So, what should be the right way to fight this? The videos I posted remind me a little bit about Martin Luther King & Malcolm X. Should we reach hands to help nazis to get out of their ignorance or should we give them fists?
People in this thread said that the Educational System failed, also most ppl understand that making a Party(like NPD, Pro-NRW, Pro-Köln etc) illegal is also the wrong way(and is more like what the Nazis did).
On November 13 2012 02:36 zalz wrote: Nazi's simply were not socialists. The socialist parts of the party were marginalized and executed during the night of the long knives.
They are as socialist as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic.
-
Also, one cannot seperate the crimes of the Nazi regime from its economical achievements. The economic strides that Nazi Germany were the result of its military build-up. The entire foundation would have fallen out from under it, had they not gone to war.
The only way to make military keynesianism viable is through going to war before the bill is presented.
The murder of millions is the direct result of the economic policies of Nazi-Germany.
Had they not gone to war, their economy could not have sustained itself. Everyone in Europe was sacrificed upon the altar of German recovery.
Fascism and Socialism are both forms of collectivism. That's all that matters, the rest are just details. There is not a war between the Left and the Right, they are both marching towards the state. There is a war between the individualists and the collectivists. What occurred in Germany was the culmination of collectivist logic, what occurred in the USSR was the culmination of collectivist logic. Nazi Germany and USSR and dozens of other authoritarian states were simply collectivism freed from the individualist tradition which might hamper its full realization. It was socialism which was the catalyst to drive out from Germany everything that was liberal.
"There are no liberals in Germany today; there are young revolutionaries: there are young conservatives. But who would be a liberal? Liberalism is a philosophy of life from which German youth now turns with nausea, with wrath, with quite peculiar scorn, for there is none more foreign, more repugnant, more opposed to its philosophy. German youth today recognize the liberal as the archenemy." -Moeller van den Bruck
"Because in the sphere of ideas Germany was the most convinced exponent of all socialist dreams, and in the sphere of reality she was the most powerful architect of the most highly organized economic system. In us is the twentieth century. However the war may end, we are the exemplary people. Our ideas will determine the aims of the life of humanity. "The war economy is the first realization of a socialist society and its spirit is the first active appearance of a socialist spirit. The needs of war have established the socialist idea in German economic life, and thus the defense of our nation produced for humanity the idea of 1914, the idea of German organization, the people's community of national socialism.. State and economic life form a new unity... The feeling of economic responsibility which characterizes the work of the civil servant pervades all private activity. It is high time to recognize the fact that socialism must be power policy, because it is to be organization. Socialism has to win power: it must never blindly destroy power. "Just from the point of view of socialism, which is organization, is not an absolute right of self determination of the peoples the right to individualistic economic anarchy? Are we willing to grant complete self-determination to the individual in economic life? Consistent socialism can accord to the people a right to incorporation only in accordance with the real distribution of forces historically determined." - Johann Plenge
"Germany wants to organize Europe which up to now still lacks organization. I will explain to you now Germany's great secret: we, or perhaps the German race, have discovered the significance of organization. While the other nations still live under the regime of individualism, we have already achieved that of organization." -Wilhelm Ostwald
"Or, to put it more plainly, our conceptions of Liberalism, Democracy, and so forth, are derived from the ideas of English Individualism, according to which a state with a weak government is a liberal state, and every restriction upon the freedom of the individual is conceived as the product of autocracy and militarism. "This class of people, who unconsciously reason from English standards, compromises the whole educated German bourgeoisie. Their political notions of 'freedom' and 'civic right,' of constitutionalism and parliamentarianism, are derived from that individualistic conception of the world, of which English Liberalism is a classical embodiment, and which was adopted, by the spokemen of the German bourgeoisie in the fifties, sixties, and seventies of the nineteenth century. But these standards are old-fashioned and shattered... What has to be done now is to get rid of these inherited political ideas and to assist the growth of a new conception of State and Society. In this sphere Socialism must present a conscious and determined opposition to individualism. "The state has undergone a process of socialization, and Social Democracy has undergone a process of nationalization." - Paul Lensch
"The German, more correctly, Prussian, instinct is this: the power belongs to the whole... Everyone is given his place. One commands or obeys. This is, since the eighteenth century, authoritarian socialism, essentially illiberal and anti-democratic, in so far as the English Liberalism and French Democracy are meant... There are in Germany many hated and ill-reputed contrasts, but liberalism alone is contemptible on German soil." -Oswald Spengler
Does anyone else have issues with the wording of the statements the participants had to agree/disagree with? - Usage of terms that people with no higher education will probably not recognize as being coined by the Nazi regime can easily cause people to be qualified as right-wing extremists due to simple misunderstandings. (examples: "Volksgemeinschaft", "unwertes Leben") - The same problem exists with the statement regarding whether the Nazi regime had good sides as well. Without proper education, people might remeber the economic upswing, expansion of the infrastructure or some reforms of law as beneficial effects without noticing them as parts of the preparation for war. - Some questions are aimed broadly at anti-democratic sentiments, but might draw false positives simply due to dissatisfaction with the current political establishment thats widely seen as mainly self-serving. - The questions regarding "Chauvinism" have the fixed point that any appreciation of the german nation is intrinsically wrong. Disagreeing with this, especially considering the openly showcased patriotism of other democratic nations (USA, GB, France come to mind), shouldn't qualify anyone as a political extremist.
