Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Markle's Myth.......Hitler was a socialist......propaganda only needs the truth to be defeated

+4
Markle
Floridatexan
othershoe1030
2seaoat
8 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

2seaoat



http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/germanyandprussia/fl/Was-Adolf-Hitler-a-Socialist-Debunking-a-Historical-Myth.htm

Mr. Markle shines when he is taking a bit of the truth and distorting the same to try to create a new reality. So every time he paste and cuts his photo of hitler talking about socialism, you will understand as I have pointed out repeatedly that Hitler was not a socialist......and as historians have stated....he was the antithesis of socialism.

Guest


Guest

The opposite of collectivist crapola no matter what you call it is a capitalist free market and limited govt.

None of which applied to fascist govts.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

This is the last paragraph from the above article. I thought the part about the middle class being disoriented due to various upheavals to be quite parallel to the state of affairs we are experiencing today.

“As with other fascist ideologies and movements it subscribed to an ideology of national renewal, rebirth, and rejuvenation manifesting itself in extreme populist radical nationalism, militarism, and – in contradistinction to many other forms of fascism, extreme biological racism…the movement understood itself to be, and indeed was, a new form of political movement…the anti-Socialist, anti-liberal, and radical nationalist tenets of Nazi ideology applied particularly to the sentiments of a middle class disorientated by the domestic and international upheavals in the inter-war period.” (Neil Gregor, Nazism, Oxford, 2000 p 4-5.)

I think our current economic system in this country and perhaps globally would be accurately described, not as capitalism but as corporatism. It started out as capitalism but as any game of Monopoly will demonstrate, morphed into what we have today.

Guest


Guest

These are the prominent progressives and their quotes about fascism... you might even recognize the populist speak.

H. G. Wells, one of the most influential progressives of the 20th century, said in 1932 that progressives must become “liberal fascists” and “enlightened Nazis.” Regarding totalitarianism, he stated: “I have never been able to escape altogether from its relentless logic.” Calling for a “‘Phoenix Rebirth’ of Liberalism” under the umbrella of “Liberal Fascism,” Wells said: “I am asking for a Liberal Fascisti, for enlightened Nazis.”

The poet Wallace Stevens pronounced himself “pro-Mussolini personally.”

The eminent historian Charles Beard wrote of Mussolini’s efforts: “Beyond question, an amazing experiment is being made [in Italy], an experiment in reconciling individualism and socialism.”

Muckraking journalists almost universally admired Mussolini. Lincoln Steffens,for one, said that Italian fascism made Western democracy, by comparison, look like a system run by “petty persons with petty purposes.” Mussolini, Steffens proclaimed reverently, had been “formed” by God “out of the rib of Italy.”

McClure’s Magazine founder Samuel McClure, an important figure in the muckraking movement,described Italian fascism as “a great step forward and the first new ideal in government since the founding of the American Republic.”

After having vistited Italy and interviewed Mussolini in 1926, the American humorist Will Rogers, who was informally dubbed “Ambassador-at-Large of the United States” by the National Press Club, said of the fascist dictator: “I’m pretty high on that bird.” “Dictator form of government is the greatest form of government,” Rogers wrote, “that is, if you have the right dictator.”

Reporter Ida Tarbell was deeply impressed by Mussolini's attitudes regarding labor, affectionately dubbing him “a despot with a dimple.”

NAACP co-founder W. E. B. DuBois saw National Socialism as a worthy model for economic organization. The establishment of the Nazi dictatorship in Germany, he wrote, had been “absolutely necessary to get the state in order.” In 1937 DuBois stated: “there is today, in some respects, more democracy in Germany than there has been in years past.”

FDR adviser Rexford Guy Tugwell said of Italian fascism: “It's the cleanest,neatest,most efficiently operating piece of social machinery I've ever seen. It makes me envious.” In late 1934 he noted: “I find Italy doing many of the things which seem to me necessary.... Mussolini certainly has the same people opposed to him as FDR has.”

New Republic editor George Soule, who avidly supported FDR, noted approvingly that the Roosevelt administration was “trying out the economics of fascism.”

Playwright George Bernard Shaw hailed Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini as the world’s great “progressive” leaders because they “did things,” unlike the leaders of those “putrefying corpses” called parliamentary democracies.

The education reformer and socialist John Dewey spoke of the “social possibilities of war” and the “immense impetus to reorganization” that it afforded. He added,with an air of hopefulness,that the conflict might force Americans “to give up much of [their] economic freedom”; to abandon their “individualistic tradition” and “march in step”; and to recognize “the supremacy of public need over private possessions.”

