Jump to content

Talk:Nazism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sam Spade (talk | contribs) at 04:02, 2 December 2003. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Economics

I'm not much of an economist, but I'd like to see a broad overview of Nazi economics, especially international economics - one of their primary motivations for starting agressive war in Europe. I'm not talking about Hitlers personal views on how vital economics is to warfare itself - that belongs somewhere else. Who was it that said 'All economics is politics'? I'll give it a crack, but I'm worried about being too sympathetic towards it. And I really don't wish to offend others who agree with their overall conception of problems in international economics without possibly even realizing it - this subject is *very* touchy, after all. I think I understand it from their POV, but as a Libertarian I strongly disagree with it from my POV. I want to properly describe their conception of economics, however. Any ideas? - Bob Dobbs

Well, if you know what you're talking about, then I'd like to suggest the following method: start at the beginning and keep writing till you reach the end. Don't worry too much about mistakes. Try to represent both the good and bad. Good luck!--user:Branko

The "Libertarian National Socialist Green Party" looks to me like a troll or parody of minor political parties such as the Greens and Libertarians. I'm not sure it belongs here with the actual history of Nazism. --Fubar Obfusco

Bellamy salute - Fascist salute

I've removed the references to the "Fascist salute". The straight-arm salute was used in many Western nations as a people's salute. In the USA, it was known as the "Bellamy salute" and used with the Pledge of Allegiance up until the '40s. --Fubar Obfusco

Wasn't the US salute only done halfway through the Pledge? (starting with hand over heart as it's done now), and, I definitely know that it was done palm up. -- Zoe

Nicely done, Ray. Very interesting breakdown of Nazi ideology. Danny

No genocide, no Holocaust, no camps in the article?

I'm more than a bit disappointed to see an article on Nazism which fails to mention genocide, the Holocaust or death camps -- but I'll restrain myself from editing . . . I might not be feeling neutral at the moment. -- your Jewish friend, Ed Poor

Nazism and Communism

It may be a bit of an over simplification to say that "Nazism and Communism are both totalitarian..." More appropriate might be to say that Nazism and Stalinism are both totalitarian, as there is certainly no requirement in communist ideology to REQUIRE a totalitarian state. Indeed, anarcho-syndicalism is a form of communism that requires that there be NO permanent head of state at all.JFQ

Yes you are right. It should say "the Soviet Union" or something like that.

I have revised the first paragraph converting it into a description of the practices of the Hitler dictatorship. There is a place within the article for the theories Hitler's supporters believed were the ideological basis of the dictatorship, but Hitler never considered himself bound by them in practice. User:Fredbauder

Communism doesn't aim to proletariat's supremacy. It aims to a classless society, thus making the states itself obsolete. Ericd 20:49 Sep 20, 2002 (UTC)

It has been said that both ideologies, Nazism and Communism, would share some goals in matters of totalitarian state and expansionism. However, they differ in respective identification of the social group of which they propose the supremacy, the "Aryan race" or the proletariat.

This paragraph has serious problems. Ericd points out one of them above. Another problem: what does it mean by communism? Stalinism? Leninism? libertarian communism? Depending on what you mean, "totalitarian" is either perfectly fitting or utterly inappropriate. Please address these problems before putting the text back in. DanKeshet

Well there is huge gap between communist ideology and communist government. But Stalisnism doesn't even aim to proletariat supremacy it only aim to Stalin supremacy :-). Ericd 21:07 Sep 20, 2002 (UTC)

Large nations "the creation of great races"

"National Socialism classically says that a nation is the highest creation of a race. Therefore, great nations (literally large nations) are said to be the creation of great races. The theory says that great nations grow from military power. In turn, military power naturally grows from rational, civilized cultures. In turn, these cultures naturally grow from races with natural good health, and aggressive, intelligent, courageous traits."

-- Does anybody have a source for this?

