Page 1 of 9 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 88

Thread: National Socialism, Fascism, and Communism

  1. #1
    Providence Planter
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    Anglo
    Subrace
    Nordic
    Y-DNA
    R1A-BY30613
    mtDNA
    U8B-K2A5A1
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Rhode Island Rhode Island
    Location
    Kentucky
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Blacksmith
    Politics
    Anti-Federalist
    Religion
    Posts
    3,701
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,054
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    400
    Thanked in
    347 Posts

    National Socialism, Fascism, and Communism

    National Socialism is ideologically moderate between Fascism and Communism, because of the relation between Nationalism and the former, Socialism and the latter. We see on the map of Europe National Socialism in Protestant areas, Fascism in Catholic areas, and Communism in Orthodox areas. Catholic areas come from the Latin Western Roman Empire and France, and Orthodox areas from the Greek Eastern Roman Empire and Russia. National Socialism represents the barbarian world on the periphery, but it is notable that Germany was split into a Nationalist West Germany and a Socialist East Germany. All of this is very organic looking. Ideology and region, or geopolitics, seems so natural, and so, why should there not be a Europe based upon these regional affiliations (although maintaining peace, of course)? Would this not also mean that the Germanic peoples should be considered to have the best solution, in some kind of radical middle? Germany apparently chose the best of both worlds in a bipolar Europe, and tried to unify under those principles, so perhaps it would make sense to have Germany's, or at least Germanic Protestant National Socialist leadership for Europe. The others always focus on one bloc or another, without any sense of centrality.

  2. #2

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Ralf For This Useful Post:


  4. #3
    Providence Planter
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    Anglo
    Subrace
    Nordic
    Y-DNA
    R1A-BY30613
    mtDNA
    U8B-K2A5A1
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Rhode Island Rhode Island
    Location
    Kentucky
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Blacksmith
    Politics
    Anti-Federalist
    Religion
    Posts
    3,701
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,054
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    400
    Thanked in
    347 Posts
    Hitler was not Fascist. You have mistaken him with Mussolini, Franco, and Petain.

  5. #4
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Online
    Friday, May 11th, 2012 @ 09:24 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Teutonic
    Ancestry
    Germany, England, Scotland
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Politics
    Natural Law
    Posts
    152
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimston View Post
    Hitler was not Fascist. You have mistaken him with Mussolini, Franco, and Petain.
    Franco wasn't a fascist either, if I remember right (the Falangists were the real fascists, I think?). Just a typical Latino dictator.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Storm Saxon For This Useful Post:


  7. #5
    Senior Member
    Alfadur's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Online
    Friday, June 15th, 2012 @ 06:10 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    Gender
    Politics
    Ethnic Nationalism
    Religion
    Agnostic
    Posts
    675
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    14
    Thanked in
    13 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimston View Post
    We see on the map of Europe National Socialism in Protestant areas, Fascism in Catholic areas, and Communism in Orthodox areas.
    Authoritarian politics are partly influenced by religion and culture, but that's far from the whole reason behind them. There is no "Just So" explanation that neatly explains why certain ideologies have caught on in certain places. National Socialism is not especially Protestant in nature - the only NS state in existence, Germany, was half Catholic anyway - but rather the most extreme form of the "folk socialism" that has always existed in the German and Scandinavian society. Religion has very little to do with it, on the national and geopolitical level.

    On the other hand, you are halfway right: NS Germany had different schools of thought, which were pretty influenced by area and religion. The Prussians had a left-wing tendency which Mohler called "National Revolutionary", which upheld the Lutheran-Prussian tradition, had a distinct mix of German and Slavic ideas, and oriented towards the East while opposed against Western capitalism. In contrast were the Bavarian and Austrian Catholics, who had a strong right-wing tendency and took the exact opposite stance. (Hitler himself was one of them.)

