, un-Christianlike behavior. Why is that ? And can you understand why others may perceive you to be a hypocrite for constantly bashing Dem/Liberals, yet you sit on your tongue when it comes to your own committing the very same behaviors you claim to find so detestable when those from the left allegedly so the same behaviors ?

Most of the information you've provided is direct from the liberal media. The side that lost the election. Of course they will never give Trump a fair shake. In fact the left has gone so far as to have women come forward with bogus claims of sleeping with Trump. This happened numerous times and was just another attempt to slander Trumps name and shift voters over to Hillary

I will hear you out, however. Do you have proof that Trump begged for an abortion, or is this hearsay?

Do you have evidence of this so called love child?

And I bash liberals/democrats because they are destroying the nation. HELLO! No respect for Trump, AT ALL. Seriously, has the liberal media ever run a positive story on Trump? They feed of their own lies. Perhaps they could have run a story on Trumps patriotism? Just imagine for one second if the media treated Obama this way? The paradox of the liberal media is real. The culture war is real. Im standing up for what I believe is right and Trump is the man to lead the charge. If he made mistakes in his past, SO BE IT. He is only human after all.

I also said I was a sinner like everyone else. You and me are no different. I simply advocate for God, because I see his will as good.

That being said, I don't have a double standard. Trump stands against abortion this is crystal clear. He is acting in concert with the constitution by protecting the rights of the minority. Founding Fathers would be proud of Trump, no doubt about it.

If Trump did something wrong, then he should be impeached. Go ahead with that if you have any evidence.

Seeing as how the liberal media hates Trump, you would think we would have been long gone.

 

[Tigerace117]

With all the upheaval in Russia pre-WW1, I can’t credit the Germans with total victory in the east. I am at a loss to explain the Russian results with the Finns in 1939, iirc Finland ceded some territory. Russia was probably buoyed by their relatively easy conquest of eastern Poland, as well.

It was the battlefield defeats of Russian forces—- and the desire of those forces to get out of the conflict- during World War One which played a crucial role in causing the unrest which led to the rise of the Soviets in the first place.

Had the Germans not advanced so far into the Russian Empire said dissent would not been nearly as high.

The Russians got enough land to bury their dead, but just barely. The winter war was a national humiliation.

 

[Logician Man]

Most of the information you've provided is direct from the liberal media. The side that lost the election. Of course they will never give Trump a fair shake. In fact the left has gone so far as to have women come forward with bogus claims of sleeping with Trump. This happened numerous times and was just another attempt to slander Trumps name and shift voters over to Hillary

I will hear you out, however. Do you have proof that Trump begged for an abortion, or is this hearsay?

Do you have evidence of this so called love child?

And I bash liberals/democrats because they are destroying the nation. HELLO! No respect for Trump, AT ALL. Seriously, has the liberal media ever run a positive story on Trump? They feed of their own lies. Perhaps they could have run a story on Trumps patriotism? Just imagine for one second if the media treated Obama this way? The paradox of the liberal media is real. The culture war is real. Im standing up for what I believe is right and Trump is the man to lead the charge. If he made mistakes in his past, SO BE IT. He is only human after all.

I also said I was a sinner like everyone else. You and me are no different. I simply advocate for God, because I see his will as good.

That being said, I don't have a double standard. Trump stands against abortion this is crystal clear. He is acting in concert with the constitution by protecting the rights of the minority. Founding Fathers would be proud of Trump, no doubt about it.

If Trump did something wrong, then he should be impeached. Go ahead with that if you have any evidence.

Seeing as how the liberal media hates Trump, you would think we would have been long gone.

Thanks for validating you do indeed have a double standard when you judge politicians and people of faith.

 

[Tigerace117]

So I'm assuming you think Hitler would fall on the right side of the political spectrum? So change my mind!

I'm interested to see what evidence you have of this. Honestly, I'll try to be as objective as possible.

Even if we don't agree we can still learn from each other and grow in understanding and knowledge.

Hitler actively attempted to exterminate any “leftists” in Germany or German occupied territory.

 

[Iron_Merc]

The Russians might disagree on that.



Theory? There's no need to theorize, the historical facts were in decades ago. All you're trying to do now is revise and distort the historical facts to suit your partisan ideology.

You've never heard of liberal revisionists?

 

[Moot]

You've never heard of liberal revisionists?

No one is trying to revise history except you.

