Watching this thing on History or Discovery of the rise of Hitler in Germany.

The announcer just read part of the platform of the Nazi party.

Followed up by this is something you would hear now from Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. That this would get thunderous applause at the Democratic National Convention when read out loud.

I needed that giggle today.

Tanya 93 said:

---

Watching this thing on History or Discovery of the rise of Hitler in Germany.

The announcer just read part of the platform of the Nazi party.

Followed up by this is something you would hear now from Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. That this would get thunderous applause at the Democratic National Convention when read out loud.

I needed that giggle today.

---

Yeah, I've seen that.

As to thread title....didn't know you were Hindu!

BigRobSA said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

Watching this thing on History or Discovery of the rise of Hitler in Germany.

The announcer just read part of the platform of the Nazi party.

Followed up by this is something you would hear now from Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. That this would get thunderous applause at the Democratic National Convention when read out loud.

I needed that giggle today.

---

Yeah, I've seen that.

As to thread title....didn't know you were Hindu!

---

Have you seen the sparkles women wear?
Totally worth it

Tanya 93 said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

Watching this thing on History or Discovery of the rise of Hitler in Germany.

The announcer just read part of the platform of the Nazi party.

Followed up by this is something you would hear now from Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. That this would get thunderous applause at the Democratic National Convention when read out loud.

I needed that giggle today.

---

Yeah, I've seen that.

As to thread title....didn't know you were Hindu!

---

Have you seen the sparkles women wear?
Totally worth it

---

And all the slushies you can drink!!!!

it's pretty annoying that for 80 years the socialists just gloss over this fact:


National Socialist German Workers' Party

In German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

or NSDAP

Yep, the Nazis were a socialist party, but even more dangerously they mixed in elements of fascism so you had an amalgam of two of the most dangerous ideologies in the world. Toss in virulent racism and antisemitism and it was a recipe for disaster.

Most people don't even know that Nazi is short for Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei which translates to National Socialist German Workers' Party.

The Nazis were never "right wing" except when Hitler needed to make a speech to the army. Then he would transform himself into the biggest right wing nationalist to ever exist, because he knew that is what his audience wanted to hear.

The first group to roll over and go full support for the Nazi Party after they won the plurality in the election was academia and teachers. The military was the last to acquiesce.

LMCane said:

---

it's pretty annoying that for 80 years the socialists just gloss over this fact:


National Socialist German Workers' Party

In German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

or NSDAP

---

And the Republican Party freed the slaves. All washed from memory.

I just found that announcer funny.

I have bigger issues to worry about than Trump

Rapier108 said:

---

Yep, the Nazis were a socialist party, but even more dangerously they mixed in elements of fascism so you had an amalgam of two of the most dangerous ideologies in the world. Toss in virulent racism and antisemitism and it was a recipe for disaster.

Most people don't even know that Nazi is short for Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei which translates to National Socialist German Workers' Party.

The Nazis were never "right wing" except when Hitler needed to make a speech to the army. Then he would transform himself into the biggest right wing nationalist to ever exist, because he knew that is what his audience wanted to hear.

The first group to roll over and go full support for the Nazi Party after they won the plurality in the election was academia and teachers. The military was the last to acquiesce.

---

Godless liberals/socialists/commies are the final bosses of branding...they are amazing at it, because their movements rely so heavily upon it. "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea", "Antifascist", "No human is illegal", "In this house, we believe...".

They are great at smearing and slandering their political opposition with it, and good at getting people to hop on their cases withcarefully crafted humane/virtue signaling labels.

Just absolute masters of propaganda and deception, always have been.

Useful idiots buy right in...

LMCane said:

---

it's pretty annoying that for 80 years the socialists just gloss over this fact:


National Socialist German Workers' Party

In German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

or NSDAP

---

They don't gloss over it, this was done on purpose. And it was a genius move on their part.

The Nazis were not far right, they were far left.

Even Hitler himself admitted that there was very little difference between the Nazi party and communism.

But the Democrat party, after world war II, was successful in branding them as far right, thereby securing every Jewish vote and the vote of any one of Eastern European descent for decades to come.

Public school aids in this.

The history teacher in my son's high school (Austin, TX) talked extensively about Mao's plans, beliefs and policies but never once mentioned the millions he slaughtered.

These folks are evil

Tanya 93 said:

---

Watching this thing on History or Discovery of the rise of Hitler in Germany.

The announcer just read part of the platform of the Nazi party.

Followed up by this is something you would hear now from Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. That this would get thunderous applause at the Democratic National Convention when read out loud.

I needed that giggle today.

---

it shouldn't be that hard to see - the party has endorsed antisemitism in their actions and words from the "progressives" at every turn

Tanya 93 said:

---

Watching this thing on History or Discovery of the rise of Hitler in Germany.