    Lastly, Communism is not "natural" to Orthodox Christian areas. It's an ideology created by a Jew, and was forced upon Russia by the Bolsheviks who were largely Americanized Jews. Russia, in turn, enforced it on the rest of Eastern Europe. It's true that Eastern Europe has a long tradition of authoritarian rule and collectivism, and democracy has never really caught on there, so that's probably one of the reasons why the Russians grew to accept it eventually (and are nostalgic about it today). It was simply an accident of history that Eastern Europe went communist.
    It's true that Slavs are naturally receptive to collectivist ideas (and that's totally unrelated to their Orthodox Christianity, which was very anti-communist), but this tendency to anti-democracy and collectivism could just as easily have expressed itself as NS.

    Hitler was not Fascist. You have mistaken him with Mussolini, Franco, and Petain.
    Hitler and NS Germany belonged to the political spectrum that can be termed as "Fascism", along with Mussolini in Italy and the Iron Guard in Romania. These three did have obvious differences, but they were all part of a nationalistic bloc that was anti-democratic and emphasized the national community above all.

    Military dictatorships, such as Franco's Spain, are not fascism. A military junta is often the worst enemy of fascists, as all professional career generals are. Franco was a little traitor who destroyed the Falangists in Spain; Antonescu betrayed the Iron Guard in Romania; Pinochet helped the Jewish capitalists come into Chile and allowed the global corporations to plunder his country. Those greedy opportunist Latino dictators have nothing in common with genuine fascism. (The word "fascism" has been used and abused to death, anyways ).

    My conclusion: your whole OP is a bit of a stretch.

  8. #6
    Providence Planter
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    Anglo
    Subrace
    Nordic
    Y-DNA
    R1A-BY30613
    mtDNA
    U8B-K2A5A1
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Rhode Island Rhode Island
    Location
    Kentucky
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Blacksmith
    Politics
    Anti-Federalist
    Religion
    Posts
    3,701
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,054
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    400
    Thanked in
    347 Posts
    Well, I presented broad categories, not individuals which fail to fit into them...

    It is broadly true that the Latin Arch produced the most significant Fascism, and that the Slavic world was the only place where Communism came to root both in the government and in the people (before Oriental adoption). The Paris Commune and the 1848 Revolutions were insurrectionist but only as workable in the West as Romanian fascism could have been in the East. It was quite different in the North. National Socialism was/is only popular in Germanic lands previously evangelized by Protestantism, even in Hungary where the Calvinists and Unitarians apparently made some headway. Austria as a Catholic country was most especially German anyway, and therefore liable to be part of it by association inasmuch as Hungary would follow the course of Austria, like a domino effect. Austria also had the same dreams as Prussia, of mastering new land under Germanic rule in the East.

    Capitalism is an economic system (like mercantilism) that too often gets lumped into the discussion, having nothing to do with governmental practice. These are secular ideologies that have, in part, replaced or substituted for the old Christian religious divisions, if not merely becoming standard in parallel to them.

    Nazi Germany radically substituted Imperial Germany's infrastructure for something new entirely, whereas the Weimar Republic was a temporary solution akin to the North German Confederation, also on the heel of the former Roman Empire (although Austria continued that tradition to be honest, divorced from Protestant Germany). Nazi Germany was socialist because the government was based in sharing the spoils of class warfare concerning Jews and other targets with the German people (an internal struggle), and nationalist because it was ethnocentric the same, as with the Sudetenland and Koenigsberg (an external struggle).

    The radical differences of fascism and communism were toned down in order for a marriage in national socialism. I myself would rather live in Nazi Germany than a fascist South European country or a communist East European country, but it is true that Germany's choice to yoke these two ideologies into one was as instrumental as geography in making Germany susceptible to the Allied/Iron Curtain partition by France in the West and Russia in the East. This is ultimately why Germany lost, and has nothing to do with Jews like some claim. Being "Mitteleuropa" certainly makes Germany a magnet for all kinds of attention "central" or "axis" to Europe, both good or bad.