 

[Iron_Merc]

Hitler actively attempted to exterminate any “leftists” in Germany or German occupied territory.

I suspect he did this as a preventative measure against any opposition from the left which may have threatened his grip on power.
Germans who happened to be Communists or Social Democrats, judges and lawyers, or editors and journalists who had opposed the Nazis. They were the first to be arrested.

 

[Grand Mal]

So I'm assuming you think Hitler would fall on the right side of the political spectrum? So change my mind!

I'm interested to see what evidence you have of this. Honestly, I'll try to be as objective as possible.

Even if we don't agree we can still learn from each other and grow in understanding and knowledge.

Just for a start, because I don't have much time, Hitler and his cronies got their start after WW1 with the Freikorps, extreme right-wing groups of war vets who literally fought in the streets with socialists and communists. They hijacked a political party to get a presence in the Reichstag and bullied their way into having Hitler named Chancellor. The first guests in the concentration camps were socialist political opponents. This is history. You can try to twist the wording how you will to serve your agenda but you cant change history.
Given time I'd instruct you about how the war measures regarding industrial production that look like socialism were the same government controls exercised in any industrial country at war but I'll assign that reading to you.

 

[Iron_Merc]

This speech was delivered by Hilter in Munich, Germany, February 24, 1941

This brings us to the really fundamental and decisive reason, to the actual cause of the collapse which took place at that time. The German nation had for several decades been exposed to gradual internal disintegration. It was divided into two worlds. We are only too conscious of them today, we old National Socialists, for we fought and struggled against them. We stood between these two worlds, and it was out of them that our movement gradually came into being.

And later on in the speech he says this:

I purchase the necessities of life with the productive power of German workmen. The results of our economic policy speak for us, not for the gold standard people. For we, the poor have abolished unemployment because we no longer pay homage to this madness, because we regard our entire economic existence as a production problem and no longer as a capitalistic problem. We placed the whole organized strength of the nation, the discipline of the entire nation, behind our economic policy. We explained to the nation that it was madness to wage internal economic wars between the various classes, in which they all perish together.
Of course, a fundamental social principle was necessary to achieve this. It is today no longer possible to build up a state on a capitalistic basis. The peoples eventually begin to stir. The awakening of the peoples cannot be prevented by wars. On the contrary, war will only hasten it. Such states will be ruined by financial catastrophes which will destroy the foundations of their own former financial policy.

And a little further down:

Germany's economic policy is conducted exclusively in accordance with the interests of the German people. In this respect I am a fanatical socialist, one who has ever in mind the interests of all his people. I am not the slave of a few international banking syndicates. I am under no obligation to any capitalist group. I sprang from the German people. My Movement, our Movement, is a German people's Movement, and it is only to this German people that we are obligated.

And still, further down:

I purchase the necessities of life with the productive power of German workmen. The results of our economic policy speak for us, not for the gold standard people. For we, the poor have abolished unemployment because we no longer pay homage to this madness, because we regard our entire economic existence as a production problem and no longer as a capitalistic problem. We placed the whole organized strength of the nation, the discipline of the entire nation, behind our economic policy. We explained to the nation that it was madness to wage internal economic wars between the various classes, in which they all perish together.
Of course, a fundamental social principle was necessary to achieve this. It is today no longer possible to build up a state on a capitalistic basis. The peoples eventually begin to stir. The awakening of the peoples cannot be prevented by wars. On the contrary, war will only hasten it. Such states will be ruined by financial catastrophes which will destroy the foundations of their own former financial policy.

And another:

In the midst of this people, forming its very core, is the National Socialist Movement which began its existence in this room 21 years ago,-this Movement the likes of which does not exist in the democratic countries, this Movement whose only pendant is fascism. Nation and army, party and state are today one indivisible whole. No power in the world can loosen what is so firmly welded together. Only fools can imagine that the year 1918 can be repeated.

 

[Tigerace117]

I suspect he did this as a preventative measure against any opposition from the left which may have threatened his grip on power.
Germans who happened to be Communists or Social Democrats, judges and lawyers, or editors and journalists who had opposed the Nazis. They were the first to be arrested.

Except he continued to do it well after he had already solidified power. People on the right, on the other hand, were embraced and bought in heavily to his rhetoric.

 

[Fledermaus]

Hitler actively attempted to exterminate any “leftists” in Germany or German occupied territory.

Add to that a very real Socialist Party in Germany voted against his power grab.

