Leftist Intellectuals Blamed For Holocausts Of 20th Century
ciceroii
and others,
but there is also the old adage that the "Pen is mightier than the
sword". What evil actions, two World Wars, atrocities,
destructionists carried out by
the above dictators were the effects, not the causes.
It was anti-liberal writers who prepared the ground.
Perhaps the first and foremost of these was Hegel whose
theories led to Marxism and German nationalism and aggression.
All of these writers, Sorel, Gentile, Spengler, were
invariably statist, collectivist,
utopian and anti-capitalist in their destructionism.
"Thus Hitler was not the founder of Nazism; he was
its product. He was like most of his
collaborators a sadistic gangster. He was uneducated
and ignorant; he had failed
even the lower grades of high school". (Von Mises)
"But for more than seventy years the German professors of political
science, history, law, geography and philosophy eagerly imbued their
disciples with a hysterical hatred of capitalism, and preached a war of
'liberation' against the liberal, capitalist West. The German
"socialists of the chair" , much admired in all foreign countries, were
the pacemakers of the two World Wars. At the turn of the century the
immense majority of Germans were already radical supporters of the
socialism and aggressive nationalism [of
Hegel and his intellectual followers]. What was lacking and was added
later was only a new term to signify their doctrine. [And that term was
of course National Socialism or Nazism]…There were nowhere more docile
disciples of Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin than the Nazis were". -Ludwig
von Mises, p.530
"Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis.
"It is not true that the masses are vehemently asking for socialism and
that there are no means to resist them. The masses favor socialism
because they trust the socialist propaganda of the intellectuals. The
intellectuals, not the populace, are molding public opinion…They
themselves have generated the socialist ideas and indoctrinated the
masses with them. No proletarian nor son of a proletarian has
contributed to the elaboration of the interventionist and socialist
programs. Their authors were all of bourgeois background. The esoteric
writings of dialectical materialism, of Hegel, the father both of
Marxism and of German aggressive nationalism, the books of George Sorel,
Gentile and of Spengler were not read by the average man; they did not
move the masses directly. It was the intellectuals who popularized
them".
"The intellectual leaders of the peoples have produced and popularized
the fallacies which are on the point of destroying liberty and Western
civilization. The intellectuals alone are responsible for the mass
slaughters which are the characteristic mark of our century. They alone
can reverse the trend and pave the way for a resurrection of
freedom".-Ludvig von Mises, "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological
Analysis", 1981 (reprinted).
Matt
fascism and for that matter Italian fascism were both right wing right
political ideologies.
ciceroii <cice...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B264E00...@home.com...
of course National Socialism or Nazism].There were nowhere more docile
disciples of Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin than the Nazis were". -Ludwig
von Mises, p.530
"Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis.
"It is not true that the masses are vehemently asking for socialism and
that there are no means to resist them. The masses favor socialism
because they trust the socialist propaganda of the intellectuals. The
intellectuals, not the populace, are molding public opinion.They
BERNARDZ
matvon@no says...
Surely Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Mengistu, Pol Pot and others, have
to take responsibility for their actions no matter whose idea it was.
RES
portray Hitler as a leftist, see prof Young's article at:
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm
RES
BVallely
>>>The political right is popularly associated with the following principles.
Of course, it goes without saying that these are generalizations, and not every
person on the far right believes in every principle, or disbelieves its
opposite. Most people's political beliefs are complex, and cannot be neatly
pigeonholed. This is as true of Hitler as anyone. But since the far right is
trying peg Hitler as a leftist, it's worth reviewing the tenets popularly
associated with the right. These include:
* Individualism over collectivism. >>>>
Yeah, right. Nazi's were all rugged individualists.
>>>>>* Racism or racial segregation over racial tolerance. >>>>>
Really? Did you know that the KKK was an arm of the Democratic party back when
it was a real force?
* Eugenics over freedom of reproduction. >>>>>
Abortions were legal under Hitler.
* Merit over equality. >>>>>>
Oh, my God!!! You mean Republicans judge people by what they do, rather than
the color of their skin? Shocking!!!
* Competition over cooperation. >>>>>>
Oh, dear. Competition is bad? The battle cry of the loser.
* Power politics and militarism over pacifism. >>>>>
Name me one "pacifism" nation in world history.
* Capitalism over Marxism. >>>>>>>
Bwah-ha-ha-ha. Hitler tolerated limited, heavily government control,
corporations. There is no doubt that he would have gone over to pure communism
when the war was over. Hitler was a control freak -- he had no other way of
doing things.
* Realism over idealism. >>>>>>
No, Hitler wasn't a realist.
* Nationalism over internationalism. >>>>
God, this is getting sorta of silly.
* Meat-eating over vegetarianism.>>>>
Hitler was a vegetarian.
* Gun ownership over gun control >>>>
Nope. Hitler believed strongly in gun control.
* Common sense over theory or science. >>>>
Gather round while I sing you of Vierner Von Brown.
A man who's allegiance,
Is ruled by expedience.
Call him a Nazi,
He won't even frown.
"Nazi, schmazi" sez Vierner Von Brown.