From scanning the old revisions, has apparently been added by Ray Van De Walker at 09:21 Aug 1, 2002, for his edit called "Described Nazi theory in NPOV)". On his user profile, I found mention of Ray having degrees in Computer Science and Philosophy from the University of California. -- Brandonforgod

Sounds like nazi-talk to me. Vera Cruz

Well, yes - isn't that the point? It starts out by stating it is the position of National Socialism, and describes it straightforwardly. What's the problem with that? We aren't in a beauty contest here, it may be twisted and wrong, but it IS accurate. Dobbs 21:50 Dec 18, 2002 (UTC)

Similarities between Nazism and Islam

== Nazism and Islam ==
Nazism as an ideology and as a value system has many things common with traditional Islam. During the WWII, Iran, Iraq, and many other Arab countries were on the side of the Nazis, and because of the hostility to Israel Nazism is not seen there in such a negative light even today.
The similarities between Islam and Nazism run deep. Not all people are seen as the same - there is difference between infidels, people of the book and faithful in Islam. Similary, Nazism believed in different sort of people - the bottom were Jews and non-whites, corresponding to infidels, then Slavic people were somehow analogous to the people of the book in Islam, and Aryans to the faithful. The family values are also similar, as well as despising of petty profits made from lending money (a practice is against Islamic values, and was used to portray both USA and the Jews in the negative light by the Nazis).

Many systems of belief share similarities with Nazism, and many systems of belief have been compared to Nazism. It is not enlightening to pick just one out for special emphasis. Also, regarding historical alliances with the Nazis, there were many, many countries historically allied or gaining benefit from the Nazis; there is no usefulness in picking out just one (and then expanding it to include many anti-Nazi countires) for special emphasis. DanKeshet

Nazism and Judaism may also share some similarities, and Christianity as well. Your point being? Rickyrab 23:51, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

"Hitler also greatly admired America"

Have removed the following sentence from under Nazi and Great Britain:

Similarly, Hitler also greatly admired America. He praised the United States for its anti-immigration laws. According to Hitler, America was a successful nation because it kept itself "pure" of "lesser races."

It doesn't fit with my understanding, but I admit to have made no careful investigation at all.
-- Ruhrjung 17:36 29 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I'm going to be so bold as to put it back, but wanted to say why, first. In Mein Kampf (vol. 2 ch. 3) he writes "...Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the American Union, in which an effort is made to consult reason at least partially. By refusing immigration on principle to elements in poor health, by simply excluding certain races from naturalization, it professes in slow beginnings a view which is peculiar to the folkish state concept." This comes on the heels of his comparison in volume 1 of North and South America, intimating that the economic successes and failures of these respectively can be attributed to "race."
It's plain (to me, anyway) that Hitler had a skewed view of America, which oddly enough fit his own ideology. What's less in doubt is that he actually held the U.S. (or his imagined version of it) in high esteem, at least before the war. - Hephaestos 17:53 29 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Exactly. That was his view in the early 1920s. My impression is however that this changed during the 1930s, but as I wrote: I've made no investigation, only accumulated impressions during my short life. I believe you make a serious mistake, but edit-wars are not to my liking.
Best regards!
-- Ruhrjung 18:05 29 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Some quotes:

"Hitler badly misjudged the Americans, partly because of his preconceptions and partly because he was badly served. He entertained fantastically wrong notions of American society and politics. He believed that the masses ... were on the verge of revolt against a dominant Jewish ruling class and that the United States ... was a corrupt and demoralized country...
On this view, the United States was not nearly such a formidable enemy as its material power might make it appear. Besides being blinded by his prejudices Hitler was misled by exceptionally inept reporting by his emmissaries in Washington, especially his service attaches, who ... devoted more ink to political nonsense than to technical reports."

{From "Total War" by Peter Calvocoressi & Guy Wint, Random House, 1972}
-- Ruhrjung 18:33 29 Jun 2003 (UTC)

British money

Even more interesting is that the relation between national socialism and the british empire was no one way track. Without british money the so called movement of the NSDAP would have hardly "survived" the elections of 1930. Even today much of the propaganda material for geman Neo-Nazis comes from Greater Britain and the U.S.

The paragraph above is removed from the article. I think it would need a credible source to be reinserted, and if so better with a polished language.
--Ruhrjung 11:58, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)

It may be that my language is not polish enough to write it in your article, but what I wrote about britisch support of the NSDAP can be read in every history book.
--134.76.145.47

The poliching is no problem, that will surely someone else take care of. But you could provide a good reference, couldn't you?
--Ruhrjung 12:33, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)


I'll try my best!