The progressive financier George Perkins said the “great European war … is striking down individualism and building up collectivism.”

Grosvenor Clarkson,Chairman of the Federal Interdepartmental Defense Board, said the war effort “is a story of the conversion of a hundred million combatively individualistic people into a vast cooperative effort in which the good of the unit was sacrificed to the good of the whole.”

Mussolini in a 1921 speech: “Between us and the communists there are no political affinities but there are intellectual ones. Like you [communists], we consider necessary a centralized unitary state which imposes iron discipline and all persons, with this difference, that you reached this conclusion by way of the concept of class, and we by the way of the concept of nation.”

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions." Hitler 1927

I am impressed however when progressives can ignore history and quotes and instead resort to a conditioned revision.

Carry on comrades... ignore anything that doesn't fit your learned agenda. It truly requires a humanist faith.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/engl_258/lecture%20notes/capitalism%20etc%20defined.htm

Defining Capitalism, Communism, Fascism, Socialism

Caveat: There are some inherent pitfalls trying to offer simple, bite sized definitions of capitalism, socialism, communism and fascism – the first being that these are complex concepts concerning both economics and government, so short definitions will be incomplete; the second being that these concepts are not always mutually exclusive (most modern states combine elements of more than one); the third being that historical states defined the terms differently; and finally, some of the terms refer strictly to economic systems (capitalism) while others (fascism) also refer to government and economic systems (communism and fascism).

For a point of reference, the United States is a Constitutional Democratic Republic that has long embraced both capitalism (free markets) and socialism (public schools and universities, and public works – parks, roads and highways, sewer and water, dams, harbors, as well as social welfare, such as worker’s comp, unemployment insurance, social security etc.).

Capitalism
In common usage, the word capitalism means an economic system in which all or most of the means of production are privately owned and operated, and the investment of capital and the production, distribution and prices of commodities (goods and services) are determined mainly in a free market, rather than by the state. In capitalism, the means of production are generally operated for profit.

In a purely capitalist economy, there would be no public schools, no state owned or maintained roads and highways, public works, welfare, unemployment insurance, workers compensation, Social Security benefits etc.

Socialism
Most generally, socialism refers to state ownership of common property, or state ownership of the means of production. A purely socialist state would be one in which the state owns and operates the means of production. However, nearly all modern capitalist countries combine socialism and capitalism.

The University of Idaho, and any other public school or university, is a “socialist” institutions, and those who attend it or work for it are partaking in socialism, because it is owned and operated by the state of Idaho. The same is true of federal and state highways, federal and state parks, harbors etc.

Communism
Most generally, communism refers to community ownership of property, with the end goal being complete social equality via economic equality. Communism is generally seen by communist countries as an idealized utopian economic and social state that the country as a whole is working toward; that is to say that pure communism is the ideal that the People’s Republic of China is (was?) working toward. Such an ideal often justifies means (such as authoritarianism or totalitariansim) that are not themselves communist ideals.

Fundamentally, communism argues that all labor belongs to the individual laborer; no man can own another man's body, and therefore each man owns his own labor. In this model all "profit" actually belongs in part to the laborer, not, or not just, those who control the means of production, such as the business or factory owner. Profit that is not shared with the laborer, therefore, is considered inherently exploitive.

Fascism
The word descends from the Latin ‘fasces’, the bundle of sticks used by the Romans to symbolize their empire. This should clue you in that Fascism attempts to recapture both the glory and social organization of Rome.

Most generally, “a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.”

Unlike communism, fascism is opposed to state ownership of capital and economic equality is not a principle or goal. During the 1930s and WWII, communism and fascism represented the extreme left and right, respectively, in European politics. Hitler justified both Nazi anti-Semitism and dictatorship largely on the basis of his working to fight-off communism.

The church also played a major role in all of the European fascist countries (Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal) as the authority on religious and moral issues, which was opposed to the threat of "godless communists".

Mussolini, the Italian father of Fascism, writes that: “..Fascism [is] the complete opposite of…Marxian Socialism, the materialist conception of history of human civilization can be explained simply through the conflict of interests among the various social groups and by the change and development in the means and instruments of production.... Fascism, now and always, believes in holiness and in heroism; that is to say, in actions influenced by no economic motive, direct or indirect. And if the economic conception of history be denied, according to which theory men are no more than puppets, carried to and fro by the waves of chance, while the real directing forces are quite out of their control, it follows that the existence of an unchangeable and unchanging class-war is also denied - the natural progeny of the economic conception of history. And above all Fascism denies that class-war can be the preponderant force in the transformation of society....