Some has harsh words for this man of renown.
But some think our attitude,
Should be one of gratitude.
Like the widows and orphans
Of old London town,
Who owe their large pensions
To Vierner Von Brown.
You too could be a big hero.
Once you've learned to count backwards to zero.
"In German, And English,
I know how to count down.
And I'm learning Chinese."
Sez Veiner Von Brown.
Tom Leher
The Germans had abandoned science? Geeze, what an idiot.
E. Barry Bruyea
>For an interesting and informative discussion of the right's attempt to
>portray Hitler as a leftist, see prof Young's article at:
>
>http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm
>
>RES
As a 'rightest' I only recognize Hitler's anti-capitalism, a trait he
shared with Stalin. I don't and never have viewed him as a socialist,
only as a totalitarian dictator, the same as Stalin. Basically, there
was little difference between them.
Greg
"RES" <resc...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B279BDF...@home.com...
> For an interesting and informative discussion of the right's attempt to
> portray Hitler as a leftist, see prof Young's article at:
>
> http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm
>
Prof Young's article completely misses the point that I and many others make
regarding left and right. It's just another stupid person who can't rid
their mind of this left/right dichotomy. Maybe there are some "rightists"
that try to portray Hitler as a "leftist", but I haven't come across this
arguement before. In any case they would be wrong. The prof's problem is
that he can't see that there is any other alternative to left or right. If
you're not left then you must be right. This is bullshit.
Hitler wasn't a "leftist". We all know Hitler was a "rightist". We know
there are differences between left and right and we even understand what
they are. However those of us with at least half our brain in working order
understand that Left politics and Right politics are both socialism, and
therefore couldn't care less about the differences that Prog Young spends a
whole article outlining.
Sorry to tell you this but Socialism comes in extreme left, extreme right or
any mixture of the two. If you want to argue among yourselves about left
and right you are wasting your time. It's like the Monty Python movie where
the People's Front of Judea are fighting the Judean People's Front. Left,
Right, whatever - it's all wrong and it's all evil.
I would like to say more about this so I will do so later. Right now I have
to go out. I might even reply direct to the prof?
GregB
RES
Greg wrote:
>
> "RES" <resc...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:3B279BDF...@home.com...
> > For an interesting and informative discussion of the right's attempt to
> > portray Hitler as a leftist, see prof Young's article at:
> >
> > http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm
> >
>
> Prof Young's article completely misses the point that I and many others make
> regarding left and right. It's just another stupid person who can't rid
> their mind of this left/right dichotomy. Maybe there are some "rightists"
> that try to portray Hitler as a "leftist", but I haven't come across this
> arguement before. In any case they would be wrong. The prof's problem is
> that he can't see that there is any other alternative to left or right. If
> you're not left then you must be right. This is bullshit.
>
> Hitler wasn't a "leftist". We all know Hitler was a "rightist". We know
> there are differences between left and right and we even understand what
> they are. However those of us with at least half our brain in working order
> understand that Left politics and Right politics are both socialism, and
> therefore couldn't care less about the differences that Prog Young spends a
> whole article outlining.
>
> Sorry to tell you this but Socialism comes in extreme left, extreme right or
> any mixture of the two.
Now you are playing the same 'simplification' game. Please explain as I
have not heard it explained in this way before. RES
If you want to argue among yourselves about left
> and right you are wasting your time. It's like the Monty Python movie where
> the People's Front of Judea are fighting the Judean People's Front. Left,
> Right, whatever - it's all wrong and it's all evil.
>
Socialism evil? Capitalism evil? Communism evil? Fascism evil? RES
David Collier-Brown
> Maybe there are some "rightists"
> that try to portray Hitler as a "leftist", but I haven't come across this
> arguement before.
Alas, it shows up in every-other post by Cicero/Iconoclast
who loves to post here.
--dave
--
David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify
Performance & Engineering Team | some people and astonish the rest.
Americas Customer Engineering | -- Mark Twain
(905) 415-2849 | dav...@canada.sun.com
ciceroii
Greg wrote:
>
> "RES" <resc...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:3B279BDF...@home.com...
> > For an interesting and informative discussion of the right's attempt to
> > portray Hitler as a leftist, see prof Young's article at:
> >
> > http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm
> >
>
> Prof Young's article completely misses the point that I and many others make
> regarding left and right. It's just another stupid person who can't rid
> their mind of this left/right dichotomy. Maybe there are some "rightists"
> that try to portray Hitler as a "leftist", but I haven't come across this
> arguement before. In any case they would be wrong. The prof's problem is
> that he can't see that there is any other alternative to left or right. If
> you're not left then you must be right. This is bullshit.
>
> Hitler wasn't a "leftist". We all know Hitler was a "rightist".
Who the fuck is "We all"? Certainly not Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek,
David Horowitz (who had been a Commie himself), Robert Conquest and
many others.
Hitler himself said he was a socialist:
"The party is all-embracing…There will be no licence, no free space, in
which the individual belongs to himself. This is Socialism-not such
trifles as private possesssions of the means of production. Of what
importance is that if I range men firmly within a discipline they cannot
escape? Let them own land or factories as much as they please. The
decisive factor is that the State, through the party, is supreme over
them, regardless whether they are owners or workers. All that, you see,
is unnecessary . Our Socialism goes far deeper.
The people about us are unaware of what is really happening to them.
They gaze fascinated at one or two familiar superficialities, such as
possessions and income and rank and other outworn conceptions. As long
as these are kept intact, they are quite satisfied. But in the meantime
they have entered a new relation, a powerful social force has caught
them up. They themselves are changed. That are ownership and income to
that? Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize
human beings.
--Adolf Hitler to Hermann Raushning explaining the essence of National
Socialism.
moniker
Hey, I've forgotten who said this.
Greg
Greg wrote:
>
> "RES" <resc...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:3B279BDF...@home.com...
> > For an interesting and informative discussion of the right's attempt to
> > portray Hitler as a leftist, see prof Young's article at:
> >
> > http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm
> >
>
> Prof Young's article completely misses the point that I and many others
make
> regarding left and right. It's just another stupid person who can't rid
> their mind of this left/right dichotomy. Maybe there are some "rightists"
> that try to portray Hitler as a "leftist", but I haven't come across this
> arguement before. In any case they would be wrong. The prof's problem is
> that he can't see that there is any other alternative to left or right.
If
> you're not left then you must be right. This is bullshit.
>
> Hitler wasn't a "leftist". We all know Hitler was a "rightist".
Who the fuck is "We all"? Certainly not Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek,
David Horowitz (who had been a Commie himself), Robert Conquest and
many others.
Hitler himself said he was a socialist:
(I snipped the whole Hitler quote)
For fuck sake. It's like talking to a brick wall. For starters did you
read my whole post. If you did I'm surprised you didn't immediately recount
what you have written above, and apologise. You're doing the exact thing
that my post was commenting on. You're words above indicate a fixation with
the idea that to be socialist means to be "left", and to be right is to be
something else - fascist? capitalist? free market? conservative? I don't
know what? It's never really said.
The whole point, and btw von Mises, Hayek and Horowitz all agree on this, is
that "left" (communism) and "right" (fascism) are BOTH socialism. That's
the fucking point! Get it? Sure Hitler said he was a socialist. Because
that's what he was. But he wasn't "left" (under the normally accepted
definition of the term "left"). He was a socialist of the fascist (right
wing) type. I can't put it any plainer than this.
So you see, if you're really a supporter of freedom and free market
capitalism (like von Mises and Hayek), then left or right doesn't make any
difference. It's a moot point. They're both fucked, and any arguments
between lefties and righties are a waste of time.
Read the rest of my previous post.
Greg B
moniker
Hey, I've forgotten who said this.
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Control: cancel <omKW6.18851$A45.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>
Newsgroups: can.politics.ctl
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsengine.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!babel!gts!t-fcn.net!nntp.zortron.com!news.uunet.ca!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.stealth.net!newspump.sol.net!news.alt.net!usenet
From: ne...@this.or.that.net
Subject: cmsg cancel <omKW6.18851$A45.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com> ignore
Message-ID: <cancel.omKW6.18851$A45.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>
Sender: ne...@this.or.that.net
Organization: Morph
X-No-Archive: yes
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 15:09:14 GMT
Approved: You bet
Lines: 2
ciceroii
Greg wrote:
>
> "RES" <resc...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:3B279BDF...@home.com...
> > For an interesting and informative discussion of the right's attempt to
> > portray Hitler as a leftist, see prof Young's article at:
> >
> > http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm
> >
>
> Prof Young's article completely misses the point that I and many others make
> regarding left and right. It's just another stupid person who can't rid
> their mind of this left/right dichotomy. Maybe there are some "rightists"
> that try to portray Hitler as a "leftist", but I haven't come across this
> arguement before. In any case they would be wrong. The prof's problem is
> that he can't see that there is any other alternative to left or right. If
> you're not left then you must be right. This is bullshit.
>
> Hitler wasn't a "leftist". We all know Hitler was a "rightist".
Who the fuck is "We all"? Certainly not Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek,
David Horowitz (who had been a Commie himself), Robert Conquest and
many others.
Hitler himself said he was a socialist:
"The party is all-embracing…There will be no licence, no free space, in
which the individual belongs to himself. This is Socialism-not such
trifles as private possesssions of the means of production. Of what
importance is that if I range men firmly within a discipline they cannot
escape? Let them own land or factories as much as they please. The
decisive factor is that the State, through the party, is supreme over
them, regardless whether they are owners or workers. All that, you see,
is unnecessary . Our Socialism goes far deeper.
The people about us are unaware of what is really happening to them.
They gaze fascinated at one or two familiar superficialities, such as
possessions and income and rank and other outworn conceptions. As long
as these are kept intact, they are quite satisfied. But in the meantime
they have entered a new relation, a powerful social force has caught
them up. They themselves are changed. That are ownership and income to
that? Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize
human beings.
--Adolf Hitler to Hermann Raushning explaining the essence of National
Socialism.