    The Anglosphere won because of being "detached" from the Continent and because of foreign resources under imperial dominion (almost completely drained in order to restore the balance of power), as with the Napoleonic Wars. Saying it was because of Jews (whether because of their presence as moneychangers in capitalism or because of Marxist activism) is insulting to the Gentiles who could fight well enough to stay free peoples from Continental snobbery and assimilationist policies. I am sure the Scandinavian countries would have preferred England protect them from being used for German fodder, as arranged with Iceland and Greenland made into protectorates. (Compare Finland going to Germany for protection from Russia, although we all know Sweden would have lifted a finger if asked, as the only reason to go to war, hah!) We are all Germanic people, but would only choose to associate in non-binding pacts and resolutions to the Continent. If Germany was going to be a quagmire of sorts, a lightning rod for all eyes to look at, then it would make other Germanics uncomfortable, seeing as how the North European backwaters preferred to remain on the periphery of European affairs, and not dragged through them with goose-stepping marching orders.

    I know this is all changing the nature of the thread, but it is true that Germany, by involving herself in a bridge between fascism and communism, was only deepening Germanic integration to European hegemony, which could be good or bad. On the outside of the European establishment (Which is England's choice, and Norway's too!), there is little chance that Germanics could actually affect the control of European standards and government, but by assuming European leadership in WWII, Germany made enemies on all sides. It was novel, I suppose, but not wrong, if one believes both in the superiority or worth of Germanics and in European integration whilst not completely assimilating to the old Russian East and French West division one way or the other. Rather than making a choice, Germany chose neither and both at the same time, and under her own image!

    Involving Jews is also insulting to the intelligence because of similar wars before that were fought without any mention of Jews, in which the same concerns were at stake. The only time Jews were legitimately and regularly invoked as being an interference were wars with Muslims, because Jews definitely double-dealed over those conflicts. Jews would love to play middle-man between Christians and Muslims, to play arbiters reaping the rewards, as much as when Tudor England stood between Valois France and Habsburg Austria during the Renaissance. Those were deliberate interventions by Jews, but wars between Christians and wars between Muslims in which Jews are involved, happen to be incidental occurrences. Yes, the Holocaust was incidental.

  9. #7

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Ralf For This Useful Post:


  11. #8
    Providence Planter
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    Anglo
    Subrace
    Nordic
    Y-DNA
    R1A-BY30613
    mtDNA
    U8B-K2A5A1
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Rhode Island Rhode Island
    Location
    Kentucky
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Blacksmith
    Politics
    Anti-Federalist
    Religion
    Posts
    3,701
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,054
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    400
    Thanked in
    347 Posts
    No big deal. Feel free to elaborate your take on any one of the issues raised in the thread.

  12. #9
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Germanic
    State
    Teutonic Order Teutonic Order
    Gender
    Politics
    GPWW
    Posts
    1,630
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9
    Thanked in
    9 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimston View Post
    National Socialism is ideologically moderate between Fascism and Communism,
    No. NS is a merger of Nationalism and Catholic-Social conscious (see Karl Lueger, pre WW1 mayor of Vienna, Hitler's idol)

    You have neither read Mein Kampf nor did any genuine studying, because most of your claims are bizarre and fictional.

    And if you had read the memoirs of Hartmann Lauterbacher (former NSDAP Gauleiter of Hannover, born Austrian) you would knew that this merger (NS) is of Austrian origin. The title of his book is: "Erlebt und mitgestaltet"

    Hitler's and Lauterbacher's NS is inspired by the Christian-Social movement of the early 20th movement in the Austrian Empire.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimston
    because of the relation between Nationalism and the former, Socialism and the latter.
    False conclusion based on your previous false statement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimston
    We see on the map of Europe National Socialism in Protestant areas, Fascism in Catholic areas,
    False claim based on previous fiction. Catholic-Croatia was NS, while Catholic-Italy was Fascist.
    Britain (Protestant) would have, if Mosley and the BFU(British Fascist Union) had prevailed, Fascist, not NS.
    NS requires the Republican form of government as it calls for the overthrow of the system. Hitler always talked about that it was Mussolini's greatest mistake to not expel King Victor Emanuel. Hitler was right, when Victor Emanuel finally dismissed Mussolini as PM.
    Mussolini's second regime (because traitor King Victor Emanuel defected to the British)1943-45, the RSI, was NS. RSI stands for Repubblica Sociale Italiana or Italian Social Republic.