Do we really need more than one swastika on this page? How about replacing the grey one (not the color one at the top of the page) with a picture of Hitler. Vancouverguy 23:12, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

more than one swastika on this page? no hurt in using it to point out the religous tone for the bent cross. I put in a pic of hitler. I'm looking for a ad bill about the nazi propaganda for industry [for the econ]. reddi 23:41, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Thanks.Vancouverguy 23:42, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

The background of the German National Socialists

I've removed the following paragraphs, which were added to the end of the article. The misspelling of Göring's name gives, the disregard of the article's disposition, and the usage of <i>...</i> gives the impression that the editor might be not so seriously interested in improving Wikipedia.

I would suggest that actually you have removed this passage because it doesn't fit with the rest of the page - a long apologia for Nazism. Goering's name is not spelt incorrectly - replacing an umlaut with an additional e is common in the English language and if the italicisation is wrong then fix that and don't use it as a flimsy excuse to remove the passage.
The page is full of crap - Nazi domestic economic policy had one aim and one aim alone - to ready Germany for war. In that sense it was a success, but in no other. Throughout Hitler's term in power the economy tottered on the brink of disaster and even mass famine. German families were poorer in 1939 than they were in 1929. The attempt to pass off American isolationisationism as an excuse for Nazi-ism gets a few points for originality but it doesn't alter the fact that it is garbage


Sociologically many prominent Nazis (though not Hitler) were the children of those who had previously prospered under the Imperial regime in Germany. Herman Goering was the son of an imperial diplomat, Albert Speer the son of an architect and the Nazis were very strong in the student movement before winning power. Many of these people, as well as senior figures in the armed forces, blamed those they called the "November criminals" for removing the old order and instead establishing a democratic republic and so undermining their inheritance. Combined with a wider German sense of injustice over the outcome of the Great War this was a powerful political force.
But there is no evidence that the Nazi's ever secured the support of the majority of the German people and many - especially Catholics, many dissenting, but not all, protestant churches and perhaps the majority of the working class - remained sceptical. Hitler's foreign policy successes were welcommed, and boosted his popularity, because he appeared so successful without provoking a war. His often stated intention to actually have a war was ignored by many (including the German officer corps) until too late.

--Ruhrjung 06:47, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Minor inconsistency

"According to the Nazis, an obvious mistake of this type is to permit or encourage multiple languages within a nation. This belief is why the German Nazis were so concerned with the unification of German-speaking peoples' territories."

Unifying German-speaking peoples would oppose having one language spoken in more than one nation, not having one nation speaking more than one language. It's obviously not a problem with the article per se as it is a local fallacious construct; I think we should avoid these as much as possible but I'm not familiar enough with the topic to edit while preserving the proper logic nuance (did they also consider more than one nation speaking a single language to be a problem? or did they infer this logic from the "mistake" described in the text? or was it just an economical/military reason for doing this?). --Gutza 09:48, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Is national socialism socialism?

Lir, while early national socialism had some socialist components in its philosophy, Hitler eliminated these, culminating in the purge of the Strassers during the Night of the Long Knives. National Socialism as it is traditionally understood has very little to do with socialism. Danny 03:27, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

  • It is your POV that the National Socialists weren't "true" socialists, they claimed that they were. There is a difference between national socialism and international socialism. Lirath Q. Pynnor
    • No, it is my professional statement as someone who specializes in this particular period of history. The Deutsche Arbeits-Front was not a trade union in any traditional sense, workers were generally opposed to the Nazis coming to power (see the tables in Schaefer's NSDAP: Entwicklung und Struktur der Staatspartei des dritten Reiches for instance, on p. 17 and 19), Schacht could hardly be described as a socialist in any sense, and there was a distinct hierarchy, determined by service to the Reich. According to you, how was it socialist. Oh, and socialism and nationalism need not result in national socialism. Eastern Europe, for example, the Solidarity union, prove that. How do you regard it as socialist Danny 03:42, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)
      • And it is my professional statement that the National Socialist party claimed to be socialist; unlike most other socialists, they did not support internationalism (preferring nationalism). Lirath Q. Pynnor
        • And just what is your profession, Lir? RickK 03:44, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Do what you want. I am getting pretty damn tired of Wikipedia. Danny 03:57, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)


Couple quick things. Nazism was kinda socialist, in a vague and moderate way. They did nationalize some industry, and had some vestiges of a social welfare net. They wern't really right or left wing, but mostly just authoritarian. Also, why come people are always getting mad about edits and discussion on the wikipedia? I thought that was the point of it, that it was always to be a work in progress, etc...? JackLynch 04:02, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nazism&oldid=1855830"