 

[Iron_Merc]

Just for a start, because I don't have much time, Hitler and his cronies got their start after WW1 with the Freikorps, extreme right-wing groups of war vets who literally fought in the streets with socialists and communists. They hijacked a political party to get a presence in the Reichstag and bullied their way into having Hitler named Chancellor. The first guests in the concentration camps were socialist political opponents. This is history. You can try to twist the wording how you will to serve your agenda but you cant change history.
Given time I'd instruct you about how the war measures regarding industrial production that look like socialism were the same government controls exercised in any industrial country at war but I'll assign that reading to you.

I appreciate you responding in kind with good information. I have done a little research on the topic at hand and this is what I've come up with:

As far as I can tell Hitler had minimal interactions with the band of soldiers known as Freikorps. In fact, I can not find any evidence to support the premise that Hitler was somehow involved with the group in any capacity whatsoever. If you have some relevant information, please post it here as I am eager to get to the bottom of this.

While some former Freikorps members eventually reached prominence during the Third Reich, they tend to be over shadowed by the general distrust - most Freikorps members faced within the National Socialist German Worker’s Party (NSDAP). Indeed many Freikorps fighters were purged during Adolf Hitler’s (1889-1945) June 1934 purge (“Röhm-Putsch”).

It is clear in my mind that Hitler, while having a number of former freikorps members in his cabinet, eventually came to view the "free corps" as a potential threat to his grip on power. Therefore, they needed to be dealt with. And they were.

Hitler eventually viewed some of them as threats. A huge ceremony was arranged on 9 November 1933 in which the Freikorps leaders symbolically presented their old battle flags to Hitler's SA and SS. It was a sign of allegiance to their new authority, the Nazi state. When Hitler's internal purge of the party, the Night of the Long Knives, came in 1934, a large number of Freikorps leaders were targeted for killing or arrest, including Ehrhardt and Röhm.

Historian Robert GL Waite claims that in Hitler's "Röhm Purge" speech to the Reichstag on 13 July 1934, he implied that the Freikorps were one of the groups of "pathological enemies of the state".

We also have the matter of Gustav Noske. A lifetime socialist, but also a law and order man (not that odd a combination in the Social Democratic Party)

Sources:
Freikorps - Wikipedia
Meet the Freikorps: Vanguard of Terror 1918-1923 | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans
Adolf Hitler - Wikiquote

 

[Iron_Merc]

Except he continued to do it well after he had already solidified power. People on the right, on the other hand, were embraced and bought in heavily to his rhetoric.

Please cite sources for this information I want to believe you are correct but I am going to need to see evidence in order to back your claim. From my understanding, the leftists that Hitler rounded up and had killed occurred near the onset of his rise to power to protect his authority and destroy the opposition.

 

[Tigerace117]

Please cite sources for this information I want to believe you are correct but I am going to need to see evidence in order to back your claim. From my understanding, the leftists that Hitler rounded up and had killed occurred near the onset of his rise to power to protect his authority and destroy the opposition.

For example.....

“German Communists were among the first to be imprisoned in concentration camps.[64][65] Their ties to the USSR concerned Hitler, and the Nazi Party was intractably opposed to communism. Rumors of communist violence were spread by the Nazis to justify the Enabling Act of 1933, which gave Hitler his first dictatorial powers. Hermann Göring testified at Nuremberg that Nazi willingness to repress German Communists prompted Hindenburg and the old elite to cooperate with them. Hitler and the Nazis also despised German leftists because of their resistance to Nazi racism. Many German leftist leaders were Jews who had been prominent in the 1919 Spartacist uprising. Hitler referred to Marxism and "Bolshevism" as means for "the international Jew" to undermine "racial purity", stir up class tension and mobilize trade unions against the government and business. When the Nazis occupied a territory, communists, socialists and anarchists were usually among the first to be repressed; this included summary executions. An example is Hitler's Commissar Order, in which he demanded the summary execution of all Soviet troops who were political commissars who offered resistance or were captured in battle.[66]”

Holocaust victims - Wikipedia

 

[Iron_Merc]

Holocaust victims - Wikipedia

Thanks for getting back to me with evidence, now lets check it out!

I did read your linked source and yes, I find that your evidence is legitimate and supported by documentation. German newspaper report on the opening of Dachau (March 1933) reads:

On Wednesday the first concentration camp will be opened near Dachau. It has a capacity of 5,000 persons. Here all the Communist and – as far as necessary – Reichsbanner [pro-democratic paramilitaries] and Marxist functionaries who threaten the security of the state will be concentrated as it is not possible in the long run, if the state apparatus is not to be greatly overstressed, to leave the individual Communist functionaries in local court prisons. On the other hand, it is no longer acceptable to set these functionaries free again. Individual experiments made by us have shown that they continue to agitate and attempt to organize. We have taken this measure without regard to petty misgivings, in the conviction that we are thereby calming the national population and acting in its spirit.

First lets look at the definition of Reichsbanner [pro-democratic paramilitaries] (credit to wikipedia) :

Paramilitary groups were formed throughout the Weimar Republic in the wake of Germany's defeat in World War I and the ensuing German Revolution. Some were created by political parties to help in recruiting, discipline and in preparation for seizing power. Some were created before World War I. Others were formed by individuals after the war and were called "Freikorps" (Free corps). The party affiliated groups and others were all outside government control, but the Freikorps units were under government control, supply and pay (usually through army sources).

In my opinion: Hitler wanted to lock down the nation to further cement his iron rule. I think in this case, the left wingers were political opponents of Hitler and not necessarily the common German you would find walking down the street. These were men with political connections and dangerous ideologies that could potentially threaten Hitler's grip on power. He wanted to do everything within his considerable power to therefore eliminate that threat. So as far as I can tell, these are most likely political opponenets and not nessisarily ordinary German citizens? What do you think?

 

[Dick Tornado]

In contemplation of modern thought and theory, Hitler is often seen as a very evil character.

Looking forward to a great debate!

Swap a name game, It's Fun or Scary is on page 2 of the blogs.

Covers most of what you want.

Walks you through some points in Hitler's rise and power grab.

Sort of softballish, written with keeping it simple.

Looks at what was and what is as well....

 

[Iron_Merc]

You didn't answer my very reasonable question. Otherwise, I have no idea what you'd find here that you wouldn't find in any other textbook about the subject. Oh dang it, here comes that homework thing again... Can't seem to escape it while giving you the benefit of the doubt as the most innocent reason.

So no this is not a homework assignment. I just want clarity on Hitlers background and beliefs. The truth is what Im after.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Looking forward to a great debate!

Placing Hitler into a distinct right or left spectrum never really works well because he was a very situational dictator, one who drew his exact policies from the political and international situation at the time and doesn't really bear a lot of similarity to today, especially the German political scene which is radically different from American political standards.

The Nazi Party was certainly a far right political party by German standards, as emphasized by its heavy emphasis on German militarism, nationalism, and opposition to both communism and capitalism. National socialism, the ideology of the Nazi Party, and logically therefore Hitler, was derived heavily from German figures like Oswald Spengler, and the leadership of Otto Von Bismark. A huge part of the Nationalist Socialist playbook was derived from works like Preussentum und Sozialismus (Prussians and Socialism), which argued that the Prussian model of right-wing socialism, the combination of state management of industry and economic affairs, combined with a strong national identity and a strong military. Prussian socialism, as it was called, directly rebuked so called "Marxian-Socialism" and "English Socialism", and opposed the abolition of private property and in England's case, democracy.

Thus, it is fundamentally important to the discussion of the Nazi ideology to understand the framework by which "Prussian Socialism" was formed; it was an ideology that rejected the centerpiece of most Marxist-derived groups, the framing of the world in terms of class conflict, instead opting for a nationality and Volk (people) centered standard, very similar to the Fascist race-based conflict that would define that ideology. So Prussian Socialism was socialism without class conflict, egalitarianism without internationalism, and collectivity without the abolition of private property. As you can see, the Prussian Socialism that would form the bedrock for National Socialism bore little resemblance to the traditional views we hold on leftist ideologies like Marxism, communism, and socialism itself.

 

[Iron_Merc]

I want to take a look at some writings of Hitler. I want to get some feedback primarily on this section (outlined in bold) -- Please note, I am not using this as evidence for or against Hitler, I merely want to get some interpretative opinions from you guys.

Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler
Volume Two - The National Socialist Movement
Chapter IV: Personality and the Conception of the Folkish State

Marxism represents the most striking phase of the Jewish endeavour to eliminate the dominant significance of personality in every sphere of human life and replace it by the numerical power of the masses. In politics the parliamentary form of government is the expression of this effort. ……..