The list goes on, too. I don't want to invalidate the study - the numbers considering xenophobia are interesting, but to be expected - but the only thing it shows to me is how easily people get labeled as right-wing extremists over here.
For one, the liberal societies of Western Europe need to acknowledge that there are real problems with multi culturalism. That doesn't mean demonizing inmigrants to hell and back, but the current policy of screaming "lalalala I can't hear you" all it does is alienating moderate people into becoming more radical just because people willing ignore an issue.
Deal with the issue without extremes, make people feel like they are being heard and you take away the power out of the extremist's message.
On November 13 2012 03:13 The KY wrote: Yes, Hitler's economic policies were revolutionary. I particularly liked when he seized all the property from jewish people and other minorities, didn't allow women to work (and did not count them or the jews as unemployed), and built an economy largely around militarisation and also coincidentally an enormous deficit.
history is not about morals. it's about success. And there is no denying that the German Empire between 1933 and 1942 was incredibly successful. Does not mean we should repeat their strategy because TODAY our morality counts, some things are just not acceptable anymore.
On November 13 2012 03:27 sephiria wrote: As a historian and a german citizen I would like to point something out: The NPD is a democratic party and allowed in germany. It is also NOT a conservative party in any way. It is NOT related to the NSDAP (which is banned). On a federal/state level, the NPD does not hold any power and its voters and supporters are constantly threatened with bodily harm and loss of social perspective. Social gatherings of their organisations are regularly disrupted which is against the law that protects the right to demonstrate and the freedom of speech, however, facist behaviour by left partys and politicians is widely tolerated. If you have at some point been in a relationship with someone who, at some point, was a member of the NPD you can lose your job for no reason (except for "wrong friends") Since left partys are fed by the general fear of "nazis" the left media likes to overstate the threat. The german right is the weakest in Europe.
apart from the point of "we want to decrease the number of immigrants" the NPD has a stunningly similar party program to the radical german left (which commits more political crimes per year, is massively stronger and has public support even from non radicals). I think they both should be allowed but monitored closely. As every populist party, both are dangerous, but the NPD does not wield any power.
@Huyugu you seem to know what you are talking about. a fellow historian?
saying the NPD the democratic is plain wrong.... they are permitted but just look at their election posters and tell me again that they arent racist The NPD is controlled by the "BND" & "BKA" all the time for good reasons.... And the NPD is conservative party because otherwise many voters wouldn´t rotate between NPD and CDU Even many politician at the NPD were CDU politicians before!
But still the left wing member are numerous and currently violent aswell
I've only read first few comments and I'm quite surprised people are being ridiculed by the fact of neonazism being on the rise. In many developed western countries there has been a flood of immigrants from poor parts of the world (mainly islamic and jewish) past few decades who are willing to work for far less than natives of the said countries, which in times of economic crisis when people are losing jobs translates into some angry native population. Also the fact that those same immigrants are trying to enforce their own laws/ways and milking benefits in the countries they migrated to doesn't really help the case. I mean really, if you're gonna migrate to another country, you should honestly obey its rules and adapt to its culture instead of sticking out like a sore thumb, otherwise you're just asking for trouble.
