Rising fascism in the US

Thank you!

This individual is a poor idiot.

Lets go to numbers first.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Nazism



There are about 1,000 Nazi groups. The greatest group has 400 members, Most of these groups are from 10 to 30 members. No more than 100,000 members in the whole US plus they are scattered in small towns and rural areas.

Evidently not a danger for the US government and less for a country with 326,835,205 inhabitants.

Having Laurie Marhoefer comparing the Nazi movement of Germany before WW2 with the current Nazi groups in the US is completely ridiculous

On the other hand, liberals, those dudes who want drugs to be legalized, who incite abortion by demanding laws condoning it, who can't even recognize their own gender identity and men believe they are women, who incite the breaking of laws like immigration law, who disrespect the symbols of the country, these people causing chaos in the US are millions!

So, these millions of liberal dudes are afraid of a few thousands of Nazi members... wow! this is good to know, because besides of being corrupt dudes infesting society with their immoralities, now also results that they are a bunch of chicken...

The members of the Nazi movement are free by constitutional right to express their ideals and beliefs.

It is a complete nonsense that these groups represent any danger for the US because their number of affiliates and lack of resources and organization to be a real thread.

No doubt that liberals are just experts in inventing fake news and causing fear in our society.

And totally on the contrary, liberals are the enemies of a decent way of life and culture in the US.

Beware of liberals!

I agree they have a right to express their beliefs without being thrown in prison for it. I also find their beliefs abhorrent. Do you also find Nazi beliefs abhorrent, Cameron?

That reminds me of an old question that I never asked. Do you think the Nazis of 3rd Reich really had beliefs, or were they just thugs that got to act under the color of law?

Well, they had a world view they official endorsed, whether or not they all believed it.

I know that you didn't ask me, but I am willing to provide an answer which comes from my reading on this topic, going back almost 50 years. The initial NSDAP manifesto attacked liberal democracy, among other ideas. This was a crucial position, as many Germans felt that the failure of the empire was a result of liberal democracy. (German army officers denied that they had been defeated in the field; in particular, Ludendorff invented the "Stab in the Back" myth, that blamed politicians for Germany's defeat.) Without going into more detail, Ludendorff was damaged goods, and had no political future. But Hitler adopted the stab in the back myth, and the "Versailles Diktat" myth, and used them to get into power.

It is not the truth, nor careful analysis which people seek, usually, in making political decisions. Whether it was the ordinary German voter, or those who had joined the NSDAP, their motivations were based on the broad outlines of German resentment and a desire to "make Germany great again." Certainly there were some cynical Nazi official who were just looking out for the main chance. There were also a certain number who were enamored of fascist principles, and eager to implement them. Many others were political supporters who were otherwise mediocrities ready to exploit their opportunities. There are always plenty of people around willing to take advantage of any opportunity of self-aggrandizement, self-enrichment and the prospect of personal power. Such people are rarely, if ever, motivated by pure ideology, nor very squeamish about what that brings in its train.

This was true for the Italian fascists, the Spanish fascists, the Croatian, Greek and Hungarian fascists. It was true for the Bolsheviks. It was true for Japanese militarists. It was true for American politicians, whether Democrats of Republicans. Virtue is almost always in short supply; venality knows no limits.

These things are still true today, and are true in every nation.

Trump constantly attacks the media as evil, the enemies of America. He's got an army of gun-crazied followers listening to him. He is supported in his propaganda campaign by no other than dictator Putin. He could possibly get a majority in congress in a few years. Sorry to break your bubble but that's more dangerous to your democracy than any mischief the kids do in kindergarden.

I am surprised you seem unable to understand that. I chalk it up to your inexperience of life.

I agree, your post was excellent.

And rightly so. They lie about him mercilessly. It should be no surprise that he objects to their horribly unfair coverage.



Freedom-loving Americans you mean.



He has a majority in Congress NOW.



The only dangers to democracy here are the Democrats' witch hunts. Outlawing the Democratic Party in America will remove these dangers.

Kolyo, cameronleon is a Holocaust denier and a white supremacist.

Thank you!

The repukes presently in congress don't support him. At most they fear him.

An interesting case of ideological purity among historical nazis is provided by the story of John Rabe. It's admitedly an extreme case, an outlier. Rabe was perhaps the most genuinely good-hearted Nazi there ever was. What he did during the rape of Nankin was downright heroic. And yet, this man petitioned Hitler several times to intervene, and got himself arrested by the Gestapo for doing so. In his letters to Hitler, he appears convinced that the Fuhrer, if correctly informed about the situation in China, would require from his Japanese allies that they show better respect for Chinese civilian lives... As late as 1938, he still assumed that Hitler was as well-intentioned as Rabe was himself, ans that the Nazi regime remained a positive force in this wold.

You bet that most Nazis believed their own ideological crap. Rabe did. He was a good man, perhaps the best among them, and yet he thought highly enough of Hitler to write to him in those words:

Mein Führer!

The majority of my friends in China are of the opinion that you have not been provided a detailed report about the actual events in Nanking.

In sending you the enclosed copy of a lecture I have given, which however is not intended for the broader public, I am fulfilling a promise made to my friends in China that I would inform you about the sufferings of the Chinese populace.