…..
Even if, on the basis of its mass-theory, Marxism should prove itself capable of taking over and developing the present economic system, that would not signify anything. The question as to whether the Marxist doctrine be right or wrong cannot be decided by any test which would show that it can administer for the future what already exists today, but only by asking whether it has the creative power to build up according to its own principles a civilization which would be a counterpart of what already exists. Even if Marxism were a thousandfold capable of taking over the economic life as we now have it and maintaining it in operation under Marxist direction, such an achievement would prove nothing; because, on the basis of its own principles, Marxism would never be able to create something which could supplant what exists today.
And Marxism itself has furnished the proof that it cannot do this. Not only has it been unable anywhere to create a cultural or economic system of its own; but it was not even able to develop, according to its own principles, the civilization and economic system it found ready at hand. It has had to make compromises, by way of a return to the principle of personality, just as it cannot dispense with that principle in its own organization.
The folkish philosophy is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its view of life.
If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground. For that reason it would not have the right to call itself a philosophy of life. If the social programme of the movement consisted in eliminating personality and putting the multitude in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our national-bourgeois parties are.
The People's State must assure the welfare of its citizens by recognizing the importance of personal values under all circumstances and by preparing the way for the maximum of productive efficiency in all the various branches of economic life, thus securing to the individual the highest possible share in the general output.
Hence the People's State must mercilessly expurgate from all the leading circles in the government of the country the parliamentarian principle, according to which decisive power through the majority vote is invested in the multitude. Personal responsibility must be substituted in its stead.
From this the following conclusion results:
The best constitution and the best form of government is that which makes it quite natural for the best brains to reach a position of dominant importance and influence in the community.
Just as in the field of economics men of outstanding ability cannot be designated from above but must come forward in virtue of their own efforts, and just as there is an unceasing educative process that leads from the smallest shop to the largest undertaking, and just as life itself is the school in which those lessons are taught, so in the political field it is not possible to 'discover' political talent all in a moment. Genius of an extraordinary stamp is not to be judged by normal standards whereby we judge other men.
In its organization the State must be established on the principle of personality, starting from the smallest cell and ascending up to the supreme government of the country.
There are no decisions made by the majority vote, but only by responsible persons. And the word 'council' is once more restored to its original meaning. Every man in a position of responsibility will have councillors at his side, but the decision is made by that individual person alone.

 

[Jredbaron96]

I want to take a look at some writings of Hitler. I want to get some feedback primarily on this section (outlined in bold) -- Please note, I am not using this as evidence for or against Hitler, I merely want to get some interpretative opinions from you guys.

All Hitler is basically saying is that Marxism is wrong because it ignores the importance of race, and that democracy and communism are Jewish efforts to undermine that concept.

 

[Iron_Merc]

All Hitler is basically saying is that Marxism is wrong because it ignores the importance of race, and that democracy and communism are Jewish efforts to undermine that concept.

So it seems to me Hitler is effectively merging Marxism with Nationalism.

 

[Iron_Merc]

Interesting parallels

 

[snakestretcher]

In contemplation of modern thought and theory, Hitler is often seen as a very evil character. From the attempted extermination of the entire Jewish race to the rise of eugenics and a pure Aryan race, Hitler was a driven man who inspired an entire nation - a nation that could have easily dominated the entire world had the United States not stepped in at the 11th hour.

My question is very simple. What was Hitler and the Nazi regime all about? What drove Hitler to commit such in-human acts? Such acts of barbarity? Can we even classify them using the modern spectrum of left right politics? Or for that matter, the modern interpretation of conserverative vs liberal?

So, to keep this simple lets just get some information on the table before we drill down with specifics. Please present your own personal theory as to the politics, theology and ideology of Hitler, and then your theory as to the ideology and philosophy and economy of the nation state of Germany (at that time). Back up your suppositions with facts if at all possible.

Looking forward to a great debate!

View attachment 67263995

It was the USSR driving the Nazis out of the Soviet Union that was the turning point which led to Hitler's ultimate defeat. 'Barbarossa' was Hitler's worst blunder and cost him the war. America was barely six months into the war at that time.
As to the original question Nazism was about power and global domination. Personal hatred of anything not conforming to the Aryan 'ideal' was Hitler's catalyst, with socialists and Jews in particular targeted. Rumour has it that Hitler, a poor quality but obsessive artist in his early life, was refused entry to an art academy and blamed the Jewish principal for his failure. That belief festered and we know what the result was.