We know
WAS CANCELLED BY :
Control: cancel <3B2B6109...@home.com>
Newsgroups: can.politics.ctl
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newspump.sol.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!babel!gts!t-fcn.net!nntp.zortron.com!news.uunet.ca!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.stealth.net!newspump.sol.net!news.alt.net!usenet
From: ne...@this.or.that.net
Subject: cmsg cancel <3B2B6109...@home.com> ignore
Message-ID: <cancel.3B2B6...@home.com>
Sender: ne...@this.or.that.net
Organization: Morph
X-No-Archive: yes
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 14:09:23 GMT
Greg
Greg wrote:
>
> "RES" <resc...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:3B279BDF...@home.com...
> > For an interesting and informative discussion of the right's attempt to
> > portray Hitler as a leftist, see prof Young's article at:
> >
> > http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm
> >
>
> Prof Young's article completely misses the point that I and many others
make
> regarding left and right. It's just another stupid person who can't rid
> their mind of this left/right dichotomy. Maybe there are some "rightists"
> that try to portray Hitler as a "leftist", but I haven't come across this
> arguement before. In any case they would be wrong. The prof's problem is
> that he can't see that there is any other alternative to left or right.
If
> you're not left then you must be right. This is bullshit.
>
> Hitler wasn't a "leftist". We all know Hitler was a "rightist".
Who the fuck is "We all"? Certainly not Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek,
David Horowitz (who had been a Commie himself), Robert Conquest and
many others.
Hitler himself said he was a socialist:
(I snipped the whole Hitler quote)
For fuck sake. It's like talking to a brick wall. For starters did you
read my whole post. If you did I'm surprised you didn't immediately recount
what you have written above, and apologise. You're doing the exact thing
that my post was commenting on. You're words above indicate a fixation with
the idea that to be socialist means to be "left", and to be right is to be
something else - fascist? capitalist? free market? conservative? I don't
know what? It's never really said.
The whole point, and btw von Mises, Hayek and Horowitz all agree on this, is
that "left" (communism) and "right" (fascism) are BOTH socialism. That's
the fucking point! Get it? Sure Hitler said he was a socialist. Because
that's what he was. But he wasn't "left" (under the normally accepted
definition of the term "left"). He was a socialist of the fascist (right
wing) type. I can't put it any plainer than this.
So you see, if you're really a supporter of freedom and free market
capitalism (like von Mises and Hayek), then left or right doesn't make any
difference. It's a moot point. They're both fucked, and any arguments
between lefties and righties are a waste of time.
Read the rest of my previous post.
Greg B
We know
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Control: cancel <HBKW6.615$bl....@news.syd.ip.net.au>
Newsgroups: can.politics.ctl
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsengine.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!babel!gts!t-fcn.net!nntp.zortron.com!news.uunet.ca!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.stealth.net!newspump.sol.net!news.alt.net!usenet
From: ne...@this.or.that.net
Subject: cmsg cancel <HBKW6.615$bl....@news.syd.ip.net.au> ignore
Message-ID: <cancel.HBKW6.615$bl....@news.syd.ip.net.au>
Sender: ne...@this.or.that.net
Organization: Morph
X-No-Archive: yes
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 15:24:17 GMT
Humble Wisdom
I'm guessing someone not too bright.
"moniker" <mon...@false.address> wrote in message
news:omKW6.18851$A45.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
Aaron Hirshberg
The person who said it is a complete ass. Because, Milton Friedman
and Joseph Schumpeter are/were intellectuals. And they are
conservatives.
Aaron Hirshberg
E. Barry Bruyea
wrote:
>
>Hey, I've forgotten who said this.
Just something else Hitler & Lenin/Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot had in common.
>
>
lawrence day
America doesn't care at all about "intellectuals",
neither conservative nor liberal.
They're 'down-to-earth'.
Noam Chomsky, Ralph Nader, Gore Vidal, etc.
that brainy crew is far more likely
to be quoted in Euro newspapers
than Yank ones.
--Lawrence Day
ant
"Humble Wisdom" <A9...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:QbNW6.70080$QE4.7...@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
> I'm guessing someone not too bright.
>
its very likely that its cicero under one of its many nom de plumes, the
newsgroups its posted to and the subject line<his assertions that hitler was
a leftist were recently trashed in another of his threads> just the poor
fool having a temper tantrum.
ant
You've got MALE.. sex organs!
mentality. They sure as hell AREN'T Evil Liberals, or "leftists"
as you insist. Today's skinheads and white supramecists are big
Rush Limbaugh fans.
You really need to face up to the fact that the right wing extremos
are very close to today's Nazis..
I'm sure it hurts, but you need to realize what a sorry group of people
the Noble Republican Party has become nowadays.
J.Hunter
> For fuck sake. It's like talking to a brick wall. For starters did you
> read my whole post. If you did I'm surprised you didn't immediately
recount
> what you have written above, and apologise. You're doing the exact thing
> that my post was commenting on. You're words above indicate a fixation
with
> the idea that to be socialist means to be "left", and to be right is to be
> something else - fascist? capitalist? free market? conservative? I don't
> know what? It's never really said.
>
> The whole point, and btw von Mises, Hayek and Horowitz all agree on this,
is
> that "left" (communism) and "right" (fascism) are BOTH socialism. That's
> the fucking point! Get it? Sure Hitler said he was a socialist. Because
> that's what he was. But he wasn't "left" (under the normally accepted
> definition of the term "left"). He was a socialist of the fascist (right
> wing) type. I can't put it any plainer than this.
>
> So you see, if you're really a supporter of freedom and free market
> capitalism (like von Mises and Hayek), then left or right doesn't make any
> difference. It's a moot point. They're both fucked, and any arguments
> between lefties and righties are a waste of time.
>
> Read the rest of my previous post.
>
> Greg B
That is so right. Right on. The thing is, that even though Hayek is
described as right wing and ultra right wing, and conservative and all that
shit, IHMO, he is in the exact middle, and the rest is meaningless
name-calling. Those who say, that people are and should be free to do what
they want so long as they are not hurting others, place themselves in the
middle of the two camps of left and right wing. The characteristic of both
the 'wings', conservative tending to fascist on the right wing, and
socialist tending to totalitarian on the left wing, is that each of them
believes that society aka the state, has the right to override the
individual human right to do what you want, so long as *they* arbitrarily
*think* it's in the interest of society aka the state. Whether the value
arbitrarily chosen as justifying the impost, is crusty old imperial
conservatism, or trendy morally superior politically correct egregious
dickheadery, is all one to the poor bastard who's gotta put up with it!
You've got MALE.. sex organs!
Chris
Aaron Hirshberg wrote in message
<3aa3320d.01061...@posting.google.com>...
I think someone got frustrated with not being able to read their eviction
notices.
Chris
>Aaron Hirshberg
John Leonard
century. Meaning that we now take for granted many of the ideas that they
first proposed.
Humble Wisdom <A9...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:QbNW6.70080$QE4.7...@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
lawrence day
> You fucking idiot. Check out the people who inherited the Nazi
> mentality. They sure as hell AREN'T Evil Liberals, or "leftists"
> as you insist. Today's skinheads and white supramecists are big
> Rush Limbaugh fans.
>
> You really need to face up to the fact that the right wing extremos
> are very close to today's Nazis..
>
> I'm sure it hurts, but you need to realize what a sorry group of people
> the Noble Republican Party has become nowadays.
If Teddy Roosevelt were still around
he'd sure smack that gopher.
Anyway, from Prof. Young's article regarding
Hitler's anti-intellectualism/prostupidity:
"..Hitler was notorious for his anti-intellectualism:
"The youthful brain should in general not be burdened with things
ninety-five percent of which it cannot use and hence
forgets again… In many cases, the material to be learned
in the various subjects is so swollen that only a fraction of it
remains in the head of the individual pupil,
and only a fraction of this abundance can find application,
while on the other
hand it is not adequate for the man working
and earning his living in a definite field." (48)
"Knowledge above the average can be crammed
into the average man, but it remains dead,
and in the last analysis sterile
knowledge.
The result is a man who may be a living dictionary
but nevertheless falls down miserably in all special
situations and decisive moments in life." (49)
"The folkish state must not adjust its entire educational work
primarily to the inoculation of mere knowledge,
but to the breeding of absolutely healthy bodies.
The training of mental abilities is only secondary.
And here again, first place must
be taken by the development of character,
especially the promotion of will-power and determination,
combined with the training of joy in responsibility,
and only in last place comes scientific schooling." (50)
"A people of scholars, if they are physically degenerate,
weak-willed and cowardly pacifists, will not storm the heavens,
indeed, they will not be able to safeguard
their existence on this earth." (51)
It is worth noting that after conquering Poland the
first to be exterminated, even before gays, haemophiliacs and Jews,
were the university professors
thus to stupidify the Poles into mute serfism.
Ironically Mr. Lambourne/Iconoclast/Ciceroi/etcetc
seems to share this anti-intellectualism of the
skinheadsHitlerPolPotStalinRushLimbaughprostupidity movement.
Lawrence Day
David Collier-Brown
> Who the fuck is "We all"? Certainly not Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek,
> David Horowitz (who had been a Commie himself), Robert Conquest and
> many others.
Cicero **REALLY REALLY** wants fascists to be leftists.
He argues that Mr. Hitler did too...
However, no matter what Hitler says, he did not make workers
own and control of the means of production. Therefor
he does not meet the (original, unchanged) definition:
so·cial·ism (ssh-lzm) n.
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in
which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned
collectively or by a centralized government that often plans
and controls the economy.
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=socialism
QED.
Ned Latham
> ciceroii wrote:
> > Who the fuck is "We all"? Certainly not Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek,
> > David Horowitz (who had been a Commie himself), Robert Conquest and
> > many others.
>
> Cicero **REALLY REALLY** wants fascists to be leftists.
> He argues that Mr. Hitler did too...
>
> However, no matter what Hitler says, he did not make workers
> own and control of the means of production. Therefor
> he does not meet the (original, unchanged) definition:
>
> so·cial·ism (ssh-lzm) n.
> 1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in
> which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned
> collectively or by a centralized government that often plans
> and controls the economy.
> http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=socialism
>
> QED.
Wrong. Government != workers.
Ned
--
To reply, cut out my nose * Democracy means "the people rule". *
and make the met a net. * Fight for the power of assent. *
John Leonard
century. Meaning that we now take for granted many of the ideas that they
first proposed.
Humble Wisdom <A9...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:QbNW6.70080$QE4.7...@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Control: cancel <TCWW6.711$Cw3.2...@news.intnet.net>
Newsgroups: can.politics.ctl
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsengine.sol.net!206.55.64.81.MISMATCH!newsfeeds.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!babel!gts!t-fcn.net!nntp.zortron.com!news.uunet.ca!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.stealth.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newspump.sol.net!news.alt.net!usenet
From: ne...@this.or.that.net
Subject: cmsg cancel <TCWW6.711$Cw3.2...@news.intnet.net> ignore
Message-ID: <cancel.TCWW6.711$Cw3.2...@news.intnet.net>
Sender: ne...@this.or.that.net
Organization: Morph
X-No-Archive: yes
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 05:09:20 GMT
lawrence day
> mentality. They sure as hell AREN'T Evil Liberals, or "leftists"
> as you insist. Today's skinheads and white supramecists are big
> Rush Limbaugh fans.
>
> You really need to face up to the fact that the right wing extremos
> are very close to today's Nazis..
>
> I'm sure it hurts, but you need to realize what a sorry group of people
> the Noble Republican Party has become nowadays.
If Teddy Roosevelt were still around
Lawrence Day
>
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Control: cancel <cf87c73f.01061...@posting.google.com>
Newsgroups: can.politics.ctl
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsengine.sol.net!206.55.64.81.MISMATCH!newsfeeds.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!babel!gts!t-fcn.net!nntp.zortron.com!news.uunet.ca!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.stealth.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newspump.sol.net!news.alt.net!usenet
From: ne...@this.or.that.net
Subject: cmsg cancel <cf87c73f.01061...@posting.google.com> ignore
Message-ID: <cancel.cf87c73f.0...@posting.google.com>
Sender: ne...@this.or.that.net
Organization: Morph
X-No-Archive: yes
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 13:23:53 GMT
David Collier-Brown
> Who the fuck is "We all"? Certainly not Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek,
> David Horowitz (who had been a Commie himself), Robert Conquest and
> many others.
Cicero **REALLY REALLY** wants fascists to be leftists.
He argues that Mr. Hitler did too...
However, no matter what Hitler says, he did not make workers
own and control of the means of production. Therefor
he does not meet the (original, unchanged) definition:
so·cial·ism (ssh-lzm) n.
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in
which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned
collectively or by a centralized government that often plans
and controls the economy.
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=socialism
QED.
--dave
--
David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify
Performance & Engineering Team | some people and astonish the rest.
Americas Customer Engineering | -- Mark Twain
(905) 415-2849 | dav...@canada.sun.com
WAS CANCELLED BY :
Control: cancel <3B2E30C8...@canada.sun.com>
Newsgroups: can.politics.ctl
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newspump.sol.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!babel!gts!t-fcn.net!nntp.zortron.com!news.uunet.ca!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.stealth.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newspump.sol.net!news.alt.net!usenet
From: ne...@this.or.that.net
Subject: cmsg cancel <3B2E30C8...@canada.sun.com> ignore
Message-ID: <cancel.3B2E3...@canada.sun.com>
Sender: ne...@this.or.that.net
Organization: Morph
X-No-Archive: yes
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 21:53:55 GMT
Ned Latham
> > Who the fuck is "We all"? Certainly not Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek,
> > David Horowitz (who had been a Commie himself), Robert Conquest and
> > many others.
>
> Cicero **REALLY REALLY** wants fascists to be leftists.
> He argues that Mr. Hitler did too...
>
> However, no matter what Hitler says, he did not make workers
> own and control of the means of production. Therefor
> he does not meet the (original, unchanged) definition:
>
> so·cial·ism (ssh-lzm) n.
> 1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in
> which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned
> collectively or by a centralized government that often plans
> and controls the economy.
> http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=socialism
>
> QED.
Wrong. Government != workers.
Ned
--
To reply, cut out my nose * Democracy means "the people rule". *
and make the met a net. * Fight for the power of assent. *
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Control: cancel <slrn9isf08....@arthur.valhalla.net.au>
Newsgroups: can.politics.ctl
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newspump.sol.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!babel!gts!t-fcn.net!nntp.zortron.com!news.uunet.ca!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.stealth.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newspump.sol.net!news.alt.net!usenet
From: ne...@this.or.that.net
Subject: cmsg cancel <slrn9isf08....@arthur.valhalla.net.au> ignore
Message-ID: <cancel.slrn9is...@arthur.valhalla.net.au>
Sender: ne...@this.or.that.net
Organization: Morph
X-No-Archive: yes
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 21:54:05 GMT
ciceroii
lawrence day wrote:
>
> "You've got MALE.. sex organs!" <cool...@luke.com> wrote in message news:<3B2BF649...@luke.com>...
> > You fucking idiot. Check out the people who inherited the Nazi
> > mentality. They sure as hell AREN'T Evil Liberals, or "leftists"
> > as you insist. Today's skinheads and white supramecists are big
> > Rush Limbaugh fans.
> >
> >Rest of incoherent rant has been deleted.
If you believe that ant-capitalist leftist intellectuals were not to
blame for Nazism you have
to deal with quotations like the following from people who were there at
the time:
In his great book "The Road to Serfdom" (1944) F.A. Hayek has devoted an
entire chapter to discussing "The Socialist Roots of Nazism".
Hayek points out that Hitler hated Jews in both Austria and Germany
because like many socialist perceived them as capitalists. "In Germany
and Austria the Jew had come to be regarded as the representative of
capitalism because a traditional dislike of large classes of the
population for commercial pursuits had left these more readily
accessible to a group that was practically excluded from the more highly
esteemed occupation. …The fact that German anti-capitalism spring from
the same root is of great importance for the understanding of what has
happened there, but this is rarely grasped by foreign observers.
(p. 155 , "The Road to Serfdom".
Marx and Engels were supposed to have been intellectuals, right?
Here's more:
The doctrines of National Socialism are the culmination of a long
evolution of thought, a process in which [collectivist] thinkers who
have had a great influence far beyond the confines of Germany have taken
part.
Though in this development German thinkers have taken the lead, they
were by no means alone. Thomas Carlyle, George Sorel, Houston Stewart
Chamberlain, August Comte, George Sorel , are as much a part of that
continuous development as any Germans.
It was not the defeat of WW I, the suffering in the hyper-inflation and
depression or a wave of nationalism that led to the success of Nazism in
Germany. Still less was the cause, as so many people still believe, a
capitalist reaction to the advance of Bolshevism. On the contrary, the
support which brought these ideas to power came precisely from the
socialist camp. It was the union of anti-capitalist forces that drove
out of Germany everything that was liberal.
"From 1914 onward there arose from the ranks of the Marxist socialism
one teacher after another that led, not the conservatives and
reactionaries, but the hard-working laborer and idealist into the
National Socialist fold.
So there you are. Let see you try to refute the above.
ciceroii
lawrence day wrote:
>
> "You've got MALE.. sex organs!" <cool...@luke.com> wrote in message news:<3B2BF649...@luke.com>...
> > You fucking idiot. Check out the people who inherited the Nazi
> > mentality. They sure as hell AREN'T Evil Liberals, or "leftists"
> > as you insist. Today's skinheads and white supramecists are big
> > Rush Limbaugh fans.
> >
Here's more:
WAS CANCELLED BY :
Control: cancel <3B38C9B1...@sympatico.ca>
Newsgroups: can.politics.ctl
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsengine.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!babel!gts!t-fcn.net!nntp.zortron.com!news.uunet.ca!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.stealth.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newspump.sol.net!news.alt.net!usenet
From: ne...@this.or.that.net
Subject: cmsg cancel <3B38C9B1...@sympatico.ca> ignore
Message-ID: <cancel.3B38C...@sympatico.ca>
Sender: ne...@this.or.that.net
Organization: Morph
X-No-Archive: yes
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 20:24:05 GMT
Dave The Impaler
> lawrence day wrote:
> >
>
> > "You've got MALE.. sex organs!" <cool...@luke.com> wrote in message ne
> ws:<3B2BF649...@luke.com>...
> > > You fucking idiot. Check out the people who inherited the Nazi
> > > mentality. They sure as hell AREN'T Evil Liberals, or "leftists"
> > > as you insist. Today's skinheads and white supramecists are big
> > > Rush Limbaugh fans.
> > >
> > >Rest of incoherent rant has been deleted.
>
> If you believe that ant-capitalist leftist intellectuals were not to
> blame for Nazism you have
>
> to deal with quotations like the following from people who were there at
> the time:
>
> In his great book "The Road to Serfdom" (1944) F.A. Hayek has devoted an
> entire chapter to discussing "The Socialist Roots of Nazism".
Hmm. Hayek is such a far sighted person. He only sees in Black and
white unlike most other people.
>
>
> Hayek points out that Hitler hated Jews in both Austria and Germany
> because like many socialist perceived them as capitalists. "In Germany
> and Austria the Jew had come to be regarded as the representative of
> capitalism because a traditional dislike of large classes of the
> population for commercial pursuits had left these more readily
> accessible to a group that was practically excluded from the more highly
> esteemed occupation. …The fact that German anti-capitalism spring from
> the same root is of great importance for the understanding of what has
> happened there, but this is rarely grasped by foreign observers.
> (p. 155 , "The Road to Serfdom".
>
>
> Marx and Engels were supposed to have been intellectuals, right?
Never mind that he also identified Jews with socialism. IE: Trotsky,
Zinoviev, Marx, Engels and the whole communist leadership in the
Bavarian Workers Republic of 1918-19.
>
> Here's more:
>
> The doctrines of National Socialism are the culmination of a long
> evolution of thought, a process in which [collectivist] thinkers who
> have had a great influence far beyond the confines of Germany have taken
> part.
You mean segregationists. They are only remotely collectivist in their
attitude towards their nation.
>
>
> It was not the defeat of WW I, the suffering in the hyper-inflation and
> depression or a wave of nationalism that led to the success of Nazism in
> Germany. Still less was the cause, as so many people still believe, a
> capitalist reaction to the advance of Bolshevism. On the contrary, the
> support which brought these ideas to power came precisely from the
> socialist camp. It was the union of anti-capitalist forces that drove
> out of Germany everything that was liberal.
>
>
> "From 1914 onward there arose from the ranks of the Marxist socialism
> one teacher after another that led, not the conservatives and
> reactionaries, but the hard-working laborer and idealist into the
> National Socialist fold.
>
Never mind that Nazism had mainly a middle class base until the 1930s
>
> So there you are. Let see you try to refute the above.
The socialist camp must have doubled since the 1930 depression. The
SPD and KPd maintained their votes, while the Liberals were reduced to
virtually nothing and Nazism rose in votes. I doubt that most of nazi
support came from the "socialist camp".
Come on Iconoclast, come up with a refutation of those arguments.
DAVE
Dave The Impaler
> >
>
> > "You've got MALE.. sex organs!" <cool...@luke.com> wrote in message ne
> ws:<3B2BF649...@luke.com>...
> > > You fucking idiot. Check out the people who inherited the Nazi
> > > mentality. They sure as hell AREN'T Evil Liberals, or "leftists"
> > > as you insist. Today's skinheads and white supramecists are big
> > > Rush Limbaugh fans.
> > >
> > >Rest of incoherent rant has been deleted.
>
> If you believe that ant-capitalist leftist intellectuals were not to
> blame for Nazism you have
>
> to deal with quotations like the following from people who were there at
> the time:
>
> In his great book "The Road to Serfdom" (1944) F.A. Hayek has devoted an
> entire chapter to discussing "The Socialist Roots of Nazism".
Hmm. Hayek is such a far sighted person. He only sees in Black and
white unlike most other people.
>
>
> Hayek points out that Hitler hated Jews in both Austria and Germany
> because like many socialist perceived them as capitalists. "In Germany
> and Austria the Jew had come to be regarded as the representative of
> capitalism because a traditional dislike of large classes of the
> population for commercial pursuits had left these more readily
> accessible to a group that was practically excluded from the more highly
> esteemed occupation. …The fact that German anti-capitalism spring from
> the same root is of great importance for the understanding of what has
> happened there, but this is rarely grasped by foreign observers.
> (p. 155 , "The Road to Serfdom".
>
>
> Marx and Engels were supposed to have been intellectuals, right?
Never mind that he also identified Jews with socialism. IE: Trotsky,
Zinoviev, Marx, Engels and the whole communist leadership in the
Bavarian Workers Republic of 1918-19.
>
> Here's more:
>
> The doctrines of National Socialism are the culmination of a long
> evolution of thought, a process in which [collectivist] thinkers who
> have had a great influence far beyond the confines of Germany have taken
> part.
You mean segregationists. They are only remotely collectivist in their
attitude towards their nation.
>
>
> It was not the defeat of WW I, the suffering in the hyper-inflation and
> depression or a wave of nationalism that led to the success of Nazism in
> Germany. Still less was the cause, as so many people still believe, a
> capitalist reaction to the advance of Bolshevism. On the contrary, the
> support which brought these ideas to power came precisely from the
> socialist camp. It was the union of anti-capitalist forces that drove
> out of Germany everything that was liberal.
>
>
> "From 1914 onward there arose from the ranks of the Marxist socialism
> one teacher after another that led, not the conservatives and
> reactionaries, but the hard-working laborer and idealist into the
> National Socialist fold.
>
Never mind that Nazism had mainly a middle class base until the 1930s
>
> So there you are. Let see you try to refute the above.
The socialist camp must have doubled since the 1930 depression. The
SPD and KPd maintained their votes, while the Liberals were reduced to
virtually nothing and Nazism rose in votes. I doubt that most of nazi
support came from the "socialist camp".
Come on Iconoclast, come up with a refutation of those arguments.
DAVE
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Control: cancel <9be05ff8.01062...@posting.google.com>
Newsgroups: can.politics.ctl
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newspump.sol.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!babel!gts!t-fcn.net!nntp.zortron.com!news.uunet.ca!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.stealth.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.sol.net!news.alt.net!usenet
From: ne...@this.or.that.net
Subject: cmsg cancel <9be05ff8.01062...@posting.google.com> ignore
Message-ID: <cancel.9be05ff8.0...@posting.google.com>
Sender: ne...@this.or.that.net
Organization: Morph
X-No-Archive: yes
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 23:53:44 GMT
Dave The Impaler
DAVE
davem...@my-Deja.com (Dave The Impaler) wrote in message news:<9$-_-$-_--$_$$%%$$@news.noc.cabal.int>...