Hitler, a socialist?!?!

[Abood]

Today in History class, after my teacher wrote "National Socialism" on the board, i whispered to my friend "hitler was not a socialist", and he said "yes he was".
My teacher also said something like "hitler had society as an exclusive thing" and then he explained by saying that he wanted socialism for certain groups, without all the jews, etc etc.. now how is that socialist?!

[Technocrates]

He was not. National Socialism is totally seperate. In his book Mein Kampf, Hitler rips on the social democrats of Vienna. He was actually a corporatist in the sense that the state supported all businesses and resources in its interest but did not share them collectively. Never fear, national socialism is one word. Your teacher is wrong!

[Abood]

Do u have any resources, such as the Mein Kampf itself, so that i can tell my teacher he's wrong?! :D
after all, i cant go to a teacher and tell him ur wrong, with no proof.

[Jadan ja]

This quote by Hitler clearly shows that he was not a socialist:

"We stand for the maintenance of private property... We shall protect free enterprise as the most expedient, or rather the sole possible economic order." -Hitler

Opposition to property and capitalism is what defines socialism, so someone who sad that cannot be socialst by definition.

Also, all socialists believe in equality and ideas of "superior race" and "inferior races" are obviously saying that people are unequal.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

You can find Mein Kampf at any major bookstore, but it's far too big and contains far too much bullshit to be worth reading, IMO.

I think the fact people even have to ask on a Leftist website if Hitler was a Socialist is a disgusting reflection on the kind of vague, misleading bullshit that is forced into our minds at school.

[Jadan ja]

Isnt Mein Kampf illegal in many countries?

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Oh, well I'm not sure about that one, I found it browsing through my local bookstore (in Wexford, Ireland) so I assumed it wasn't that taboo, although I can see why it would be banned in countries such as Isreal, the people of which have had a *cough* less than satisfactory expierience with the author...

[Abood]

I think the fact people even have to ask on a Leftist website if Hitler was a Socialist is a disgusting reflection on the kind of vague, misleading bullshit that is forced into our minds at school.
i know that hitler was not a socialist, i just wanna know why people think he is, cuz well, i started to doubt my own beliefs.

[Abood]

i started to doubt my own beliefs.
why the hell did i even post that reply... ok i get what u mean.
well, bad people exist, and good people gotta fix them, or get rid of them.

[Noah]

I think the fact people even have to ask on a Leftist website if Hitler was a Socialist

This comment is irrelevant, people come into the learning section to ask anything they want whether it is hard, easy or inbetween.

The above comment is discouraging, if the person is a leftist then he's not exacly going to post on a rightist website to ask whether Hitler was a TRUE socialist.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

This comment is irrelevant, people come into the learning section to ask anything they want whether it is hard, easy or inbetween.

It's the fact that the question had to be asked, and that this question was stirred up at school. If the education system was able to provide actual facts instead of vague distorted half-truths, Socialist Advocate never would have had to create this thread.


The above comment is discouraging, if the person is a leftist then he's not exacly going to post on a rightist website to ask whether Hitler was a TRUE socialist.

I don't quite understand. I don't feel this comment in itself is discouraging at all, but it does bring to light a highly discouraging observation about what we are being taught in school. That said, one can't just let such an observation go unshared because it might be 'discouraging'. Also, your comment about him not asking on a 'rightist' (I assume you mean reactionary) website just goes to show you misunderstood my post. I'm not saying he shouldn't have had to ask on this site, I'm saying he shouldn't have had to ask at all. It is of course not Socialist Advocate's fault, and I'm sorry if it semed like I was implying so.

[encephalon]

Hitler was a fascist, in which duty to the state (and its leader) supercedes any other aspect of life. Fascist doctrine also despises unionism, workers rights.. pretty much anything socialism values, fascism devalues.

Your history teacher should frankly be ashamed of himself for preaching such blatant inaccuracies, and I wholly suggest that you challenge him on the subject in class and publicly. It won't take much research to show how wrong his assertion is, and it's important that the rest of your class knows that hitler wasn't a socialist.

They chose the term "National Socialism" to get support of the workers and undermine the strong red current in Germany at the time. In truth (and hitler readily admits this in Mein Kampf), there's very little, if anything, akin to socialism in the Nazi doctrine.

[which doctor]

Hitler was a national socialist, but not a socialist. Make sure the students in your class know the difference.

[Abood]

Hitler was a national socialist, but not a socialist. Make sure the students in your class know the difference.
i sure will!

its so contradicting. Hitler was a national socialist.. how is that?! socialism promotes total equality, all races, all classes.. and what hitler wanted was people HAD TO FEEL that theyre equal, and all working for germany, but they really werent.. thts wut i would call "psychological socialism". He also was racist, and only wanted the aryans... socialist value?! hardly!
The term "national socialist" by itself is an oxymoron, since nationalism promotes unequality and conservation, etc etc.. while socialism is the opposite.

[Zero]

You have to realise that Communism isn't bi-partisan. You don't have Lib Dems and Con Reps running around everywhere throwing sticks at eachother. Therefore it encompases the neo-nazi assholes who can justify killing a lot of people for no reason. These are Authoritarian, the intellegent half though is Libertarian.

Though people above have said this, and I'm sure there will be people posting below me to clarify, and fix what I have said.

[Everyday Anarchy]

Another thing to remember is that when the Nazi party took power, they outlawed all of the Communists. A real Socialist party certainly would not ban a Communist party.

You have to admit, though, Nazi Germany had an obsession with its workers.

