When you do some reading in German history, especially about the period between 1848 and 1933, you probably get a better view and find it perhaps interesting to intensivate your studies.
What in America is commenly called "leftist" is here connected to neither site but a cultural phenomen (e.g. all these "Volks-" connected words we have since 18th/19th century).
[Our conservatives of today, the Christian Democratic Union, is a party with a program in mayn parts 'left' to that of the US Democrats.)
Hitler never would have come to such a power, if could have relied on what you call "the majority of the nobility" - something no-one really ever negated to my knowledge.
Apropos knowledge: your claim that the Nazis "they also recruited many of them into their fold" is the first time I've heard of such as well.
Martin Niemöller's poem reads in the (translated) original version:
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
The version inscribed at the New England Holocaust Memorial in Boston, Massachusetts reads a bit different:
They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Hitler never would have come to such a power, if could have relied on what you call "the majority of the nobility" - something no-one really ever negated to my knowledge.
I don't understand what you mean by this. It is my understanding that the nobility were disdainful of Hitler and his workers party. They only supported him because he seemed like the only one that could revive Germany at that time. They felt that they were using him, but as it turns out, he used them. If I'm not mistaken, the plot to assasinate the Fuhrer in 1944 was planned primarily by noblemen.
Quote:Apropos knowledge: your claim that the Nazis "they also recruited many of them into their fold" is the first time I've heard of such as well.
I've read many books about the Nazis, and many of them say that they gained many recruits by "converting" former communists. The Nazis claimed to be a workers party, so they seemed to have much in common.
Atavistic wrote:If I'm not mistaken, the plot to assasinate the Fuhrer in 1944 was planned primarily by noblemen.
I don't know why you beat the dead horse of "nobilty/noblemen" - the failed Hitler assassination attempt was done by military officers.
Walter Hinteler wrote:Atavistic wrote:If I'm not mistaken, the plot to assasinate the Fuhrer in 1944 was planned primarily by noblemen.
I don't know why you beat the dead horse of "nobilty/noblemen" - the failed Hitler assassination attempt was done by military officers.
Only because that is who I consider to be the true "right-wing". But alas we are not going to see eye to eye on this so we'll just have to agree to disagree.
But tell me Walter, from your experience, is there a sort sentimentality for the Nazis among certain people there? Being with how they completely revived the country (before they destroyed it) I could understand if there was.
I'm old enough to remember some of old Nazis, who couldn't enjoy democracy, but nowadays, sentimentality?
No.
The neo nazis have no idea what they are talking about (and thus even more dangerous).
Young neo-nazis are troubled fools who are looking for action. They are not idealists at all.
.
Their minds are poisoned by middle-aged control freaks who are power hungry.
.
In the Fifties I had a German friend who had lost a leg in Russia. He would not admit that he had fought for an evil man. It took a long time and many arguments before he admitted that he was wrong.
.
One does not have to look far for non-thinking blind followers. The Bush crowd.
Should Israel threaten Germany?
I think she should.
Israel and Germany are very good friends right now.
Atavistic wrote:The National Socialists
The National German Workers Party
Yeah, and Zhirinovsky's party is called the Liberal Democratic Party, though it's neither. Names, shnames.
Voltaire: "The Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, roman, nor an empire."
wandeljw wrote:Voltaire: "The Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, roman, nor an empire."
Heh. That in turn reminds me of what they said about Miklos Horthy, who ruled Hungary between the two world wars.
As Admiral in the Austro-Hungarian Imperial Fleet, he had commanded it in World War I; but Hungary was on the losing side and was left without a coastline after the Trianon treaty. That was also about the time that Hungary's National Assembly, after a brief Communist interlude, re-established the Kingdom of Hungary, but decided not to recall Charles IV from exile, but proclaim Horthy as Regent for an indefinite period of time instead.
To sceptics, he was thenceforth "a regent without a king and an admiral without a fleet".
Walter, I'm curious as to your opinion of Ernst Junger.
Don't have really one: had to read him at school (in German) and we dealt with (due to the critics in those years [late 60's] in history, philsophy and French as well.
Have been to where he lived - we passed it on our way to the family holidays on the Lake Constance.
Sorry, no help here :wink:
No problem. I'm reading Storm of Steel (you would know it as In Stahlgewittern) right now, and I find him to be very interesting. Just thought I'd ask.
I should have read it at school .... but used the critics in some literature guide books instead
tsk, tsk, Walter. Report to the Principal's office immediately.