My mission will have been fulfilled if you would be kind enough to let me know that the enclosed copy of my lecture was presented to you.

I have since been notified that I am to abstain from delivering other lectures of the sort or to show any pictures dealing with the subject. I shall obey this order, since it is not my intention to work against German policy and German government offices.

Let me assure you of my allegiance and honest devotion.

Cycloptichorn, may I add to your list of historical parallels. Hitler had setup a fall guy before he came into power. For one reason, to give him cover before he came forward to take power:

Franz von Papen (German: [ˈfʁants fɔn ˈpaːpən]; 29 October 1879 – 2 May 1969) was a German nobleman, General Staff officer and politician. He served as Chancellor of Germany in 1932 and as Vice-Chancellor under Adolf Hitler in 1933–34. He belonged to the group of close advisers to President Paul von Hindenburg in the late Weimar Republic. It was largely Papen, believing that Hitler could be controlled once he was in the government, who persuaded Hindenburg to appoint Hitler as Chancellor in a cabinet not under Nazi Party domination. However, Papen and his allies were quickly marginalized by Hitler and he left the government after the Night of the Long Knives, during which the Nazis killed some of his confidantes. -wikipedia

I put forth the proposition here that the Fuhrer is not tRump, but Bannon! tRump is simply a wealthy, simpleton, fall guy. Bannon will come into power when the table is set or disappear if things go bad.

Franz von Papen made possible Hitler's take-over. Von Papen had been a member of the Zentrum, the Center Party, the German Catholic Party. At the time that the NSDAP took control of the Reichstag, with 35% of the seats, von Papen was the head of the DVP, the German People's Party. the other major, far right party. In coalition, this gave them the necessary majority, but not enough to take over. So van Papen put Hitler in the know about the constitution of the Weimar Republic. Acting initially as a go-between with the Zentrum, he put Hitler in touch with the party's leadership, and Hitler promised to emancipate Catholics throughout Germany. Catholics did not have full civil rights in all of Germany, and were barred from public office in many places. Hitler had been raised Catholic, and said several times that he was and always had been a Catholic. He was sufficiently plausible that the Center Party joined with the NSDAP and the DVP to pass the enabling act. This gave the chancellor the right to legislate without reference to the Reichstag. After the Reichstag fire, left-wing parties had been banned, but the NSDAP had still only polled 45% (fractionally less, in fact). So Hitler needed the support of the DVP and the Zentrum to pass the act. (Even then, members of the SA and the SS intimidated members of the Social Democrats and other suspect deputies, to assure passage of the act. Hitler later disposed of the SA during the event known as the Night of the Long Knives, referring to the ceremonial daggers that SS members wore with their uniforms.) The communists had already been banned after the Reichstag fire, and their leadership arrested. Several members of the leadership of the Social Democrats had been arrested as well, and steps were taken to intimidate the remainder.

Hitler was never more than a gutter politician and a demagogue who knew how to push the buttons of the electorate. Walter may have a different opinion, but I attribute success in purging the Reichstag and passing the enabling act to von Papen, who was an experienced and canny politician.

Every time Oralloy goes on about purging the Republican Party, and banning the Democrats, I think of the enabling act and the Night of the Long Knives. I haven't called anyone a Nazi, except those clowns in Charlottesville who paraded with Nazi flags and were giving one another the straight arm salute. I think of the current threat as neo-fascist. While in the past, the fascists in Italy, Germany, Spain, Croatia, Greece and Hungary cozied up to capitalists to finance their political shenanigans, in our contemporary situation, the capitalists don't want to be guests at the feast, sitting at the lower tables. They don't want favors from the government, they want to own the government. Witness the billions poured into Republican coffers by the Koch brothers and their corporate ilk. Anyone who does not take the threat of neo-fascism seriously is not paying attention.

From the left or the right, people calling themselves liberals or conservatives, the threat is very real. Fascism is not a political ideology, nor an economic system. It is the formula for totalitarianism. Whether it's Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin or Mao, the destination is still the same, and the road map has not changed in the last 90 years. But now, we've got new drivers.

Von Papen has been a member of Zentrum from 1921 until 1932.
The DVP was a national-liberal party (follower-up of the National Liberal Party [1866 - 1918])

Von Papen wasn't a member of the DVP but since 1932 without party affiliation (like many ministers in his cabinet). This "cabinet of the barons" was supported in the Reichstag only by the DVP and the DNVP ("German National People's Party", national-conservative)

Von Papen was a monarchist who wanted to form a "new state" which was nearly identical to Imperial Germany.

(As an aside: von Papen belonged to a "Erbsälzer"-family in a nearby town - Erbsälzer was a title belonged in the town of Werl - eight families got had the hereditary ["erb"-] right to exploit the nearby salt springs.
The "Kollegium der Erbsälzer zu Werl und Neuwerk" still exists, with only two families today [von Lilien and von Papen], just and only for a meeting before and after a mass [and they still own the park, where the salty sources are])

Thanks, Walter.

No, I don't agree with their beliefs. I don't find their beliefs abhorrent, however I don't agree with them.

I truly think that they have their right to follow the political, social, economical, whatever tendency they think is best for them.

And people interfering their demonstrations expressing their beliefs (which are with a city permit) , the people who want to stop them are fanatics, not so people with reasoning who can understand the freedoms in this country.