[Severian]

Here's a thread on what fascism is and why it pretends to be socialist. (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=43120)

[Abood]

Another thing to remember is that when the Nazi party took power, they outlawed all of the Communists. A real Socialist party certainly would not ban a Communist party.
Well, i thought that they wanted a one party rule, like in the USSR, when Lenin banned all other parties, including the Socialist Revolutionary.

[Severian]

The Nazis did ban all other parties.

But the Communist Party first of all.

The trade unions were also suppressed, and all workers' organizations. Wages dropped significantly, and the rise of the Nazi party was a boost to the bosses' profits.

A number of capitalist families and companies had helped finance the Nazis during the rise to power, and they got a return on their investment.

Read the thread I just linked. Or any history on the rise of the Nazi party to power - it'll explain that the Nazis were fighting the workers organizations, including the Communist Party, the whole way.

If you read Mein Kampf, he explains the "Marxists" are his main enemies.

***

Incidentally, the Soviet government in Lenin's time didn't set out to ban all other parties....they banned those which took up arms against the Soviet government, and some others merged into the Communist Party.

There was at least one other party still legal as late as 1923 - a left faction of the Paole Zion. 1923's when Lenin had his first stroke, and Stalin began to consolidate his power.

[rebelworker]

Oh come on, took up arms against the bolsheviks, REALLLYYY!!!

The anarchist organizations were banned because a couple of people identified with anarchism stole the car of a foreign aid worker, dose that count as the anarchist organisations taking up arms against the soviets?

and what about the Ukrain, The makhnovists were in an alliance with the bolsheviks when Trotsky turned the guns on them.

You lenninists sure are delusional.

I guess the Kronstdat soviet was taking up arms against itself? so people had to...
Take up arms against them?????

The Bolsheviks also supressed the trade unions, just like hitler, funny that,
pretending to be for the workers, then shooting them in the back....
very similar
hahaha


As to hitler, and the National Socialist(NAZI) party, they defenitly postured as socialists a bit, but just to build up working class support and recruit in hoods controlled by communists.

They even went as far as to Have a gay socialist leading thier "brownshirts" thug squads. But later once the party had gained mass support, and most importantly sufficient support from the ruling class, they purged all the "undesirable" elements of the Party. This was called the night of the long knives, they went out and rounded up all the socialists and uncontrollable people in important positions and "got rid of em", replacing them with people more in line and loyal to hitler.

Could add a line to the famous monumnet,

First they came for the socialists in the Party,
but I did nothing becuse I was not a socialist in the Party.

Then they came for the Communists....

[Dark Exodus]

His teacher was correct, Hitler was a national socialist. His friend was the incorrect one.

Usually in schools it isn't the teachers that are the problem, its higher up than them.

[Everyday Anarchy]

It would have been nice for the teacher to at least say something about how a National Socialist is not the same as a Socialist.
I've noticed that a lot of times in my school, teachers have been teaching things in a way that students associate them with other things and get the wrong ideas (just like the example posted). Worst of all, the teachers don't say anything about it. The kids don't know anything about it to begin with, so whatever they're told it is, they believe.

[KickMcCann]

As mentioned above, National Socialism was just a convenient title for Hitler's version of Benito's Italian Fascism, it worked because at the time, most Germans had a taste for two things, a strong nation and socialism. It of course wasn't socialist, or even really national if you consider its alliance with the Italians and Japanese, or the divisions of troops populated by eastern european slavs, arabs and a few indians.


Regardless, in order to best win the arguement that Hitler wasn't a socialist, it is easiest to use the example of warlords and militias in certain parts of Africa. Many of these movements are backward and superstitious, often with the only goal of seizing land or power for the head warlord. Nevertheless, these backward, sectarian warlord groups adopt names like "National democratic movement" "the rebellion for people's democracy" "the revolutionary freedom and liberty movement" (Those are all made up, but you get the picture)

None of those groups have anything to do with democracy, freedom, or the people, but the certainly use such words because it will gain them support from a naive population. That's what Hitler did.

[Ol' Dirty]

National(ism) "Socialism" isn't really Socialism. It's just name Hitler gave it to appeal to socialists, then he mixed it with anti-semitism, homophobia and racism to get... [B]TA DA! Votes, like all politicians.

[Severian]

It should also be pointed out: people who make this comparison are always using it to discredit socialism and/or communism.

Not to discredit fascism or Naziism, which are already plenty discredited.

So in using this argument, they're admitting that nobody really thinks the two are the same.

[Abood]

His teacher was correct, Hitler was a national socialist. His friend was the incorrect one.
i agree, especially that in another lesson, we studied how hitler wasn't really a socialist but only used it as propaganda. i gotta fix my frends brain, who ironically enough, claims that hes a commie :lol: a hitler supporter, homophobe commie... :lol:

[commiecrusader]

National Socialism believes in equality for one group of people, and the elimination of all other groups. It is a complete contradiction, essentially Racist-Fascism. He used the term Socialism to attract workers to vote for him, who were the key to achieving electoral support and victory.

[sovietsniper]

Originally posted by KickMcCa[email protected] 2 2006, 12:24 AM
the divisions of troops populated by eastern european slavs, arabs and a few indians.



These were only used as desprate measures in 44 and 45 when hitler was running out of sutible germans to fight for him. They were only half measures, one genral wanted to recruit a million man ukranian army to fight the soviets but hitler didnt like the idea on racial grounds.

[Goatse]

He used the name "National Socialist" so he would appeal to the leftists and rightists.

He wasn't a socialist at all.