After Socialism, Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society; it denies that numbers alone can govern by means of a periodical consultation, and it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage....”

A Note On Morality: Capitalism and socialism are essentially a-moral* terms: they simply refer to economic systems – who owns what and how capital is exchanged – regardless of any other type of moral principle or goal. Communism and fascism, on the other hand, refer to both economics, governance, and basic moral principles: that is to say they refer to overarching ideas about how people should live (rather than describing how people do business), so they imply a total ideology: a morality, an economy, a government.

* A-moral simply means neither moral or immoral. A rock is a-moral. Driving a car is usually a-moral. Killing someone with a rock is usually immoral. Driving drunk is immoral.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/germanyandprussia/fl/Was-Adolf-Hitler-a-Socialist-Debunking-a-Historical-Myth.htm

Mr. Markle shines when he is taking a bit of the truth and distorting the same to try to create a new reality.  So every time he paste and cuts his photo of hitler talking about socialism, you will understand as I have pointed out repeatedly that Hitler was not a socialist......and as historians have stated....he was the antithesis of socialism.


You're a hoot!

Markle's Myth.......Hitler was a socialist......propaganda only needs the truth to be defeated AnimatedLaughterPink

Certainly NOT my myth when I am quoting the words of Wordslinger's hero himself, Adolph Hitler. After all, for years Wordslinger has claimed the name Adolph Hitler gave to his personal train as his own personal signature. He is so PROUD!

Here, for the convenience of my good buddy Wordslinger is the quote from Herr Hitler himself. Decide for yourself.

Markle's Myth.......Hitler was a socialist......propaganda only needs the truth to be defeated AdolphHitlerandSocialist_zps33c21341

Keep up the good work!

2seaoat



So the East Germans calling themselves a Democratic republic, and the North Koreans calling themselves, and North Korea calling themselves the People's Republic make both democratic nations......Mr. Markle your logic is a hoot, please keep posting nonsense.....without it this place would get boring and people might mistakenly take you seriously.....Hitler a socialist.....now that is funny.

2seaoat





Yep, the president said he was not a crook.......its funny how people say things about themselves which are far from the truth......almost as funny as Mr. Markle thinking that the Nazis were socialist.....hilarious

Guest


Guest

Fascism certainly has more in common with socialism than it does a free republic/democracy where rubber meets road.

It's just a leftist tool to place fascism right on the political spectrum. Was hitler closer to stalin or benjamin franklin?

Results matter.

2seaoat




Bill said it....right Mr. Markle....so it must be true.

2seaoat



2seaoat



Fascism certainly has more in common with socialism than it does a free republic/democracy where rubber meets road.
I disagree completely. Again your political concepts are not scientific and are ad hoc. If you were saying communism, I would agree with you entirely. The jump to socialism is a convenient libertarian fib.....at least get the nomenclature correct.

Also, saying a frog has more in common with a snake than a rabbit says what exactly? It is a bridge to nowhere. If you are trying to frame political ideas and those who have platforms which will be considered democratic, fascist, communist, or socialist, please at least get the paradigm correct.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

PkrBum wrote:Fascism certainly has more in common with socialism than it does a free republic/democracy where rubber meets road.

It's just a leftist tool to place fascism right on the political spectrum. Was hitler closer to stalin or benjamin franklin?

Results matter.
 This is a standard view of the left/right systems and how most people place them on the continuum. I don't think it is a leftist plot to place fascism on the far right, that's where it is normally shown.

Markle's Myth.......Hitler was a socialist......propaganda only needs the truth to be defeated 752073921

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

Actually the best way to judge a form of human management is the level of government control

limits from Totalitarian to anarchy....

2seaoat



Othershoe has nailed the scientific nomenclature. The absurd oddities I have seen over the last ten years posted on the PNJ and here are creative, but bear no resemblance to the spectrum or understanding of their definitions.

Mr. Markle's attempt to bootstrap Hitler as a socialist is the most absurd fourth grade attempt to understand the nomenclature, that I begin to wonder if some folks even completed a high school civics course.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

2seaoat wrote:Othershoe has nailed the scientific nomenclature.  The absurd oddities I have seen over the last ten years posted on the PNJ and here are creative, but bear no resemblance to the spectrum or understanding of their definitions.

Mr. Markle's attempt to bootstrap Hitler as a socialist is the most absurd fourth grade attempt to understand the nomenclature, that I begin to wonder if some folks even completed a high school civics course.

We know that Markle makes a lot of stuff up, then has the audacity to declare it as fact....

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

KarlRove

KarlRove

Na·zi
ˈnätsē/
nounhistorical
1.
a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.
a member of an organization with ideology similar to Nazism.
derogatory
a person who holds and acts brutally in accordance with extreme racist or authoritarian views.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

KarlRove wrote:Na·zi
ˈnätsē/
nounhistorical
1.
a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.
a member of an organization with ideology similar to Nazism.
derogatory
a person who holds and acts brutally in accordance with extreme racist or authoritarian views.

Go back to page one of this thread and read entry #7 by SO which explains how merely having a descriptive word in a nation's name does not necessarily accurately define their functioning form of government. No matter what the Germans called themselves under Hitler they were a Fascist state.

Markle

Markle

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Othershoe has nailed the scientific nomenclature.  The absurd oddities I have seen over the last ten years posted on the PNJ and here are creative, but bear no resemblance to the spectrum or understanding of their definitions.

Mr. Markle's attempt to bootstrap Hitler as a socialist is the most absurd fourth grade attempt to understand the nomenclature, that I begin to wonder if some folks even completed a high school civics course.

We know that Markle makes a lot of stuff up, then has the audacity to declare it as fact....

No, you WANT to believe I make things up but you have never been able to prove what I post is not factual. In desperation, you launch a personal attack.

You are amusing.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Markle wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Othershoe has nailed the scientific nomenclature.  The absurd oddities I have seen over the last ten years posted on the PNJ and here are creative, but bear no resemblance to the spectrum or understanding of their definitions.

Mr. Markle's attempt to bootstrap Hitler as a socialist is the most absurd fourth grade attempt to understand the nomenclature, that I begin to wonder if some folks even completed a high school civics course.

We know that Markle makes a lot of stuff up, then has the audacity to declare it as fact....

No, you WANT to believe I make things up but you have never been able to prove what I post is not factual.  In desperation, you launch a personal attack.

You are amusing.

Ok it's time to back up your bullshit or run and hide: Hitler hated communism, so was he a socialist or a fascist? Was Nazi Germany under Hitler a fascist nation, or a socialist nation?

We're all ears.

Screw Amerika Inc.! Corporate control of our government through campaign financing.

2seaoat



He very well knows the answer to these questions because his father served this country and made a great sacrifice fighting the Nazis in the battle of the bulge. For Mr. Markle to play stupid that he does not understand what fascism was and that it had nothing to do with socialism or communism is a sad commentary on all those who sacrificed fighting fascism. To now compare the same to socialism is pretty low considering how many were sacrificed fighting this evil.

Guest


Guest

What other scale do you use to measure something large or extreme (govt authority) that slides right by zero (anarchy) and then ends at the complete other end of the spectrum and reads large and extreme (govt authority)? I can only think of polarity.

Just because you've learned something doesn't necessarily make it correct or particularly scientific. Think independently.

2seaoat



Just because you've learned something doesn't necessarily make it correct or particularly scientific.

In this case it is both correct and scientific. Othershoe has posted the correct nomenclature and scales. A freshman in a Political Science class would understand this. I have no use for ad hoc fantasy disguised as science, or the bastardization of standard terms. If a person insists on putting gravity and the concept of gravity where speed is the appropriate concept and descriptive term, it is not a question for debate......it is a threshold of knowledge which some simply do not possess, nor have they had the opportunity to read or be learned. Ignorance abounds and I want none of it.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:Just because you've learned something doesn't necessarily make it correct or particularly scientific.

In this case it is both correct and scientific. Othershoe has posted the correct nomenclature and scales. A freshman in a Political Science class would understand this. I have no use for ad hoc fantasy disguised as science, or the bastardization of standard terms. If a person insists on putting gravity and the concept of gravity where speed is the appropriate concept and descriptive term, it is not a question for debate......it is a threshold of knowledge which some simply do not possess, nor have they had the opportunity to read or be learned. Ignorance abounds and I want none of it.

Then think of something else that works in a similar scale... social, economic, mathematical, science...

Cmon... this should be easy... unless this nomenclature is flawed. Which I think it obviously is.

<--less--- more--> or vice versa. Gosh... that must sound like rocket psychiatry to y'all.

2seaoat



I do not even recognize a question.......so let me make this simple. Please look at the charts posted by othershoe. Do you understand the concepts she has posted? Do you disagree that therein lies the concepts and definitions? The rest is going on a snipe hunt which I learned long ago is silly.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum