Re: Hitler Was A Global Warming Denier
None4U
"Rocco" <rp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9CE3E7DBE1...@194.177.98.144...
> Looks like right wingers are once again in good company with Hitler.
>
>
>
> Fascism, Nazism and Conservatism
>
> European fascism drew on existing anti-modernist conservatism, and on the
> conservative reaction to communism and 19th-century socialism.
> Conservative thinkers such as historian Oswald Spengler provided much of
> the world view (Weltanschauung) of the Nazi movement.
>
> In Britain, the conservative Daily Mail enthusiastically backed Sir Oswald
> Mosley's British Union of Fascists, and part of the Conservative Party
> supported closer ties with Nazi Germany. When defeat in World War II
> ideologically and historically discredited fascism, almost all Western
> conservatives tried to distance themselves from it. Nevertheless, many
> post-war Western conservatives continued to admire the Franco regime in
> Spain, clearly conservative but also fascist in origin. With the end of
> the Franco regime and Portugal's Estado Novo in the 1970s, the
> relationship between conservatism and classical European fascism was
> further weakened.
>
> Militarism is perhaps the most striking similarity between Fascism and
> contemporary American conservatism. Of course, there are many liberals in
> America who support the military and even call for increased military
> spending.
>
> Even so, American liberals are traditionally more skeptical of the
> military than American conservatives. It is often said that
> Neoconservatives, like Hitler, see the military as a paradigm for problem
> solving (even in situations that may render militarism impractical or
> unethical).
>
> The relationship of fascism to right-wing ideologies (including some that
> are described as neo-fascist) is still an issue for conservatives and
> their opponents. Especially in Germany, there is a constant exchange of
> ideology and persons, between the influential national-conservative
> movement, and self-identified national-socialist groups. In Italy too,
> there is no clear line between conservatives, and movements inspired by
> the Italian Fascism of the 1920s to 1940s, including the Alleanza
> Nazionale which is member of the governing coalition under premier Silvio
> Berlusconi. Conservative attitudes to the 20th-century fascist regimes are
> still an issue. Under an ideological definition of Socialism, for example
> one stating that only a system adhering to the principles of Marxism can
> qualify as socialist there is a well-defined gap between Nazism and
> socialism. Nazi leaders were opposed to the Marxist idea of class conflict
> and opposed the idea that capitalism should be abolished and that workers
> should control the means of production. For those who consider class
> conflict and the abolition of capitalism as essential components of
> socialism, these factors alone are sufficient to categorize "National
> Socialism" as non-socialist.
>
> ===
>
> For socialists who consider democracy a core tenet of socialism, Nazism is
> often seen as a polar opposite of their views. Primo Levi argued that
> there was an important distinction between the policies of Nazi Germany
> and those of the Soviet Union or the People's Republic of China: while
> they were all arguably totalitarian, and all had their idea of what kind
> of parasitic classes or races society ought to be rid of, Levi saw the
> Nazis assigning a place given by birth (since one is born into a certain
> race), while the Soviets and Chinese determined their enemies according to
> their social position (which people may change within their life). There
> are many other philosophical differences between Nazism and Marxism. There
> were ideological shades of opinion within the Nazi Party, particularly
> before their seizure of power in 1933, but a central tenet of the party
> was always the leader principle or F�hrerprinzip. The Nazi Party did not
> have party congresses in which policy was deliberated upon and concessions
> made to different factions. What mattered most was what the leader, Adolf
> Hitler, thought and decreed. Those who held opinions which were at
> variance with Hitler's either learned to keep quiet or were purged,
> particularly after 1933. This is compared to the behavior of certain
> Communist states such as that of Stalin in the Soviet Union or Mao Zedong
> in China. Critics of this view point out that Mussolini imprisoned Antonio
> Gramsci from 1926 until 1934, after Gramsci, a leader of the Italian
> Communist Party and leading Marxist intellectual, tried to create a common
> front among the political left and the workers, in order to resist and
> overthrow fascism. Other Italian Communist leaders like Palmiro Togliatti
> went into exile and fought for the Republic in Spain.
>
> -------------------------
> The 2000 book, Right-Wing Populism in America, details its history from
> Bacon's Rebellion to the Ku Klux Klan to the modern-day Posse Comitatus
> and militia/Patriot movements. What distinguishes these populists from
> their left-wing counterparts, as Berlet explains, is that "they combine
> attacks on socially oppressed groups with grassroots mass mobilization and
> distorted forms of antielitism based on scapegoating." Other notorious
> right wing figures in 20th century history include Father Charles
> Coughlin, the rabid anti-Semitic radio talker of the 1930s, and Sen. Joe
> McCarthy.
>
> Beyond the Klan, there were the Silver Shirts, the American Nazi Party,
> the Posse Comitatus, the Aryan Nations, or the National Alliance -- all of
> them openly right wing fascist organizations, many of them involved in
> some of the nation's most horrific historical events. (The Oklahoma City
> bombing, for instance), then there was William Dudley Pelley, Gerald
> L.K.Smith, George Lincoln Rockwell, William Potter Gale, Richard Butler,
> and David Duke -- all of them bona fide right wing racists and fascists.
>
>
> "the Left" were the people who were beaten and murdered in the 1920s by
> the squadristi and the Brownshirts; and the first Germans sent off to Nazi
> concentration camps like Dachau were not Jews but socialists, communists,
> and other left-wing political prisoners, including "liberal" priests and
> clerics.
>
> Then why did the Nazis HATE Marxism, Communism, and Socialism?
> Just how uneducated do you Conservative propagandists
> assume we are? Everybody knows the Nazis were right wingers.
>
> From "World Book Encyclopedia", 1958, p. 5467:
> The name National Socialist German Workers Party does not
> correctly describe the Nazi movement. It was neither
> socialist nor organized for the benefit of workers. The
> name was apparently developed in an effort to win the
> support of the working classes....
> Nazism was only a part of of the broad social movement
> known as Fascism which gained millions of supporters in
> many countries during the 1930's....
> The industrialists gave financial support to the party
> because they thought the Nazis would protect them from
> from socialism and communism, and from the increasing
> strength of the labor unions.
> End Quotes.
> britannica.com
> http://www.britannica.com/bcom/eb/article/9/0,5716,56489+1+55111,00.html
> Nazi Party June 24 '00
> "The [Nazi] party's socialist orientation was basically a
> demagogic gambit designed to attract support from the
> working class."
> ("Gambit;" From "legs." Something designed to trip up another.
> Any maneuver by which one seeks to gain an advantage.)
> "By 1932 big-business circles had begun to finance the Nazi
> electoral campaigns, and ...."
> "Under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the party came to
> power in Germany in 1933 and governed by totalitarian....
> Next year:
> "Hitler crushed the Nazi Party's left, or socialist-oriented,
> wing in 1934, executing Ernst R�hm and other rebellious SA
> leaders at this time. Thereafter, Hitler's word was the
> supreme and undisputed command in the party."
> ===========
> From the Concord Desk Encyclopedia, 1977, Fascism, p 455:
> "It rejects...liberalism... and socialism. Instead it promotes
> an organic social order whereby the individual will find his
> own place in family, profession and society according to his
> character and ability. Nationalism and militarism are its
> logical products and thus it has close ties with Nazism.
> `Fascist` has become a term of abuse for many because of
> the ugly aspects of fascism, and is often used of anyone
> whose views are right wing.
>
> --------------------------
>
> One of the most frequent arguments used in favor of the notion that Hitler
> and the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP) were
> leftist is the fact that they used "sozialistische" in the party's title.
> The party's appropriation of the term was a sick lie. Generally there have
> been three broad economic variations in terms of ownership of production:
> aristocracy, in which a ruling elite owns the land and productive wealth;
> capitalism, in which a broader range of private individuals own the means
> of production; and socialism, in which everyone owns and controls the
> means of production. As traditionally understood, these three variations
> roughly fall into a right, center, left pattern as well - with
> authoritarian, dictatorial regimes and absolute monarchs on the extreme
> right; corporate/capitalist oligarchies right of center; free enterprise
> with widespread private ownership more or less in the middle; labor
> republics or social democracies in which the workers partially own and
> primarily control the means of production left of center; and utopian
> communist societies where everyone owns everything and there is
> essentially no private property on the extreme left. In short, the more
> limited and narrow the ownership and control of production, the further
> right. The more widespread such ownership and control, the further left.