On November 13 2012 03:27 sephiria wrote: As a historian and a german citizen I would like to point something out: The NPD is a democratic party and allowed in germany. It is also NOT a conservative party in any way. It is NOT related to the NSDAP (which is banned). On a federal/state level, the NPD does not hold any power and its voters and supporters are constantly threatened with bodily harm and loss of social perspective. Social gatherings of their organisations are regularly disrupted which is against the law that protects the right to demonstrate and the freedom of speech, however, facist behaviour by left partys and politicians is widely tolerated. If you have at some point been in a relationship with someone who, at some point, was a member of the NPD you can lose your job for no reason (except for "wrong friends") Since left partys are fed by the general fear of "nazis" the left media likes to overstate the threat. The german right is the weakest in Europe.
apart from the point of "we want to decrease the number of immigrants" the NPD has a stunningly similar party program to the radical german left (which commits more political crimes per year, is massively stronger and has public support even from non radicals). I think they both should be allowed but monitored closely. As every populist party, both are dangerous, but the NPD does not wield any power.
@Huyugu you seem to know what you are talking about. a fellow historian?
saying the NPD the democratic is plain wrong.... they are permitted but just look at their election posters and tell me again that they arent racist The NPD is controlled by the "BND" & "BKA" all the time for good reasons.... And the NPD is conservative party because otherwise many voters wouldn´t rotate between NPD and CDU Even many politician at the NPD were CDU politicians before!
But still the left wing member are numerous and currently violent aswell
On November 13 2012 03:13 The KY wrote: Yes, Hitler's economic policies were revolutionary. I particularly liked when he seized all the property from jewish people and other minorities, didn't allow women to work (and did not count them or the jews as unemployed), and built an economy largely around militarisation and also coincidentally an enormous deficit.
history is not about morals. it's about success. And there is no denying that the German Empire between 1933 and 1942 was incredibly successful. Does not mean we should repeat their strategy because TODAY our morality counts, some things are just not acceptable anymore.
You claim to be a historian, yet you are nothing more than a revisionist. The third Reich needed to lead an agressive war with the intention of conquest, otherwise the economy would have collapsed within a few years. There is nothing successful about the idiotic Nazi-regime. And the morals are not only TODAY condemning the despiccable and inhumane crimes the Nazis committed, anyone with half a brain at any point in time would think so. What you are saying is nothing more than right-wing propaganda to be honest.
On November 13 2012 03:13 The KY wrote: Yes, Hitler's economic policies were revolutionary. I particularly liked when he seized all the property from jewish people and other minorities, didn't allow women to work (and did not count them or the jews as unemployed), and built an economy largely around militarisation and also coincidentally an enormous deficit.
history is not about morals. it's about success. And there is no denying that the German Empire between 1933 and 1942 was incredibly successful. Does not mean we should repeat their strategy because TODAY our morality counts, some things are just not acceptable anymore.
I don't see how you can call that success? You have to see the whole story man and it was not like they made some bad decisions in 1942 and that led to their downfall but everyhting untl then was clean and shiny. Where they were in 1945 is a direct consequence of the years before (sure, many thing worsened due to bad leadership but I dare to say being at war with the Soviets, the UK, USA and basically everyone else in the world barring Japan and Italy is not a story of success...
On November 13 2012 03:28 schaf wrote: I think in Germany the whole WW2 education backfired a bit. I agree it has to be done and it's good that we get it in school a lot. But when I was growing up (mid 20s now), it felt like being German is actually a bad thing. You get constantly confronted with the horros and of the past and their guilt. My parents were not a particular help in that regard either as they were heavily influenced by the hippie movement. So, if you grow up in that environment every identification with your nation is basically taken from you (might seem a bit extreme, but with me that was the case) and if you want to be a non-conformist or a rebel in school, you look for things that are 'forbidden'.
The NPD is a joke. But they actually have a good strategy. They do offers for young people in areas where there is nothing else, do free jurisdictional advice for unemployed people, do community festivals - and the people buy it. It works.
All in all, I wouldn't call all followers of the NPD as Neo-Nazis.
And there are countries who have a much more severe problem with this, for example Russia (yes!):
you make a good point here. In reality, that means based on serious science, it is said that around 40-50% of modern nazis live in Russia.
I don't have scientific facts for that, only my own observations. In my experience the "nazis everywhere" thinking is largely an urban phenom. I was raised in a rural area and there nobody cared. There was neither right nor leftwing support. Basically the consens was that both schools of thought were tailor made for idiots. I now live in a bigger town for nearly a decade and young people actually think that Antifa guys do something useful. I strongly disagree with that notion. How many foreign guys do you see in such organisations? Very, very few actually. I think they are a bunch of spoiled upper middle class children who have a lot of growing up to do.. Around here there actions basically consist of insulting the odd old guy from one of the more rightwing populistic movements. These old guys have strange views but are basically harmless.
If you have the time, you could scroll through the presented "study", it is downright laughable. Will help you to form your own opinion.
Also I think you are right about the breeding ground of the "real" nazis. They gain support in areas where state and society failed, because they offer stuff and inclusion. There support stems from folks who get disregarded and degraded from the state and equally ignorant movements from the other side of the political spectrum.
On November 13 2012 02:00 Klive5ive wrote: It's just sensationalist crap journalism in my opinion. I'm fed up of the terms right and left wing: they are meaningless and out of date. From the article: "The Immortals, for example - anti-globalisation, anti-capitalist and anti-democratic" - that could just as easily describe a bunch of hippies! They then compare that (by proxy) with a crazy terrorist cell. I hate articles like that; it's just so dumb.
Yes, this. The terms are borderline meaningless. People usually just use the terms to paint people as "bad guys."
They are not meaningless, only misused or misunderstood.
Political left is about reducing inequality and opposing ideas that skew the distribution of power in a society in favor of the few, based on a single ruling class or a single ruling principle.
How that inequality actually came about and which out of many methods were used to amass power doesn't really matter, or is a secondary concern at best (although some will obviously be less pleasant than the others). Nonetheless, an authoritarian, oppressive government and a hardline libertarian society both ultimately lead to the same problem.
On November 13 2012 03:27 sephiria wrote: As a historian and a german citizen I would like to point something out: The NPD is a democratic party and allowed in germany. It is also NOT a conservative party in any way. It is NOT related to the NSDAP (which is banned). On a federal/state level, the NPD does not hold any power and its voters and supporters are constantly threatened with bodily harm and loss of social perspective. Social gatherings of their organisations are regularly disrupted which is against the law that protects the right to demonstrate and the freedom of speech, however, facist behaviour by left partys and politicians is widely tolerated. If you have at some point been in a relationship with someone who, at some point, was a member of the NPD you can lose your job for no reason (except for "wrong friends") Since left partys are fed by the general fear of "nazis" the left media likes to overstate the threat. The german right is the weakest in Europe.
apart from the point of "we want to decrease the number of immigrants" the NPD has a stunningly similar party program to the radical german left (which commits more political crimes per year, is massively stronger and has public support even from non radicals). I think they both should be allowed but monitored closely. As every populist party, both are dangerous, but the NPD does not wield any power.
@Huyugu you seem to know what you are talking about. a fellow historian?
saying the NPD the democratic is plain wrong.... they are permitted but just look at their election posters and tell me again that they arent racist The NPD is controlled by the "BND" & "BKA" all the time for good reasons.... And the NPD is conservative party because otherwise many voters wouldn´t rotate between NPD and CDU Even many politician at the NPD were CDU politicians before!
But still the left wing member are numerous and currently violent aswell
racism and democracy are unrelated (US like 80 years ago? canada in the early '40s? no democracys?)
and no, I am conservative. I know the difference. People just start to vote NPD because there is no conservative party in germany (and dont say cdu). So they vote what 'feels' right-wing. Most probably haven't even read the NPD party program.
I can only facepalm reading the headline... "nazi uprising"... wtf? I dont even believe the numbers of this survey but even 9 % is not an uprising. and why are only 1.5% voting for the npd if ther was an uprising?
i dunno where this discussion should be going? education + perspective and it shouldnt happen.
On November 13 2012 03:51 BlACKTrA wrote: Just google
"Gert Hoffmann", the major of braunschweig, now a CDU member , but former NPD member
their are many others but I forgot their names... and yes there are politicians rotating in both directions from CDU to NPD and the other way around
To be fair, Hoffmann dismissed it as a sin of his youth and is condemning the NPD and Nazi ideology nowadays (I'm from Braunschweig btw and I was despairing that he was actually reelected).
On November 13 2012 02:36 zalz wrote: Nazi's simply were not socialists. The socialist parts of the party were marginalized and executed during the night of the long knives.
They are as socialist as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic.
-
Also, one cannot seperate the crimes of the Nazi regime from its economical achievements. The economic strides that Nazi Germany were the result of its military build-up. The entire foundation would have fallen out from under it, had they not gone to war.
The only way to make military keynesianism viable is through going to war before the bill is presented.
The murder of millions is the direct result of the economic policies of Nazi-Germany.
Had they not gone to war, their economy could not have sustained itself. Everyone in Europe was sacrificed upon the altar of German recovery.
