• Home
  • Reviews
  • Articles
  • News
  • Tools
  • GamingHeaven
  • Forums
  • Network
 

Go Back   DriverHeaven.net > Forums > DriverHeaven's Heaven > Political and Religious Debate

Notices

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old Jul 15, 2004, 10:10 AM   #1
BWX
watching 1080i
 
BWX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: April 13th 2029
Posts: 19,435
Rep Power: 75
BWX will become famous soon enough
System Specs

An Interesting Viewpoint

This a very sobering approach to our world today.
THE WORLD SITUATION - A LETTER TO MY SONS


This was written by a retired attorney, to his sons, May 19, 2004.

Dear Tom, Kevin, Kirby and Ted,

As your father, I believe I owe it to you to share some thoughts on the
present world situation. We have over the years discussed a lot of
important things, like going to college, jobs and so forth. But this
really takes precedence over any of those discussions. I hope this might give you a longer term perspective that fewer and fewer of my generation are left to speak to. To be sure you understand that this is not politically flavored, I will tell you that since Franklin D. Roosevelt, who led us through pre and WWII (1933 - 1945) up to and including our present President, I have without exception, supported our presidents on all matters of international conflict. This would include just naming a few in addition to President Roosevelt - WWII: President Truman - Korean War 1950; President Kennedy - Bay of Pigs (1961); President Kennedy - Vietnam (1961); [1] eight presidents (5 Republican & 4 Democrat) during the cold war (1945 - 1991); President Clinton's strikes on Bosnia (1995) and on Iraq (1998). [2] So be sure you read this as completely non-political or otherwise you will miss the point.

Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as
We know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes
WWII). The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means.

First, let's examine a few basics:

1. When did the threat to us start?
Many will say September 11th, 2001. The answer as far as the United
States is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the
following attacks on us: Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979; Beirut, Lebanon
Embassy 1983; Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983; Lockerbie, Scotland
Pan-Am flight to New York 1988; First New York World Trade Center attack
1993; Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996; Nairobi,
Kenya US Embassy 1998; Dar es Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998; Aden, Yemen
USS Cole 2000; New York World Trade Center 2001; Pentagon 2001. (Note that
during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks
worldwide). [3]

2. Why were we attacked?
Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks
Happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.

4. Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.

5. What is the Muslim population of the World? 25%

6. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?
Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the
predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the
dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that made no
difference. You either went along with the administration or you were
eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for
political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests).
(http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm).

Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the 6 million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian or any others. Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way - their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else.. [5] The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing - by their own pronouncements – killing all of us infidels. I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die?

6. So who are we at war with?
There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the
Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing
this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't
clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

So with that background, now to the two major questions:
1. Can we lose this war?
2. What does losing really mean?

If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions.

We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the
major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the
answer to the second question - What does losing mean? It would appear that
a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads,
bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post
Vietnam.

This is as far from the truth as one can get. What losing really means is:

We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will
not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us
dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have
produced an increasing series of attacks against us over the past 18 years.
The plan was clearly to terrorist attack us until we were neutered and
submissive to them.

We would of course have no future support from other nations for fear of
reprisals and for the reason that they would see we are impotent and cannot
help them.

Continued.........
BWX is offline   Reply With Quote


Old Jul 15, 2004, 10:11 AM   #2
BWX
watching 1080i
 
BWX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: April 13th 2029
Posts: 19,435
Rep Power: 75
BWX will become famous soon enough
System Specs

They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will
Be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do, will be done. Spain is finished.

The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they
might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished
too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and fading
fast. See the attached article on the French condition by Tom Segel. [6]




If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will
all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us if
they were threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the Muslims, how
could anyone else? The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war and
therefore are completely committed to winning at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise committed to winning at any cost.

Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple.
Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100%
Effort to win.

So, how can we lose the war? Again, the answer is simple. We can lose
the war by imploding. That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win.

Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the
Life and death seriousness of this situation.

