AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Ican wrote:
Hitler was a socialist who like many of his kind sought power. In seeking that power he decided to oppose rival socialist and communist groups and formed the National Socialist Party to support his quest for power. Ultimately, Hitler became a socialist dictator who selected the Jews to be the ones he blamed for Germany's many troubles. He convinced those who received a share of what Hitler stole, became his loyal subjects. To maintain their loyalty, he directed their mass murder of the millions of Jews he blamed for Germany's troubles.

OBAMA IS a socialist who like many of his kind SEEKS power. In seeking that power he decided to oppose rival LIBERAL groups and formed the OBAMA BRANCH OF THE DEMOCRAT Party to support his quest for power. Ultimately, OBAMA WILL BECOME a socialist dictator who HAS selected RUSH LIMBAUGH AND MEMBERS OF HIS CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT to be the ONES he BLAMES for AMERICA's many troubles. He convinced those who WILL RECEIVE a share of what HE IS STEALING, TO BECOME his loyal subjects. To maintain their loyalty, he WILL ULTIMATELY DIRECT THE mass murder of the millions of CONSERVATIVES he BLAMES for AMERICA's many troubles.

0 Replies

@Debra Law,

Debra Law wrote:

[ican] how many millions or billions do you need to retain in your own pocket to satisfy your personal pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness?

About $800 per week--at the March 1, 2009 value of the dollar! My kids need more!

2 Replies

I am so disappointed:

Here is what the legal genius, Debra L A W-wrote;
quote
Foxfyre's intellectual dishonesty is running amok.
end of quote

I was waiting for a full explanation of what Marx really meant.

Is it possible that the legal genius, Debra L A W is really a fraud?

But, please, Debra Law, you have disappointed your fans--More explication please.

You may not have understood Foxfyre but I am not a legal genius like you are and I understood her very well.

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

Ican- She is probably a legal assistant that has delusions of grandeur. I am sure she has no family and does not know what it means to try to support a family if Obama's rule means more and more unemployment!

0 Replies

Cyclops wrote:

The other person you can blame that on? The retirees. They knew that their portfolios could go up or down or lose ALL value, and that is what happened. Somewhere along the line, you older generation got the idea that the stock market was a money machine which could not fail. People bet their entire savings on this fact. And where are they now? It was a dumb bet and I have little pity for them.
**************************************************************

Yep, greedy bastards who fought World War II,Korea and VietNam. N ow, they will get what's coming to them. But what ever happened to the Obamian mantra of compassion for all-the big tent?

0 Replies

Ican wrote:

Obama's so-called "stimulus plan" constitutes an organized effort to use the federal government of the USA to steal what Americans have lawfully earned and give much of it to Americans who have not earned it. That which the "stimulus plan" steals and is not given away to Americans who have not earned it, is paid to increasing numbers of government employees.

Those Americans who are recipents of what the "stimulus plan" steals have become a loyal group of parasites who will thereafter are a devoted group of voters and accomplices.

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

ican711nm wrote:

Debra Law wrote:
[ican] how many millions or billions do you need to retain in your own pocket to satisfy your personal pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness?
About $800 per week--at the March 1, 2009 value of the dollar! My kids need more!

Okay that was good. The best post of the day by far. Smile

0 Replies

Foxfyre challenged Cyclops- He has not met the challenge. Foxfyre wrote:

I would write that because it was included in the article on which I was commenting--you know, that article you don't seem to have read before you started popping off about it? I believe the writer of the article can quite easily support his thesis there while I believe you have zero chance of competently rebutting it.

********************************************************************

SOP for Cyclops

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote--in response to Cyclops-

I would write that because it was included in the article on which I was commenting--you know, that article you don't seem to have read before you started popping off about it? I believe the writer of the article can quite easily support his thesis there while I believe you have zero chance of competently rebutting it.
******************************

C yclops has not rebutted --as usual.

0 Replies

Foxfyre challenged Cyclops--He, as usual, had no coherent answer to the following:

I'm sure it appears that way to an Obama disciple who worships his every essence and believes he is incapable of doing no wrong. Are you that disciple? If not have you EVER posted ANYTHING critical of Barack Obama? Could you direct me to it as evidence that you don't operate on totally blind faith?

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

I do believe however, as a young man, at least according to biographies I've read, that Hitler was intrigued with Marx and Marxist concepts. Was he not a member of the German Communist Party (or at least the equivalent) for awhile? This would have been during or shortly after WWI. [{quote]
No. And Hitler weas until the early 1930's an Austrian.
[/]

It's still quite surprising for me why mainly (if not only) the American conservatives have this funny view of Hitler's politics.

It might be a problem with the language - both Hitler and Marx were native German speakers.

Or not - like many others think.

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Apparently<Walter cannot read English-

Again:

-2 And, Foxfyre- Hitler adopted Maxist ideas to use in his drive for power. Because of Hitler's monomania about Jews, he was unable to use those ideas directly, since he always said that Jews predominated in Marxist activites but according to Jonah Goldberg's book- "Liberal Fascism", he was not loath to use their concepts.

Quote Goldberg--P. 60

Hitler viewed the bourgeoise in almost the same terms as Lenin did.
"Let us not deceive ourselves," Hitler declared,"Our bourgeoise is almost worthless for any worthwhile human endeavor...Had communism really intended nothing more than a certain purification by eliminating isolated rotton elements from among the ranks of our equally worthless Philistines,one could have sat back quietly and looked on for a while"

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

What labour movement? The Deutsche Arbeiterpartei? Not a single worker in it. Hitler has never been a member of any kind of labor movement.

HITLER HAS NEVER BEEN A MEMBER OF ANY KIND,ANY KIND, ANY KIND, ANY KIND OF LABOR MOVEMENT.

WRONG_ Herr Doktor--Although you would never recognize it as such since you are so far on the left.

Note:

Quote from
"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L. Shirer"

P. 202

Hitler said in his speech of May Day 1933 that May Day would be celebrated to honor and respect the Workers. Ley( Hitler's right hand man in Labor)took over the leadership of the Unions.He said-Workers! Your institutions are sacred to us National Socialists-We are the National Socialist German Workers Party.

HInteler won't tell us that Hitler's co-optation of labor was due to the fact that many in the leadership were clearly Marxist leaning.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

[quote="Foxfyre"]
I do believe however, as a young man, at least according to biographies I've read, that Hitler was intrigued with Marx and Marxist concepts. Was he not a member of the German Communist Party (or at least the equivalent) for awhile? This would have been during or shortly after WWI. [{quote]
No. And Hitler weas until the early 1930's an Austrian.
[/]

It's still quite surprising for me why mainly (if not only) the American conservatives have this funny view of Hitler's politics.

It might be a problem with the language - both Hitler and Marx were native German speakers.

Or not - like many others think.

My comments in green since the quote function seems to be malfunctioning today.

Okay I'm working from mostly memory here and from reading a translation of Mein Kampf, but that was decades ago too. I do recall reading one history of Hitler becoming intrigued with concepts of Marxism or socialism during debates with a prominent German--I recall when Hitler was hospitalized during WWII or perhaps immediately after. I wish I could remember that source, but alas, I cannot.

The histories I have read, however suggest that Hitler became German some time before the 1930's, however.

Taking your suggestion to visit Wikipedia re this, I did and found this:

Quote:

In Mein Kampf, Hitler attributed his conversion to German nationalism to a time during his early teenage years when he read a book of his father's about the Franco-Prussian War, which caused him to question why his father and other German Austrians failed to fight for the Germans during the war

Quote:

Hitler received the final part of his father's estate in May 1913 and moved to Munich. He wrote in Mein Kampf that he had always longed to live in a "real" German city. In Munich, he became more interested in architecture and, he says, the writings of Houston Stewart Chamberlain. Moving to Munich also helped him escape military service in Austria for a time, but the Austrian army eventually arrested him. After a physical exam and a contrite plea, he was deemed unfit for service and allowed to return to Munich. However, when Germany entered World War I in August 1914, he petitioned King Ludwig III of Bavaria for permission to serve in a Bavarian regiment. This request was granted, and Adolf Hitler enlisted in the Bavarian army.[19]

Quote:

Hitler had long admired Germany, and during the war he had become a passionate German patriot, although he did not become a German citizen until 1932. Hitler found the war to be 'the greatest of all experiences' and afterwards he was praised by a number of his commanding officers for his bravery.[29] He was shocked by Germany's capitulation in November 1918 even while the German army still held enemy territory.[30] Like many other German nationalists, Hitler believed in the Dolchstoßßlegende ("dagger-stab legend") which claimed that the army, "undefeated in the field," had been "stabbed in the back" by civilian leaders and Marxists back on the home front. These politicians were later dubbed the November Criminals.

Quote:

Here Hitler also met Dietrich Eckart, one of the early founders of the party and member of the occult Thule Society.[33] Eckart became Hitler's mentor, exchanging ideas with him, teaching him how to dress and speak, and introducing him to a wide range of people. Hitler thanked Eckart by paying tribute to him in the second volume of Mein Kampf. To increase the party's appeal, the party changed its name to the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or National Socialist German Workers Party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler

Anyhow it isn't important enough for a thorough discussion. I have admitted that my own recollections were faulty on this and I will no doubt remember other stuff incorrectly as well.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Correction: I acknowledge that Hitler was not a German citizen until 1932; however emotionally and philosophically he was living and behaving as German well before that.

On a related but different matter, I know that modern liberals have been trying to rewrite American history for some time now. Apparently American history books provide a somewhat different perspective on European history than European history books do. I wonder if the converse is true? Would European accounts of American history provide a much different perspective than our own written histories do?

2 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Second correction: Hitler was hospitalized in WWI, not WWII. (I'm not proofing very well this morning am I.)

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Correction: I acknowledge that Hitler was not a German citizen until 1932; however emotionally and philosophically he was living and behaving as German well before that.

Certainly the differences between behaving as a "German" and/or as an "Austrian" are worth being looked at.

During WWI Hitler joined the Bavarian army as an Austrian, made his oath of allegiance on the Bavarian king and the Austrian emperor. (The German emperor was only C-i-C of the Bavarian army during times of war.)

I'm (mostly) writing from memory, to - it's some decades ago that I wrote my thesis.
However, since researched quite a bit on National-Socialism related topics during my life, I happen to know the one or other fact more easily than you. (Certainly you could me bombard with facts from New Mexico's and the USA's history.)

I believe - and quite a few have written about it - that the different approach to political parties, party politics, party programs etc, the different political systems, the angst-ridden view of anything left to the (US-) political center ... that all this might put the German history for an American in a different light.

Take your sentence "however emotionally and philosophically he was living and behaving as German well before that".
Hitler was born in Austria - the Empire of Austria lost it's connection to "Germany" in 1804 completely.
"Germany", on the other side, became only 'Germany' for the first time ever in 1871 - with a couple of kingdoms, (great-)dukedoms and principalities as more or less independent states. (Especially the status of the Kingdom of Bavaria is broadly neglected, in my opinion, - outside Bavaria.)

So what parameters could one use to call someone living and behaving emotically and philosophically as a German?
Most historians think that the only fact you really can demonstarte that is the so-called "hurra patriotism" in 1914.

But all this is a different topic than what this thread is about ...

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

So what parameters could one use to call someone living and behaving emotically and philosophically as a German?
Most historians think that the only fact you really can demonstarte that is the so-called "hurra patriotism" in 1914.

Perhaps most historians in German might look at it that way. Wikipedia, however, apparently looks at it as I did based on Hitler's own thoughts expressed in his own writings. It's all a matter of interpretation, however, and you could be right or I could be right or we both could be right from the particular perspective that we are coming from.

But yes, it is another topic; albeit one of interest to me.

But back to this topic, this has stirred more questions regarding history in general. It is obvious from the posts, mostly hateful posts but posts nevertheless, from the leftists on this thread and elsewhere, that they take a much different view of our history than do the MACs. They see the Reagan years negatively, for instance, while most of the MACs view the Reagan years as a positive era of American history. If each wrote their own version of that history, the reader would certainly received a much different perspective in the separate versions.

Which made me wonder how much different German history reads when written by Germans than it reads when written by historians on this side of the pond? How much differently do Europeans view American history than Americans do?

I suspect that perspective is a huge part if not everything in assessment of history, of evaluating politics, and of conclusions re socioeconomic ideology.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Which made me wonder how much different German history reads when written by Germans than it reads when written by historians on this side of the pond? How much differently do Europeans view American history than Americans do?

The history is always the same - no matter who writes what about.

The interpretations vary.
I don't think that the American history is seen that much different from Europe than it is from inside the USA. Especially, since it's a relatively short period.

Regarding the newest history, certainly Reagan is seen controversially. (E.g. we here in Germany don't focus so much on him as being THE person who re-united Germany.)
[One problem with newest history is that you deal with stuff ... and people are still alive who lived with that, too. And personal views and reviews might see facts in a different light ...]

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Do Germans view Reagan positively? Do they see him as the one who stared down Gorbachev challenging him to 'tear down the wall'?

(I think MACs long for that kind of leader who can do that kind of stuff without looking like a dangerous cowboy. President Bush, had the heart, but unfortunately did not have the kind of personality that could pull that off.)

1 Reply

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know