> By calling themselves "National Socialists", the NSDAP was attempting to
> woo the left-wing citizenry merely by coopting the terminology. The
> "national" combined with the "sozialistische" implied that the nation as a
> whole would control the means of production. During his rise, Hitler
> exploited social unrest by promising workers to back labor unions and
> increase the standard of living. The reality was quite different: the
> Nationalsozialistische party only represented nationalists, as defined by
> the NDSAP and represented by the ruling elite, not the nation as a whole.
> And it was only a corporate oligarchy which owned much of anything. Under
> the National Socialists in Germany, the system of government was a
> combination of aristocracy and capitalism (extreme right and centrist).
> The workers, "the people", owned and controlled nothing - as they would
> under socialism or any left-wing government. Private German businessmen
> owned and controlled the means of production - and answered to the
> National Socialist Party. The NDSAP "Charter of Labor" gave employers
> complete power over their workers and established the employer as the
> "leader of the enterprise," and dictated that the owner "makes the
> decisions for the employees and laborers in all matters concerning the
> enterprise". Contrary to their promises, the NDSAP outlawed trade unions,
> collective bargaining, and the right to strike. They formed the "Labor
> Front" which replaced the old trade unions and which did not represent
> workers - and workers' wages fell by 20-25%. Industries, trusts, and
> military production were not nationalized and remained in the hands of
> private owners under the control of the party. Granted, the NDSAP did
> nationalize a few utilities - such as the railroads - and created a few
> public works programs such as the construction of the Autobahn. But these
> were primarily in order to facilitate the war industry and such
> "nationalization" did not mean that these were owned by the people, but by
> the government - and were built with materials which fed back into the
> capitalist oligarchs. The German National Socialists, like the Italian
> Fascists, were corporatists. How much control did "the people" have under
> the NDSAP in terms of running the government? Virtually none. A central
> principle of the party was F�hrerprinzip - "the leadership principle". The
> National Socialists did not have party congresses in which policy was
> discussed and determined - there were no dissenting voices heard, no
> compromises or concessions made. What mattered most was what the leader
> thought and decreed. Those whose opinions differed from those of der
> F�hrer either maintained silence or were purged. The hierarchical nature
> of the corporatism espoused by the NDSAP, with der F�hrer at the pinnacle,
> supported by a capitalist oligarchy is in direct opposition to the
> egalitarianism espoused by socialism and other leftist political schools
> of thought. The National Socialists were anti-egalitarian in every sense
> and had an elitist view of society in which the superior individual - the
> �bermensch - would emerge on top. So, in terms of social/governmental
> structure and economics, the National Socialists cannot be considered
> "socialist" by any stretch of the imagination. I will grant that the
> totalitarian extremes of the NDSAP can be compared to the totalitarian
> extremes of, say, Stalinism - but that does not make Hitler any more
> left-wing than it does Stalin. Both were variations on the aristocratic
> (or its extreme, monarchic) systems - systems representing the far right.
> It can much more easily be argued that Stalin was right-wing than it can
> that Hitler was left-wing. In fact, I'd say that the latter cannot be
> argued at all. But what of the social policies of the NDSAP? In the thread
> in which this discussion arose, I cited the late Steve Kangas who composed
> a lengthy essay addressing this whole issue. In it, he identifies a number
> of principles, opposing rightist ideals and leftist ideals. These include
> (but are not limited to) the following:
>
> Individualism over collectivism.
> Racism or racial segregation over racial tolerance.
> Merit over equality.
> Competition over cooperation.
> Realism over idealism.
> Nationalism over internationalism.
> Exclusiveness over inclusiveness.
> Gun ownership over gun control
> Common sense over theory or science.
> Pragmatism over principle.
>
> He goes on - and I won't reiterate his arguments here - to demonstrate
> that Hitler and the NDSAP leaned, often heavily, toward the right, often
> far right, in every single instance. Many of these leanings are obvious to
> anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of National Socialist policies
> and history. Again, for those in doubt, I'd recommend checking out the
> essay itself. He also discusses National Socialist foreign policy in terms
> of militarism vs. pacifism. It should suffice here to quote from Mein
> Kampf: QUOTE
> If the German people in its historic development had possessed that herd
> unity which other peoples enjoyed, the German Reich today would doubtless
> be mistress of the globe. World history would have taken a different
> course, and no one can distinguish whether in this way we would not have
> obtained what so many blinded pacifists today hope to gain by begging,
> whining and whimpering: a peace, supported not by the palm branches of
> tearful, pacifist female mourners, but based on the victorious sword of a
> master people, putting the world into the service of a higher culture.
> That may sound like a "real man" - but it sure as hell doesn't sound like
> a liberal. So: in terms of economics, the NDSAP was right-wing. In terms
> of government structure, the NDSAP was right-wing. In terms of social
> policy, the NDSAP was right-wing. In terms of militarism, the NDSAP was
> right-wing. I fail to see how anyone can possibly argue that the Nazis
> were leftist.
>
How about this. You're full of shit. The Germans are Socialist now. And
have been since before WW2. Your opinion means nothing. I ask Germans.
Real Germans. And guess what . They say their Socialist who love their
controlling every aspect of their lives government. Germans always want that
father figure. The bottom line is. Socialism leads to fascism. Hitler
murdered the Socialist because all the wealth had been robbed by the
Socialist and the people wouldnt work anymore for free. So fascism forced
the issue. And they did work for free. Government controlled every aspect
of Society and industry was controlled by government Czars and boards that
rationed resources and materials. And rather inefficiently so too.
Quit posting your garbage here. You are a one horse show with no
credentials. And no facts. Its of no use.
Evan
Australia about how some nun thought Rudd was a prime example of a good
catholic. I guess that's because he's a fascist. And all good Catholic
leaders are always fascists. Pope, Hitler, Mussolini
Topaz
>Looks like right wingers are once again in good company with Hitler.
>
>
>
>Fascism, Nazism and Conservatism
>
>European fascism drew on existing anti-modernist conservatism, and on the
>conservative reaction to communism and 19th-century socialism.
>Conservative thinkers such as historian Oswald Spengler provided much of
>the world view (Weltanschauung) of the Nazi movement.
>
>In Britain, the conservative Daily Mail enthusiastically backed Sir Oswald
>Mosley's British Union of Fascists, and part of the Conservative Party
>supported closer ties with Nazi Germany. When defeat in World War II
>ideologically and historically discredited fascism
Obviously losing the war didn't prove they were wrong. It only proved
they were outnumbered. Hitler made Germany great. Of course the Jew
parasites couldn't stand that. Unfortunately the bad side won the war.
Compare the size of Germany to the size of the Jewish controlled
countries, the USA and the USSR.
An article by Dr. Joseph Goebbels, January 21, 1945
The Creators of the World's Misfortunes
by Joseph Goebbels
One could not understand this war if one did not always keep in mind
the fact that International Jewry stands behind all the unnatural
forces that our united enemies use to attempt to deceive the world and
keep humanity in the dark. It is so to speak the mortar that holds the
enemy coalition firmly together, despite its differences of class,
ideology and interests. Capitalism and Bolshevism have the same Jewish
roots, two branches of the same tree that in the end bear the same
fruit. International Jewry uses both in its own way to suppress the
nations and keep them in its service. How deep its influence on public
opinion is in all the enemy countries and many neutral nations is
plain to see that it may never be named in newspapers, speeches and
radio broadcasts. There is a law in the Soviet Union that punishes
anti-Semitism - or in plain English, public education about the Jewish
Question - by death. The expert in these matters is in no way
surprised that a leading spokesman for the Kremlin said over the New
Year that the Soviet Union would not rest until this law was valid
throughout the world. In other words, the enemy clearly says that its
goal in this war is to put the total domination of Jewry over the
nations of the earth under legal protection, and to threaten even a
discussion of this shameful attempt with the death penalty.
It is little different in the plutocratic nations. There the struggle
against the impudent usurpation of the Jewish race is not punished by
the executioner, rather by death through economic and social boycott
and by intellectual terror. This has the same effect in the end.
Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt were made by the Jewry. They enjoy its
full support and reward it with their full protection. They present
themselves in their speeches as upright men of civil courage, yet one
never hears even a word against the Jews, even though there is growing
hatred among their people as a result of this war, a hatred that is
fully justified. Jewry is a tabu theme in the enemy countries. It
stands outside every legal boundary and thus becomes the tyrant of its
host peoples. While enemy soldiers fight, bleed and die at the front,
the Jews make money from their sacrifice on the stock exchanges and
black markets. If a brave man dares to step forward and accuse the
Jews of their crimes, he will be mocked and spat on by their press,
chased from his job or otherwise impoverished, and be brought into
public contempt. Even that is apparently not enough for the Jews. They
want to bring Soviet conditions to the whole world: to give Jewry
absolute power and freedom from prosecution. He who objects or even
debates the matter gets a bullet in the back of his head or an axe
through his neck. There is no worse tyranny than this. This is the
epitome of the public and secret disgrace that Jewry inflicts on the
nations that deserve freedom.
That is all long behind us. Yet it still threatens us in the distance.
We have, it is true, entirely broken the power of the Jews in the
Reich, but they have not given up. They did not rest until they had
mobilized the whole world against us. Since they could no longer
conquer Germany from within, they want to try it from without. Every
Russian, English and American soldier is a mercenary of this world
conspiracy of a parasitic race. Given the current state of the war,
who could still believe that they are fighting and dying at the front
for the national interests of their countries! The nations want a
decent peace, but the Jews are against it. They know that the end of
the war would mean the dawning knowledge of humanity of the unhealthy
role that International Jewry played in preparing for and carrying out
this war. They fear being unmasked, which has in fact become
unavoidable and must inevitably come, just as the day follows the
night. That explains their raging bursts of hatred against us, which
are only the result of their fear and their feelings of inferiority.
They are too eager, and that makes them suspicious. International
Jewry will not succeed in turning this war to its advantage. Things
are already too far along. The hour will come in which all the peoples
of the earth will awake, and the Jews will be the victims. Here too
things can only go so far.
It is an old, often-used method of International Jewry to discredit
education and knowledge about its corrupting nature and drives,
thereby depending on the weaknesses of those people who easily confuse
cause with effect. The Jews are also masters at manipulating public
opinion, which they dominate through their network of news agencies
and press concerns that reaches throughout the world. The pitiful
illusion of a free press is one of the methods they use to stupefy the
publics of enemy lands. If the enemy press is as free as it pretends
to be, let it take an open position, for or against, on the Jewish
Question. It will not do that because it cannot and may not do so. The
Jews love to mock and criticize everything except themselves, although
everyone knows that they are most in need of public criticism. This is
where the so-called freedom of the press in enemy countries ends.
Newspapers, parliaments, statesmen and church leaders must be silent
here. Crimes and vices, filth and corruption are covered by the
blanket of love. The Jews have total control of public opinion in
enemy countries, and he who has that is also master of all of public
life. Only the nations that have to accept such a condition are to be
pitied. The Jews mislead them into believing that the German nation is
backward. Our alleged backwardness is actually proof of our progress.
We have recognized the Jews as a national and international danger,
and from this knowledge have drawn compelling conclusions. This German
knowledge will become the knowledge of he world at the end of this
war. We think it our primary duty to do everything in our power to
make that happen.
Humanity would sink into eternal darkness, it would fall into a dull
and primitive state, were the Jews to win this war. They are the
incarnation of that destructive force that in these terrible years has
guided the enemy war leadership in a fight against all that we see as
noble, beautiful and worth keeping. For that reason alone the Jews
hate it. They despite our culture and learning, which they perceive as
towering over their nomadic worldview. They fear our economic and
social standards, which leave no room for their parasitic drives, They
are the enemy of our domestic order, which has excluded their
anarchistic tendencies. Germany is the first nation in the world that
is entirely free of the Jews. That is the prime cause of its political
and economic balance. Since their expulsion from the German national
body has made it impossible for them to shake this balance from
within, they lead the nations they have deceived in battle against us
from without. It is fine with them, in fact it is part of their plan,
that Europe in the process will lose a large part of its cultural
values. The Jews had no part in their creation. They do not understand
them. A deep racial instinct tells them that since these heights of
human creative activity are forever out of their reach, they must
attack them today with hatred. The day is not distant when the nations
of Europe, yes, even those of the whole world, will shout: The Jews
are guilty for all our misfortunes! They must be called to account,
and soon and thoroughly!