The announcer just read part of the platform of the Nazi party.

Followed up by this is something you would hear now from Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. That this would get thunderous applause at the Democratic National Convention when read out loud.

I needed that giggle today.

---

Kind of reminds me of this guy

LMCane said:

---

it's pretty annoying that for 80 years the socialists just gloss over this fact:


National Socialist German Workers' Party

In German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

or NSDAP

---

This is such a tired and intellectually lazy argument. By confusing National Socialism (Nazism) with Marxist ideologies (Socialism and Communism), you fall for exactly the same rhetorical propaganda that Hitler used to attain power.

Indeed, the Nazis made use of socialist rhetoric to expand the Nazi base, and Hitler took over the German Worker's Party and specifically chose to use the word Socialism to attract working class support. However, Hitler's initial rise to power was funded by wealthy industrialists who saw him as the opposition to Marxism and hoped to crush organized labor. By the early 1930s the Nazi party had cast out most of the remaining leftists, and the remaining left-wing faction was killed during the Night of the Long Knives. At this point, the Nazi Party had fully transformed into a right-wing party under Hitler's control.

Hitler's final rise to totalitarian control came after the Reichstag fire, which he used to imprison the majority of left-wing members of the Reichstag, including ALL the Communist Party members and a large number of the Social Democrats. Finding this insufficient to gain total control, Hitler then proposed the Enabling Act, which required a two-thirds majority to pass. To pass the Enabling Act, Hitler aligned with the conservative German National People's Party, however, this was still not enough to reach two-thirds. The final coup came not from left-wing support, as all remaining left-wing members voted against the enabling act, but from the Centre Party, a Catholic center-right party having foolishly negotiated their continued existence in exchange, an agreement which was ultimately betrayed by Hitler after he gained totalitarian control.

Once in power the Nazis were explicitly pro-capitalist and continued their alignment with wealthy industrialists and privatized public firms under the ownership of their cronies. While they were not truly capitalist but crony-capitalist (similar to Russia after fall of the Soviet Union), they were certainly not socialist, nor left-wing.

You can try to re-litigate history all you like, but the reality remains that Nazism was driven to power by conservatives and right-wingers specifically to oppose the Marxist movement, and it remained a right-wing ideology until its collapse.

deddog said:

---

Public school aids in this.

The history teacher in my son's high school (Austin, TX) talked extensively about Mao's plans, beliefs and policies but never once mentioned the millions he slaughtered.

These folks are evil

---

One of the reasons i left Austin. Lived there for 20 years, was fun to hunt down drunk co-eds, terrible place to raise kids.

Thank you for showing everyone that you have exactly zero grasp of history and are simply regurgitating the same lies the left have been pushing out for 70+ years now.

And 61 posts in 8 years. What's your other names here?

Quote:

---

Hitler's final rise to totalitarian control came after the Reichstag fire, which he used to imprison the majority of left-wing members of the Reichstag, including ALL the Communist Party members and a large number of the Social Democrats.

---

And on this point, there is a reason the communists were his enemy, and it wasn't because Hitler was right wing and communism is left wing. The communists were the only other political faction in Germany with the numbers, funds, and organization that made them a threat to the Nazis. It had noting to do with Hitler being "right wing." If the communists in Germany had numbered 500 people, Hitler would have paid them no mind whatsoever.

Rapier108 said:

---

Thank you for showing everyone that you have exactly zero grasp of history and are simply regurgitating the same lies the left have been pushing out for 70+ years now.

And 61 posts in 8 years. What's your other names here?

Quote:

---

Hitler's final rise to totalitarian control came after the Reichstag fire, which he used to imprison the majority of left-wing members of the Reichstag, including ALL the Communist Party members and a large number of the Social Democrats.

---

And on this point, there is a reason the communists were his enemy, and it wasn't because Hitler was right wing and communism is left wing. The communists were the only other political faction in Germany with the numbers, funds, and organization that made them a threat to the Nazis. It had noting to do with Hitler being "right wing." If the communists in Germany had numbered 500 people, Hitler would have paid them no mind whatsoever.

---

He's a good little soldier for the new Communists he worships. Probably thinks the parties switched too.

Deep down he's probably glad Democrats instituted:
Slavery
KKK
Jim Crow
Abortion

snowminer said:

---

LMCane said:

---

it's pretty annoying that for 80 years the socialists just gloss over this fact:


National Socialist German Workers' Party

In German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

or NSDAP

---

This is such a tired and intellectually lazy argument. By confusing National Socialism (Nazism) with Marxist ideologies (Socialism and Communism), you fall for exactly the same rhetorical propaganda that Hitler used to attain power.

Indeed, the Nazis made use of socialist rhetoric to expand the Nazi base, and Hitler took over the German Worker's Party and specifically chose to use the word Socialism to attract working class support. However, Hitler's initial rise to power was funded by wealthy industrialists who saw him as the opposition to Marxism and hoped to crush organized labor. By the early 1930s the Nazi party had cast out most of the remaining leftists, and the remaining left-wing faction was killed during the Night of the Long Knives. At this point, the Nazi Party had fully transformed into a right-wing party under Hitler's control.

Hitler's final rise to totalitarian control came after the Reichstag fire, which he used to imprison the majority of left-wing members of the Reichstag, including ALL the Communist Party members and a large number of the Social Democrats. Finding this insufficient to gain total control, Hitler then proposed the Enabling Act, which required a two-thirds majority to pass. To pass the Enabling Act, Hitler aligned with the conservative German National People's Party, however, this was still not enough to reach two-thirds. The final coup came not from left-wing support, as all remaining left-wing members voted against the enabling act, but from the Centre Party, a Catholic center-right party having foolishly negotiated their continued existence in exchange, an agreement which was ultimately betrayed by Hitler after he gained totalitarian control.

Once in power the Nazis were explicitly pro-capitalist and continued their alignment with wealthy industrialists and privatized public firms under the ownership of their cronies. While they were not truly capitalist but crony-capitalist (similar to Russia after fall of the Soviet Union), they were certainly not socialist, nor left-wing.

You can try to re-litigate history all you like, but the reality remains that Nazism was driven to power by conservatives and right-wingers specifically to oppose the Marxist movement, and it remained a right-wing ideology until its collapse.

---

Your logic is flawed. Just because Hitler imprisoned the communists doesn't mean he was ideologically opposed to them. You could argue that he imprisoned them because they were his competition. Now why would communists be his competition?

This is classic left wing propaganda.
Oh the name socialist doesn't mean anything.
Oh, he took control of the means of production? Aah, it's not because he was socialist, it's because he was totalitarian. These are the same folks that believe Venezuela is a failed state because of capitalism.

He showed you what he was, a socialist who imprisoned and killed his competition. Because that's what socialists do.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

LMCane said:

---

it's pretty annoying that for 80 years the socialists just gloss over this fact:


National Socialist German Workers' Party

In German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

or NSDAP

---

And the Republican Party freed the slaves. All washed from memory.

---

e=mc2 said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Thank you for showing everyone that you have exactly zero grasp of history and are simply regurgitating the same lies the left have been pushing out for 70+ years now.

And 61 posts in 8 years. What's your other names here?

Quote:

---

Hitler's final rise to totalitarian control came after the Reichstag fire, which he used to imprison the majority of left-wing members of the Reichstag, including ALL the Communist Party members and a large number of the Social Democrats.

---

And on this point, there is a reason the communists were his enemy, and it wasn't because Hitler was right wing and communism is left wing. The communists were the only other political faction in Germany with the numbers, funds, and organization that made them a threat to the Nazis. It had noting to do with Hitler being "right wing." If the communists in Germany had numbered 500 people, Hitler would have paid them no mind whatsoever.

---

He's a good little soldier for the new Communists he worships. Probably thinks the parties switched too.

Deep down he's probably glad Democrats instituted:
Slavery
KKK
Jim Crow
Abortion

---

50 years from now, when blacks wake up and realize how many millions of their folks that were put to death by Democrats under the guise of abortion, the parties will "switch" again.

Thanks for showing me you have zero interest in discussing in good faith, with yet another lazy argument. If you inspected my post history a little deeper, you'd find that I made all of one post in the first 6 years after I made my TexAgs account, so that's more like 60 posts in 2 years. In any case, I prefer to avoid wasting my time debating with people who have no interest in productive discussion. You can reference e=mc2's post for a demonstration of exactly why I try not to bother posting here.

I certainly don't dispute that the communists and Social Democrats were Hitler's competition. It may well be that if the left took control instead of Hitler that atrocities would have occured; there are plenty of examples of the failures of Marxism, but the Nazis aren't one of them. It is simply historical fact that left-wing parties opposed Hitler's rise to power, and right-wing parties supported it.

Except he didn't seize the means of production. He left industry in the control of the same wealthy industrialists who financed his rise to power. Furthermore, he actually privatized a multitude of state controlled firms.

More Paul Gottfried and less Jonah Goldberg.

National Socialists were secular, occultist, conservationist, right-wing

That's how they and their occasional domestic allies, including sadly some Christian parties, understood them

ANGLO-AMERICAN "right-wing" is philosophical right-liberalism, including its founder, the Whig Edmund Burke

CONTINENTAL right-wing REJECTS ALL philosophical liberalism

snowminer said:

---

Except he didn't seize the means of production. He left industry in the control of the same wealthy industrialists who financed his rise to power. Furthermore, he actually privatized a multitude of state controlled firms.

---

To do business, they had to join the Nazi party.

Remind me what oath did they have to swear to join said Nazi party?

So yes . . . He did seize the means of production.

Read Gottfried's Fascism and its sequel Antifascism

There is a long and sad tradition of rightist European occultism, which is why throne and altar Apostolic (Catholic / Orthodox) bias is by far the best way to be an anti-liberal rightist.

If that's your definition of seizing the means of production then it would be impossible to claim any totalitarian regime is right-wing. It may have been required to join the party to do business, but we also know that a great deal of them were quite actively involved and not just going along just because they had to.

And down the rabbit hole Redstone takes this thread.

Wrong. On all counts.

I'm correct. The books are about 5 feet away and very densely detailed if someone wants to go.

"Always accuse your enemy of what you are doing……."

The shrill cries of "Fascist!" and "Nazi" from the left fit this perfectly. And here comes the communist NYC mayor to really make things fun.

Wow...insightful. Care to elaborate or just another no-substance drive-by?

snowminer said:

---

Except he didn't seize the means of production. He left industry in the control of the same wealthy industrialists who financed his rise to power. Furthermore, he actually privatized a multitude of state controlled firms.

---

It's a distinction without a difference Imo. It was complete central control.

snowminer said:

---

Thanks for showing me you have zero interest in discussing in good faith, with yet another lazy argument. If you inspected my post history a little deeper, you'd find that I made all of one post in the first 6 years after I made my TexAgs account, so that's more like 60 posts in 2 years. In any case, I prefer to avoid wasting my time debating with people who have no interest in productive discussion. You can reference e=mc2's post for a demonstration of exactly why I try not to bother posting here.

I certainly don't dispute that the communists and Social Democrats were Hitler's competition. It may well be that if the left took control instead of Hitler that atrocities would have occured; there are plenty of examples of the failures of Marxism, but the Nazis aren't one of them. It is simply historical fact that left-wing parties opposed Hitler's rise to power, and right-wing parties supported it.

---

Oh yeah, because communists never hurt anyone.

Rapier108 said:

---

Yep, the Nazis were a socialist party, but even more dangerously they mixed in elements of fascism so you had an amalgam of two of the most dangerous ideologies in the world. Toss in virulent racism and antisemitism and it was a recipe for disaster.

Most people don't even know that Nazi is short for Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei which translates to National Socialist German Workers' Party.

The Nazis were never "right wing" except when Hitler needed to make a speech to the army. Then he would transform himself into the biggest right wing nationalist to ever exist, because he knew that is what his audience wanted to hear.

The first group to roll over and go full support for the Nazi Party after they won the plurality in the election was academia and teachers. The military was the last to acquiesce.

---

We need to stop this "right wing" nonsense once and for all. The reason is because it isn't well defined and almost always used as a slur. Unlike "left wing" or "leftist," which is used in a descriptive format, "right wing" doesn't define anything. At least not precisely. Even if it did, the underlying component of "right wing" would be "less government" (or smaller government, if you will). More power to the individual/private section, lower regulation, free(er) markets, low(er) taxes, and constitutional rights that apply to everyone equally. That includes second amendment type rights.

Thus, "right wing" racism or a "right wing" authoritarian government is all but impossible UNLESS the government is forcing people to do things like criticize the government, pay less in taxes, invest more in the private sector, buy arms for personal protection, etc. How many fascist regimes in history have EVER done ANY of that? I'll save you the trouble of looking it up: ZERO.

Even if you were to say, "dude, not every conservative or right winger believes in"..., that doesn't defeat my point. So Trump is OK with protectionist policies. Senate Republicans like to spend. So and so is an R/reputed conservative and he/she likes to ... (something opposite from what I said above). It doesn't matter. Not only do most of those folks still believe in the majority of things I wrote above, there STILL isn't any historical examples of a fascist government that became that way due to tariffs AND strong Second Amendment protections. Or deficit spending AND less regulation (like we had in Trump 1). You just can't get there from here.

Fascism is EXCLUSIVELY a feature of the left. Strong law and order is not fascism (or does not give rise to it) because it protects citizens who obey the law. The same is true for having a strong military. On the other hand, bypassing constitutional protections to put people in jail for whatever reason is neither conservative, right wing, nor consistent with what I wrote above -- thus, it wouldn't fall under a right wing fascist dictatorship. Unless you could show me where Hitler cut taxes, cut regulation, implemented or was in favor of second amendment type protections, encouraged first amendment type rights, as well as other constitutional rights (4th and 5th amendment specifically), he was NEVER "right wing."