OK. So how did the Nazis regard themselves. It is instructive to see what Adolf Hitler had to say on the subject. An excerpt from Mein Kampf:

Yes, how often did they not turn up in huge numbers, those supporters of the Red Flag, all previously instructed to smash up everything once and for all and put an end to these meetings. More often than not everything hung on a mere thread, and only the chairman’s ruthless determination and the rough handling by our ushers baffled our adversaries’ intentions. And indeed they had every reason for being irritated.

The fact that we had chosen red as the colour for our posters sufficed to attract them to our meetings. The ordinary bourgeoisie were very shocked to see that, we had also chosen the symbolic red of Bolshevism and they regarded this as something ambiguously significant.

The suspicion was whispered in German Nationalist circles that we also were merely another variety of Marxism, perhaps even Marxists suitably disguised, or better still, Socialists. The actual difference between Socialism and Marxism still remains a mystery to these people up to this day. The charge of Marxism was conclusively proved when it was discovered that at our meetings we deliberately substituted the words ‘Fellow-countrymen and Women’ for ‘Ladies and Gentlemen’ and addressed each other as ‘Party Comrade’. We used to roar with laughter at these silly faint-hearted bourgeoisie and their efforts to puzzle out our origin, our intentions and our aims.

We chose red for our posters after particular and careful deliberation, our intention being to irritate the Left, so as to arouse their attention and tempt them to come to our meetings – if only in order to break them up – so that in this way we got a chance of talking to the people...

The goal of the Nazis and Hitler, with the use of the color red, and the name Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei with its emphasis on Socialism, was from the very beginning to confuse and deceive. It worked.

And it is still working.

Wow I can't believe you're siding with the Nazis, Padraig.

I am not siding with the Nazis.

My point is that it is not correct, or of any real use, to think of them as being of the left or socialists.

The fact that the Soviets were authoritarians just as the Nazis were, does not make them the same. Neither does the fact that they both describe themselves as being socialist.

The Nazis were quite earnest, nonetheless they were not above trolling as we would say today. Their treatment of the German Communists (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands, KPD) as well as the Social Democrats (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands, SPD) is, for me, telling and very much to the point.

The fact that the Soviets were authoritarians just as the Nazis were, does not make them the same. Neither does the fact that they both describe themselves as being socialist.

They weren't the same. One was lung cancer, the other liver cancer. Both were still socialist, though, as you admit in your own post. And sure they persecuted other socialists, but we've already covered that. Still socialist.

No, I said that the Nazis called themselves Socialist. That does not mean that they were, any more than the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic.

Anything meaningfull from anyone beside cruelest?

Just because Nasoc has SOCIALISM in its name does not make it a left country, just like DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC of Korea does not make the North ''Democratic'' and ''People's''.

Kretoma and knyte have a very limited historical perspective and will never be able to see past their own bias.

The cancer analogy is oversimplified and lacks any historical or political context. As a matter of fact, Communism is advocated by a group of individuals that want an entirely different reality than those advocating National Socialism. So different in fact, they are opposites. Communists are egalitarians, Nazis support hierarchy. Communists support the abolishment of race and class, National Socialists promote race as eminent, and never waged a class war - the National Socialists purged their Communist-sympathizers in the Night of the Long Knives. Communists put Christians into gulags, National Socialists put Jews into labor camps. The ideologies were supported by two political distinct elites that were in a death struggle throughout the 20th century. Communists tended to be Jews, liberals, and overall left-wing in every regard (the "Nobel Prize" elite of the 20th century.) Fascism, National Socialism, and other related Traditionalist movements were a reaction against liberalism.

As an anarchist it makes me cry that anyone thinks communists are not authoritarian. What does freedom mean to you?

Edited 10/23/2017 15:42:43

Admire the peace we are living in.

thanks for the reminder.^^ it was a good video though.

Operation Barbarossa was the most heroic undertaking of any Western Army since the French Revolution. For the last time men would die fighting Communism, not to contain it, not to allow its elements to continue on in degenerate urban centers ("Democratic" Socialism), but to destroy it forever.

This is so much ill informed bullshit, it might be best to ignore your brainwashed nazi propaganda. But here we are discussing your weird weird understanding of history.

First of all you cant compare Operation barbarossa with the french revolution - two completely different conflicts with almost zero similarities. Second it wasnt a fight against a political system/ Communism but against another race, to repopulated Russia by Germans and to use Slavs as slaves for the german militairy industry.

The key difference is : National Socialist Germany was controlled by Western men, and purged the political enemies of Western civilization off the continent.

Did you realized that WWII didnt only happen in russia?

nor were millions of Germans murdered in gulags.

right?! no gulags but Konzentrationslager..

Collectivized farming = the government puts farmers on special pieces of public land and steals their harvest.

This has the unfortunate consequence of starving the entire population.

better go with the wikipedia definition:

Collective farming and communal farming are various types of agricultural production in which multiple farmers run their holdings as a joint enterprise.[1] This type of collective is often an agricultural cooperative in which member-owners engage jointly in farming activities.

Kretoma and knyte have a very limited historical perspective and will never be able to see past their own bias.

Misleaded self reflection? Youre either dump or ignorant and in the best case a one dimensional, self-congratulaional rather boring politics troll.

@Padraig, Vengeance et al

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_parliamentary_election,_2014

The main parties taking part were the Workers' Party of Korea, the Korean Social Democratic Party, the Chondoist Chongu Party as well as independent candidates. All candidates were also members of the Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland. While there are officially four parties in North Korean politics, each candidate must be approved by the Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland, the dominant party in North Korean politics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016

The main parties taking part were the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, the Libertarian Party, the Green Party as well as independent candidates. All candidates were also members of the collective slavery to corporations that you must partake in to get elected. While there are officially four parties in American politics, each candidate must be approved by a religious text, preferably the Bible, hence why there are no atheists in Congress.

North Korea IS a democracy.

Seen this video many times before. Quality stuff.

Implying all major candidates weren't atheist

Obviously all major US politicians are secretly atheists. Hence abortion laws, speeches about the supremacy of God over government, angry speeches about how atheists or Muslims are destroying America, and worrying about the War on Christmas and the persecution of Christians.

The only way that the American government could be this overtly religious would be if it were dominated by atheist lizard-men doing every bit of due diligence in courting evangelical Christian voters (who themselves are another brand of agnostic/atheist lizard-men working to subvert the US government by forming a powerful political bloc).

You have to be a nihilist and therefore most likely an atheist to win as a high-level politician (Democrat or Republic). The Clintons, Bushes, Obamas, and McCains do not genuinely care about any moral, ethical, or spiritual issue.

Edited 10/24/2017 01:21:46

So what traits did you decide are absolutely essential for every other path that you're not gonna be successful at?

Heroism is an eminent trait of the natural elite. Leaders who come to power through violence have the authority of God, since God is called as a decider during combat.

On the other hand, demagogues who seize power through the "people" are inherently weak, appeasers whose go-to strategy is to redistribute resources from a smaller and superior ideological group to a larger and inferior ideological group.

Classic. Being so autistic you decide that having any semblance of social skill makes you weak.

You realize that powerful military-turned-civilian leaders from Caesar to Napoleon to Eisenhower also had immense popular support, right? Oh sorry forgot that doesn't fit within your convenient explanation that helps you forget the pain of a wasted life.

^dont forget to mention Gandhi, Kong Tse, Marc Aurel and Simon Bolivar.

Edited 10/24/2017 14:35:11