- President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation.
Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between
17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does
that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war. For the
duration we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have
become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil
rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.
And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil
rights during WWII and immediately restored them after the victory and in
fact added many more since then. Do I blame President Bush or President
Clinton before him? No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain
All of our Political Correctness and all of our civil rights during this
conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply
to war. Get them out of your head.

- Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the
Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us
lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is
because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that
conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and
weakening, it concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause.

- Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and
media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues
and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing with Saddam
Hussein. And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically
killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the
same type enemy fighters who recently were burning Americans and dragging
their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq. And still more recently
the same type enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources
internationally, of the beheading of an American prisoner they held.
Compare this with some of our press and politicians who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners - not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them. Can this be for real?

The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the
Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can. To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned - totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they absolutely oblivious to the magnitude of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us for many years. Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels. That translates into all non-Muslims - not just in the United States, but throughout the world. We are the last bastion of defense.
- We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant'. That
charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we
believe that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world. We can't. If we don't
recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive, and no other
free country in the World will survive if we are defeated. And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the Press, equal rights for anyone - let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the World.

This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or
we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the
Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to
be written or read.

If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims
take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to
increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by
little on the established French traditions. The French will be fighting
among themselves over what should or should not be done, which will
continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?

Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some
external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away,
politically correct piece by politically correct piece. And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power. They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"?

I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are
united, there is no way that we can lose. I believe that after the
election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about. Do whatever you can to preserve it.

Love,

Dad




FOOTNOTES:

[1] By the way on Vietnam, the emotions are still so high that it is
really not possible to discuss it. However, I think President Kennedy was
correct. He felt there was a communist threat from China, Russia and North
Vietnam to take over that whole area. Also remember that we were in a 'cold
war' with Russia. I frankly think Kennedy's plan worked and kept that total
communist control out, but try telling that to anyone now. It just isn't
politically correct to say so. Historians will answer this after cool
headed
research, when the people closest to it are all gone.

[2] As you know, I am a strong President Bush supporter and will vote
for
him. However, if Senator Kerry is elected, I will fully support him on all
matters of international conflict, just as I have supported all presidents
in the past.

[3] Source for statistics in Par. 1 is
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html

[4] The Institute of Islamic Information and Education.
http://www.iiie.net/Intl/PopStats.html

[5] Note the attached article by Tom Segel referred to in footnote 6
infra, the terrorist Muslim have already begun the havoc in France. (The
note was not attached to the E-mail I received. Gene)

[6] I checked this article with two sources - Hoax Busters and Urban
Myths. It does not come up as a Hoax on either. I also then E-mailed Mr.
Segel and he confirmed the article was his.

[7] "I don't think the Army or any branch of service runs any type of
war
any more. It's done by senators and congressmen. There are too many
civilians involved." Returning Iraq veteran, Sgt. 1st Class Greg Klees as
quoted in the Cedar Rapids, IA Gazette on May 13th, 2004.

[8] There are 64 Muslim countries. This does not count countries like
Spain that are controlled by the Muslim terrorists.
BWX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 02:02 PM   #3
DriverHeaven Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 28
Rep Power: 0
Eurotrash is on a distinguished road

Scary thoughts from a religious fanatic at best,
Let's not forget that christians, catholics, protestants, jews and many more religions have been at each others throats for millennia, and most of these religions didn't finally create more rights for women until the last couple of decades. Most religions are still afraid of homosexual people and thus have a long way to go before they understand it must be part of the bigger picture just like women's rights were.
Ps. anyone standing behind a leader 100% without occasionally questioning him is closer to fascism then they would like to admit. I also wonder what "cause" he's talking about, the NAZI's had causes.
Eurotrash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 02:34 PM   #4
BWX
watching 1080i
 
BWX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: April 13th 2029
Posts: 19,435
Rep Power: 75
BWX will become famous soon enough
System Specs

Quote:
Originally posted by Eurotrash
Scary thoughts from a religious fanatic at best,
No, the religious fanatics are the ones who blew up the twin towers.
BWX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 04:13 PM   #5
mkk
Obamaman
 
mkk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gefle, Sweden
Posts: 3,201
Rep Power: 39
mkk will become famous soon enoughmkk will become famous soon enough
System Specs

Quote:
Originally posted by Eurotrash
Scary thoughts from a religious fanatic at best,
Or just another scared fascist. We've got quite a few here in europe as well like for instance in France, Italy and Austria where they have gained significant political power.
mkk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 04:14 PM   #6
DriverHeaven Lover
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 156
Rep Power: 0
Sturmbahn is on a distinguished road

Quote:
Originally posted by BWX
No, the religious fanatics are the ones who blew up the twin towers.
Definitely!

Very good reading, BWX. Thanks
Sturmbahn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 17, 2004, 04:28 AM   #7
BWX
watching 1080i
 
BWX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: April 13th 2029
Posts: 19,435
Rep Power: 75
BWX will become famous soon enough
System Specs

Quote:
Originally posted by mkk
Or just another scared fascist. We've got quite a few here in europe as well like for instance in France, Italy and Austria where they have gained significant political power.
Who are you talking about? I think he's just a guy looking at the current situation in the world, and attempting to make some kind of sense out of it. If you look, he is only condemning terrorists who want to murder everyone who don't agree with them, or who aren't them.. including you and your family. What in the world makes you think he is a fascist? I really want to know.


fas·cism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fshzm)
n.
often Fascism
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, [color=yellow]suppression of the opposition through terror[/color] and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
Oppressive, dictatorial control.





Hmmmm, sounds like the author is AGAINST fascism, doesn't it? Against rule by terror... Maybe you just didn't know what that meant?
BWX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2004, 10:24 PM   #8
DH's oldest Geek?
 
OldBuzzard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,523
Rep Power: 40
OldBuzzard is a jewel in the roughOldBuzzard is a jewel in the roughOldBuzzard is a jewel in the roughOldBuzzard is a jewel in the rough
System Specs

BWX:

Don't get too stressed when you hear a liberal toss the term Fascist around. That's one of their typical responses. When they don't have a legitimate argument, they always resort to name calling. Shucks, most of them wouldn't know what a real Fascist is if one bit them on the butt.
OldBuzzard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2004, 11:21 PM   #9
Comfortably Numb
 
Highwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 504
Rep Power: 0
Highwood is on a distinguished road

Quote:
Originally posted by mkk
Or just another scared fascist.

The only fascist government the world has ever seen were the Nazis, who were by definition socialists.
Highwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2004, 12:07 AM   #10
VETUS INFLATIO
 
Falstaff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Red Lodge UK
Posts: 15,923
Rep Power: 75
Falstaff is just super!Falstaff is just super!Falstaff is just super!Falstaff is just super!Falstaff is just super!Falstaff is just super!

my god there have been many, starting with the romans...fascista..bundle of sticks....Mussolini revived it
Falstaff is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2004, 12:23 AM   #11
Mr. Nobody
 
mainman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: OmniPresent Nightwatcher
Posts: 5,933
Rep Power: 45
mainman has a spectacular aura aboutmainman has a spectacular aura about

Portugal lived under a fascist regime till 25 April 1975. My parents lived under that regime for quite few years, thank God i never knew it, but those were hard times.
mainman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2004, 01:02 AM   #12
BWX
watching 1080i
 
BWX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: April 13th 2029
Posts: 19,435
Rep Power: 75
BWX will become famous soon enough
System Specs

It also seems like the Taliban was a fascist regime in Afghanistan.
BWX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2004, 01:27 AM   #13
VETUS INFLATIO
 
Falstaff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Red Lodge UK
Posts: 15,923
Rep Power: 75
Falstaff is just super!Falstaff is just super!Falstaff is just super!Falstaff is just super!Falstaff is just super!Falstaff is just super!

they are muslims BMX and are driven by their own fanatical desire to achieve victory for all muslims against infidels, perhaps they are more fanatic than fascist, but I can see your point of view.
Falstaff is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2004, 10:42 AM   #14
mkk
Obamaman
 
mkk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gefle, Sweden
Posts: 3,201
Rep Power: 39
mkk will become famous soon enoughmkk will become famous soon enough
System Specs

Quote:
Originally posted by BWX
What in the world makes you think he is a fascist?
I'm only replying quickly while casually surfing in away from home so I'll be short in words. What makes me guess that he might well be a fascist is the arguments and world view that he brings up. While saying things that France will be overtaken by Muslims in five years is not fascist in itself, such grand delusions usually comes up in that crowd.

Quote:
Originally posted by Highwood
The only fascist government the world has ever seen were the Nazis, who were by definition socialists.
And you have any interest what so ever in history?
mkk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2004, 10:49 AM   #15
DriverHeaven Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 11
Rep Power: 0
Jarka Ruus is on a distinguished road

Quote:
Originally posted by Highwood
The only fascist government the world has ever seen were the Nazis, who were by definition socialists.
The problem is, the fanatical leftists out there ignore this fact and seem to think the Nazi party were right-wing fanatics. The truth is in the telling from Hitler's own statements including one where he stated he was a socialist to his policies. You will get idiots in here who will claim otherwise though. You could call them "Moore-ons".
Jarka Ruus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2004, 02:56 PM   #16
BWX
watching 1080i
 
BWX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: April 13th 2029
Posts: 19,435
Rep Power: 75
BWX will become famous soon enough
System Specs

Quote:
Originally posted by Jarka Ruus
You could call them "Moore-ons".
Oh, now I haven't heard that before- that's classic..
BWX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 25, 2004, 07:55 AM   #17
DriverHeaven Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 24
Rep Power: 0
insurrection is on a distinguished road

its a bit of a stretch to say that nazis were really socialist... even if they called themselves that.
Quote:
Wikipedia.org
Nazism and socialism
Because Nazism is an abbreviation for "National Socialism", and Nazi leaders sometimes described their ideology as a form of socialism, some people believe that Nazism was a form of socialism, or that there are similarities between Nazism and socialism. It has also been argued that the Nazi use of economic intervention, including central planning and some limited public ownership, is indicative of 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 socialist progress, these factors alone are sufficient to categorize "National Socialism" as non-socialist.

Nazi leaders made statements describing their views as socialist, while at the same time opposing the idea of class conflict espoused by the Social Democrats (SPD) and Communists (KPD). Established socialist movements did not view the Nazis as socialists and argued that the Nazis were thinly disguised reactionaries. Historians such as Ian Kershaw also note the links between the Nazis and the German political and economic establishment and the significance of the Night of the Long Knives in which Hitler purged what were at the time seen as "leftist" elements in the Nazi Party and how this was done at the urging of the military and conservatives.

Many of the traditional center and right political parties of the Weimar Republic accused the Nazis of being socialists citing planks in the Nazis' party program which called for nationalization of trusts and other socialist measures. However, the German National People's Party (DNVP), the most important party on the mainstream right, usually treated the Nazis as a respected potential member of coalition cabinet.

The Nazis' came to power through an alliance with traditional conservative forces. Franz von Papen, a very conservative former German Chancellor and former member of the Catholic Centre Party supported Hitler for the position of Chancellor and later became an important Nazi official.The Enabling Act which gave the Nazis dictatorial powers passed only because of the support of conservative and centrist deputies in the Reichstag, over the opposition of Social Democrats and Communists.

When the Nazis were still an opposition party some leaders, particularly Gregor Strasser, espoused anti-big business stances and advocated the idea of the Nazis as a workers' party. In spite of this, most workers continued to vote for the SPD or the KPD as late as the March 1933 elections held shortly after Hitler's appointment as chancellor.

Central to Nazi ideology and propaganda was not the rights of workers or the need for socialism but opposition to Marxism and Bolshevism which the Nazis called Judeo-Bolshevism. According to the Nazi world view Marxism was part of a Jewish conspiracy. Rather than being afraid of the Nazis' "socialism" many prominent conservatives and capitalists supported and funded the Nazis because they saw them as a bulwark against Bolshevism.

Ideologically fascism and Nazism reject the most important aspects of Marxist theory. For instance, Hitler did not exalt the working class over the capitalist class as Marx prescribed. In his book Mein Kampf, Hitler wrote '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... 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. '

Moreover, Hitler despised Marx as a Jew and condemned communism and Marxism as Judeo-Bolshevism pledging to block its rise in Germany arguing that the nation's downfall was due to Marxism and its Jewish influence.

There were ideological shades of opinion within the Nazi Party, particularly prior to their seizure of power in 1933, but a central tenet of the party was always the leadership principle or Führerprinzip. 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. Although this is in some respects comparable to the behavior of certain Communist dictatorships such as that of Stalin in the Soviet Union or Mao Zedong in China, it also presents a strong contrast to the collective leadership exercised in other Communist parties, more so to the more democratic organization of most European socialist parties.

In power, the Nazis jettisoned practically all of the socialistic aspects of their program, and worked with big business, frequently at the expense of both small business and the working classes. Gregor Strasser was murdered, as was Ernst Röhm while Otto Strasser was purged from the party. Independent trade unions were outlawed, as were strikes. In place of the unions, the Nazis created the Deutsche Arbeitsfront. The Nazis took other symbolic steps to co-opt the working classes' support, such as the introduction of May Day as a national holiday in 1933. These were described by socialists as superficial moves designed to win the allegiance of workers rather than grant them any material concessions at the expense of capital.

Industries and trusts were not nationalised, with the exception of private rail lines (nationalised in the late 1930s to meet military contingencies). The only private holdings that were expropriated were those belonging to Jews. These holdings were then sold or awarded to businessmen who supported the Nazis and satisifed their ethnic and racial policies. Military production and even film production remained in the hands of private industries whilst serving the Nazi government, and many private companies flourished during the Nazi period. The Nazis never interfered with the profits made by such large German firms as Krupp, Siemens AG, and IG Farben. Efforts were made to coordinate business's actions with the needs of the state, particularly with regard to rearmament, and the Nazis established some state owned concerns such as Volkswagen. But these were functions of the new German expansionism rather than an implementation of socialist measures. Germany had moved to a war economy, and similar measures occurred in the western democracies during the first World War, and again once the second World War had begun.

The Nazis engaged in an extensive public works program including the construction of the Autobahn system. As with the expropriation of rail lines, however, the Autobahn system was created with the purpose of facilitating military transport, and government investment in transport systems is common in almost all nations. Similarly, all political movements that have formed governments have used economic intervention of some form or another. The suggestion that economic intervention is left-wing ignores the tradition of intervention practiced by monarchies and oligarchies in Europe before the eighteenth century, and the intervention, including protectionism, subsidies and anti-trade union laws, practiced by right-wing parties in government in Europe and North America during the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Since the fall of the Nazi regime, many theorists have argued that there are similarities between the government of Nazi Germany and that of Stalin's Soviet Union. In most cases, this has not taken the form of arguing that the Nazis were socialist, but arguing that both Nazism and Stalinism are forms of totalitarianism. This view was advanced most famously by Hannah Arendt in The Origins of Totalitarianism. However, most socialists argue that Stalin's system was not a truly socialist one, since it did not meet certain requirements that they see as essential for socialism - requirements such as a functional democracy, for example.
Source
insurrection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 25, 2004, 12:33 PM   #18
ein Krieger
 
Nacht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Clemson Uni
Posts: 3,127
Rep Power: 0
Nacht is on a distinguished road

It depends on how you define socialist really. The way the USSR was run, it strayed very far from true socialism. The nazi's may have been almost there, but it is a different kind of socialism. National Socialism varies greatly from communism. They are almost direct opposites.
Nacht is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 25, 2004, 05:53 PM   #19
DriverHeaven Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 24
Rep Power: 0
insurrection is on a distinguished road

well i dont think that the author really intended for the article to be a comparison specifically between communism and nazism. a lot of the mentioned important parts of marxist theory are also important parts of socialism.
insurrection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 25, 2004, 06:58 PM   #20
DriverHeaven Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 0
Nexus7even is on a distinguished road

None of that letter has any substance to it. He never makes