International Jewry is ready with its alibi. Just as during the great
reckoning in Germany, they will attempt to look innocent and say that
one needs a scapegoat, and they are it. But that will no longer help
them, just as it did not help them during the National Socialist
revolution, The proof of their historical guilt, in details large and
small, is so plain that they can no longer be denied even with the
most clever lies and hypocrisy.
Who is it that drives the Russians, the English and the Americans into
battle and sacrifices huge numbers of human lives in a hopeless
struggle against the German people? The Jews! Their newspapers and
radio broadcasts spread the songs of war while the nations they have
deceived are led to the slaughter. Who is it that invents new plans of
hatred and destruction against us every day, making this war into a
dreadful case of self-mutilation and self-destruction of European life
and its economy, education and culture? The Jews! Who devised the
unnatural marriage between England and the USA on one side and
Bolshevism on the other, building it up and jealously ensuring its
continuance? Who covers the most perverse political situations with
cynical hypocrisy from a trembling fear that a new way could lead the
nations to realize the true causes of this terrible human catastrophe?
The Jews, only the Jews! They are named Morgenthau and Lehmann and
stand behind Roosevelt as a so-called brain trust. They are named
Mechett and Sasoon and serve as Churchill's money bags and order
givers. They are named Kaganovitsch and Ehrenburg and are Stalin's
pacesetters and intellectual spokesmen. Wherever you look, you see
Jews. They march as political commisars behind the Red army and
organize murder and terror in the areas conquered by the Soviets. They
sit behind the lines in Paris and Brussels, Rome and Athens, and
fashion their reins from the skin of the unhappy nations that have
fallen under their power.
That is the truth. It can no longer be denied, particularly since in
their drunken joy of power and victory the Jews have forgotten their
ordinarily so carefully maintained reserve and now stand in the
spotlight of public opinion. They no longer bother, apparently
believing that it is no longer necessary, that their hour has come.
And this is their mistake, which they always make when think
themselves near their great goal of anonymous world domination.
Thoughout the history of the nations, whenever this tragic situation
developed, a good providence saw to it that the Jews themselves became
the grave diggers of their own hopes. They did not destroy the healthy
peoples, rather the sting of their parasitic effects brought the
realization of the looming danger to the forefront and led to the
greatest sacrifices to overcome it. At a certain point, they become
that power that always wants evil but creates good. It will be that
way this time too.
The fact that the German nation was the first on earth to recognize
this danger and expel it from its organism is proof of its healthy
instincts. It therefore became the leader of a world struggle whose
results will determine of fate and the future of International Jewry.
We view with complete calm the wild Old Testament tirades of hatred
and revenge of Jews throughout the world against us. They are only
proof that we are on the right path. They cannot unsettle us. We gaze
on them with sovereign contempt and remember that these outbursts of
hate and revenge were everyday events for us in Germany until that
fateful day for International Jewry, 30 January 1933, when the world
revolution against the Jews that threateend not only Germany, but all
the other nations, began.
It will not cease before it has reached its goal. The truth can not be
stopped by lies or force. It will get through. The Jews will meet
their Cannae at the end of this war. Not Europe, rather they will
lose. They may laugh at this prophecy today, but they have laughed so
often in the past, and almost as often they stopped laughing sooner or
later. Not only do we know precisely what we want, we also know
precisely what we do not want. The deceived nations of he Earth may
still lack the knowledge they need, but we will bring it to them. How
will the Jews stop that in the long run? They believe their power
rests on sure foundations, but it stands on feet of clay. One hard
blow and it will collapse, burying the creators of the misfortunes of
the world in its ruins.
http://www.ihr.org/ www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/
http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org
http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/