Fascism and Socialism are both forms of collectivism. That's all that matters, the rest are just details. There is not a war between the Left and the Right, they are both marching towards the state. There is a war between the individualists and the collectivists. What occurred in Germany was the culmination of collectivist logic, what occurred in the USSR was the culmination of collectivist logic. Nazi Germany and USSR and dozens of other authoritarian states were simply collectivism freed from the individualist tradition which might hamper its full realization. It was socialism which was the catalyst to drive out from Germany everything that was liberal.
"There are no liberals in Germany today; there are young revolutionaries: there are young conservatives. But who would be a liberal? Liberalism is a philosophy of life from which German youth now turns with nausea, with wrath, with quite peculiar scorn, for there is none more foreign, more repugnant, more opposed to its philosophy. German youth today recognize the liberal as the archenemy." -Moeller van den Bruck
"Because in the sphere of ideas Germany was the most convinced exponent of all socialist dreams, and in the sphere of reality she was the most powerful architect of the most highly organized economic system. In us is the twentieth century. However the war may end, we are the exemplary people. Our ideas will determine the aims of the life of humanity. "The war economy is the first realization of a socialist society and its spirit is the first active appearance of a socialist spirit. The needs of war have established the socialist idea in German economic life, and thus the defense of our nation produced for humanity the idea of 1914, the idea of German organization, the people's community of national socialism.. State and economic life form a new unity... The feeling of economic responsibility which characterizes the work of the civil servant pervades all private activity. It is high time to recognize the fact that socialism must be power policy, because it is to be organization. Socialism has to win power: it must never blindly destroy power. "Just from the point of view of socialism, which is organization, is not an absolute right of self determination of the peoples the right to individualistic economic anarchy? Are we willing to grant complete self-determination to the individual in economic life? Consistent socialism can accord to the people a right to incorporation only in accordance with the real distribution of forces historically determined." - Johann Plenge
"Germany wants to organize Europe which up to now still lacks organization. I will explain to you now Germany's great secret: we, or perhaps the German race, have discovered the significance of organization. While the other nations still live under the regime of individualism, we have already achieved that of organization." -Wilhelm Ostwald
"Or, to put it more plainly, our conceptions of Liberalism, Democracy, and so forth, are derived from the ideas of English Individualism, according to which a state with a weak government is a liberal state, and every restriction upon the freedom of the individual is conceived as the product of autocracy and militarism. "This class of people, who unconsciously reason from English standards, compromises the whole educated German bourgeoisie. Their political notions of 'freedom' and 'civic right,' of constitutionalism and parliamentarianism, are derived from that individualistic conception of the world, of which English Liberalism is a classical embodiment, and which was adopted, by the spokemen of the German bourgeoisie in the fifties, sixties, and seventies of the nineteenth century. But these standards are old-fashioned and shattered... What has to be done now is to get rid of these inherited political ideas and to assist the growth of a new conception of State and Society. In this sphere Socialism must present a conscious and determined opposition to individualism. "The state has undergone a process of socialization, and Social Democracy has undergone a process of nationalization." - Paul Lensch
"The German, more correctly, Prussian, instinct is this: the power belongs to the whole... Everyone is given his place. One commands or obeys. This is, since the eighteenth century, authoritarian socialism, essentially illiberal and anti-democratic, in so far as the English Liberalism and French Democracy are meant... There are in Germany many hated and ill-reputed contrasts, but liberalism alone is contemptible on German soil." -Oswald Spengler
Look, we get it, you think The Road to Serfdom is the greatest thing ever. It really is too bad more people have not read it; too many "Austrians" get away with transparent parroting like that evidenced above.
On November 13 2012 03:54 SpikeStarcraft wrote: I can only facepalm reading the headline... "nazi uprising"... wtf? I dont even believe the numbers of this survey but even 9 % is not an uprising. and why are only 1.5% voting for the npd if ther was an uprising?
i dunno where this discussion should be going? education + perspective and it shouldnt happen.
There aren't 9%. Threadstarter is fearmongering on fox news level. If you have time, you can actually read the study presented, it is linked somewhere in this thread.
On November 13 2012 00:12 kafkaesque wrote:NPD-member ofttimes gather in large numbers to March for their misguided cause and try to recruit members.
To be fair: in the western parts of Germany those marches usually count a few hundred maximum and are almost always severely outnumbered by demonstrants against exactly this march.
EPT