    It has this flag:


    While the Kingdom of Italy (until 1943) had this flag.


    Notice the difference?
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimston
    and Communism in Orthodox areas. Catholic areas come from the Latin Western Roman Empire and France, and Orthodox areas from the Greek Eastern Roman Empire and Russia. National Socialism represents the barbarian world on the periphery,
    Who says so? You, Lord Vansittard and WSC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimston
    .National Socialism represents the barbarian world on the periphery, but it is notable that Germany was split into a Nationalist West Germany and a Socialist East Germany.
    ???
    Now you are ridiculous . Any evidence?

    Or are you talking about the (Soviet-Allied occupied) German Zones after 1945?

    Answer that !

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimston
    All of this is very organic looking. Ideology and region, or geopolitics, seems so natural, and so, why should there not be a Europe based upon these regional affiliations (although maintaining peace, of course)? Would this not also mean that the Germanic peoples should be considered to have the best solution, in some kind of radical middle? Germany apparently chose the best of both worlds in a bipolar Europe, and tried to unify under those principles, so perhaps it would make sense to have Germany's, or at least Germanic Protestant National Socialist leadership for Europe. The others always focus on one bloc or another, without any sense of centrality.
    What a pack of nonsense. You talk like Churchill, one false statement after another, therefor wrong conclusions, which then are backed with more fiction...until everything is turned around. Are you from the Uk ?

    If yes then you better read Capt. (RN) R. Grenfell's (a military historian) "Unconditional Hatred" rather then to talk about things you obviously have no clue of.
    http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres5/Grenfell.pdf
    He already writes as early as 1953 that "future generations may well have to pay a high price" for what Churchill and his yes-men did, namely to base perception and policy on fiction rather than on facts, and to spread hatred based on atrocity tales. According to Grenfell this will lead to a situation for his beloved England that at one point in the future everything is going to be on its head..

    Sorry about me sounding harsh, but this opportunity is simply just too good as a showcase example of what Grenfell meant 58 years ago.

  13. #10
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Germanic
    State
    Teutonic Order Teutonic Order
    Gender
    Politics
    GPWW
    Posts
    1,630
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9
    Thanked in
    9 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Storm Saxon View Post
    Franco wasn't a fascist either, if I remember right (the Falangists were the real fascists, I think?). Just a typical Latino dictator.
    False statement. The Falange and Franco were a copy of Mussolini and the Fascist Party of Italy. See above post and exact definition below.
    The Spanish Phalanx of the Assemblies of the National Syndicalist Offensive (Spanish: Falange Española de las Juntas de Ofensiva Nacional Sindicalista, FE de las JONS), known simply as the Falange, is the name assigned to several Spanish political movements and parties dating from the 1930s, and dovetailed with the Fascist movement in Italy

Page 1 of 9 123456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 66
    Last Post: Sunday, September 12th, 2010, 12:20 AM
  2. National Communism
    By Taras Bulba in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 97
    Last Post: Sunday, October 18th, 2009, 10:02 AM
  3. Chauvinism, National-Socialism or Racial-Socialism?
    By Lusitano in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Thursday, May 4th, 2006, 06:02 PM
  4. Replies: 22
    Last Post: Friday, November 5th, 2004, 03:08 AM
  5. National Socialism or Fascism?
    By Pera_Z in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: Monday, April 12th, 2004, 01:07 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •