Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Would There have Been National Socialism Without Hitler?

  1. #31
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    11 Hours Ago @ 02:24 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    45
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,882
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,176
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,279
    Thanked in
    544 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    I believe that National Socialism was waiting to happen in Germany, whether under this name or something else. Hitler just moulded this particular form of Nationalism to his own requirements and made a lot of it up as he went along (ie as circumstances dictated).

    He was a brilliant strategist and opportunist and the results are in the history books but I think an equally interesting question would be to ask how NS would have evolved in the post-Hitler era.

    The loss of a charismatic leader (..inevitable at some point!) is a considerable setback and as a political ideology would NS have had legs?
    Since it was just "waiting to happen", as you say, it would have found itself a new charismatic leader. Besides, as a revolutionary movement, the original guard HAD to go at some point, in order to preserve its legacy and at the same time make room for a more organic approach. The things necessiated by circumstances would have been achieved at some point, no reason to continue the "revolution" then internally forever. Hence also point 25 in the party programme, which clearly stated that the party has to be dissolved once certain objectives have been established.

    For this however it is important to point out that the "socialism" was not just a flavour to "nationalism". In German it's one word, Nationalsozialismus, its stated objective was to be a Weltanschauung, a complete system formed organically from the Folksoul, reflected in it and find its highest purpose in promoting the unity of Volk, State (the political organisation/entity of that Volk) and Leader, in which the common Will culminates and mutually reinforce each other. These are not supposed to be antagonistic any longer, as is the case in democrazy (pun intended).

    Much of what NS was has been around as political or cultural ideas since at least the revolutions of 1848/50 (as counter-reactions to the French Revolution nonsense exported throughout Europe), wisely the Kaiser undid many of its "achievements" by forming the German Reich. Senseful socialism was gradually implemented by the Kaiser, continuing also Prussian's internal development towards a social society and a cultural driving force. In the middle ranks much existed, factioned, some just ideas, others small assocations/movements (Blut und Boden Art, reflecting the widely existing wish to return to Nature, against the oligarchs and over-industrialisation), Heathen movements (although Goethe was an open heathen as well already, so this wasnt new then either), the Steiner schools and what not. There were certain common sentiments widely present in the population, which just had to be picked up and be molded into a unifying system. Even though Hitler came mostly about as a reaction to the catastrophy of the Weimar Republic and everything that it represents, NS still aimed at not simply managing the catastrophy, but to overcome it on all levels. A generation raised on the ideals certainly would have given the ideology legs to walk in its own right.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to velvet For This Useful Post:


  3. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Last Online
    1 Hour Ago @ 12:57 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Gender
    Religion
    Hitlerism
    Posts
    329
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    67
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    100
    Thanked in
    71 Posts
    The argument that there could have been NS without Hitler rests on the belief that NS is a product of it's times, depends upon the omnipotence of the environment (disregards distinctions such as hereditary and climate/soil), and hinges on the concept of a collective German "soul" (i.e. Carl Jung).

    From Otto Strasser's memoirs Hitler and I, page 111:
    Hitler: 'Do you deny that I am the creator of National-Socialism?'
    Strasser: 'I have no choice but to do so. National-Socialism is an idea born of the times in which we live. It is in the hearts of millions of men, and it is incarnated in you. The simultaneity with which it arose in so many minds proves its historical necessity, and proves, too, that the age of capitalism is over.'

    This is nothing more than a recurrence to a commonplace belief widely held today by detractors, average mediocrities, and superficial gaugers.

    "National-Socialism is an idea born of the times in which we live." NS was clearly not a revolution ennobled by a coalition of harmless poets and contemplative thinkers, but by men of action, peasants, and the mountain men (i.e. Hess, Speer).

    "It is in the hearts of millions of men..." Socialism is not a spontaneous occurrence, it must be inculcated into people, except for one exception.

    From Goethe's Wilhelm Miester's Wanderjahre:
    "Unwilling do men resolve upon reverence, or, rather, they never resolve upon it. It is a higher sense which must be imparted to their nature, and which unfolds itself spontaneously only in those specially favored, who, on this account, have always been looked upon as saints, as gods."

    Ironically, even Strasser admitted that it had incarnated in Hitler.

    Quote Originally Posted by Herr Rentz View Post
    I wonder how NS would have progressed, if at all, under Strasser.

    I don't agree with his more socialist leaning within the movement, but it would still have been interesting to se where it would go had Herr Hitler not come along when he did.
    Otto Strasser was a moralistic Protestant, devoid for understanding for the people. Like Ludendorff and Bismarck, he was no substitute for a Catholic leader like Hitler.

    By Strasser's own account, he had constantly raised complaints about Rosenberg and Streicher to Hitler. Strasser opposed Rosenberg because of "his paganism". Then he follows up with a misrepresentation of Hitler as praising Rosenberg as a forerunner and prophet (actually, in the Table Talk and Speer's memoirs, he dismisses the notion that Rosenberg was an official party representative). Rosenberg's impression of Strasser was that he had only joined to advance his own views.

    As for Gregor Strasser's leadership, it might have worked, but I don't know enough about the guy.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Terminus For This Useful Post:


  5. #33
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    11 Hours Ago @ 02:24 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    45
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,882
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,176
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,279
    Thanked in
    544 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Terminus View Post
    The argument that there could have been NS without Hitler rests on the belief that NS is a product of it's times, depends upon the omnipotence of the environment (disregards distinctions such as hereditary and climate/soil), and hinges on the concept of a collective German "soul" (i.e. Carl Jung).

    From Otto Strasser's memoirs Hitler and I, page 111:
    Hitler: 'Do you deny that I am the creator of National-Socialism?'
    Strasser: 'I have no choice but to do so. National-Socialism is an idea born of the times in which we live. It is in the hearts of millions of men, and it is incarnated in you. The simultaneity with which it arose in so many minds proves its historical necessity, and proves, too, that the age of capitalism is over.'

    This is nothing more than a recurrence to a commonplace belief widely held today by detractors, average mediocrities, and superficial gaugers
    And to deny it, claiming that Hitler was NS and that there would have been no NS without Hitler dismisses the entire concept of the German Volk Soul, on whose existence NS however relies, and whose sole purpose it was to give this German Volk Soul meaning and direction.

    Meme Wisdom


    The displeased masses equal zeros, which of course will count terrible, once a new One gives them meaning.

    It also ignores the detail that Hitler did not found the NSDAP, his original membership number was somewhere in the 800s or so. We had this discussion in private too, right. Hitler's achievement was to be that "One" that gave the the ideas that were so widespread, a form, meaning and direction. It did not come out of nothing, and without these widespread sentiments, NS would not have succeeded.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to velvet For This Useful Post:


  7. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Last Online
    1 Hour Ago @ 12:57 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Gender
    Religion
    Hitlerism
    Posts
    329
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    67
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    100
    Thanked in
    71 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    And to deny it, claiming that Hitler was NS and that there would have been no NS without Hitler dismisses the entire concept of the German Volk Soul, on whose existence NS however relies, and whose sole purpose it was to give this German Volk Soul meaning and direction.
    I'm not denying that German cultural creative ability plays a role, but you're overemphasizing it.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    It also ignores the detail that Hitler did not found the NSDAP, his original membership number was somewhere in the 800s or so. We had this discussion in private too, right.

    Hitler's achievement was to be that "One" that gave the the ideas that were so widespread, a form, meaning and direction. It did not come out of nothing, and without these widespread sentiments, NS would not have succeeded.
    How could he have possibly founded a movement of his own? He was a nobody. It's easier to just assume leadership of something that already exists. He was obliged to study the existing parties and select one as a basis for his own movement. That he chose DAP is a marvelous one, considering the bigger alternatives (Pan-German movement, Christian Socialist Party). Plus he was already tasked with monitoring it, that was a great opportunity for anyone looking to start a party.

    So he was just another Spinoza, Einstein, Freud, and Karl Marx, a fake idol, a popularizer of borrowed ideas?

    John 3:26 They came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, that man who was with you on the other side of the Jordan—the one you testified about—look, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him.”

    But the Jew tries to degrade the honour in which nations hold their great men and women. He stigmatizes this honour as ‘the cult of personality’.
    John 3:27 To this John replied, “A person can receive only what is given them from heaven.”

    The greatest revolutions and the greatest achievements of this world, its greatest cultural works and the immortal creations of great statesmen, are inseparably bound up with one name which stands as a symbol for them in each respective case. The failure to pay tribute to one of those great spirits signifies a neglect of that enormous source of power which lies in the remembrance of all great men and women.
    James 1:17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights,

    Christians of all people should be familiar with these verses.

    The pagans on here who are against this theory ought to produce a statement from their literature to contest these verses. But the teaching is certainly found in there as well. Goethe was heathen, was he not?

    That Goethe quote I invoked earlier made a case for both paganism and Christianity being valid religions.

  8. #35
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    11 Hours Ago @ 02:24 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    45
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,882
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,176
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,279
    Thanked in
    544 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Terminus View Post
    So he was just another Spinoza, Einstein, Freud, and Karl Marx, a fake idol, a popularizer of borrowed ideas?
    At least try to fathom the idea of "Ein Volk - Ein Reich - Ein Führer", will you?

    It is a unity, not an antagonism. Of course it needs strategic minds to mold flowing ideas into an ideology. Not going to dispute Hitler's (and Goebbels, and Göring, and Himmler...) achievement in that! But to portray it as something seperate from the Volk, that Hitler essentially "invented" the "German People" is pretty much the notion of those who want to destroy us. According to them, Germany didnt exist prior to 1933, and it ceased to exist in 1945. You are trying the same by completely ignoring the Volk and what was there, on what ground NS grew; the times, our history. Specially the recent one. We became a Nation - finally - only in 1871, we chose our Kaiser ourselves, the unification to a nation was carried on the desire of the people (apart from Bavaria maybe, which the Kaiser simply "bought"), following a long, three hundred years+ process, "nationalism" was a given, not an ideology. It became one, had to become one when this young nation was taken away, eroded, corrupted, defiled and beaten down in 1918, with the Kaiser dethroned, fleeing from the communist terrorists who had just killed the Russian Tsar, Wilhelm's cousin(!) and communist Jews declaring the "republic" in Berlin, sanctified by foreign forces without the consultation of the people.

    You see, we had Ein Volk - Ein Reich - Ein Führer already from 1871 - 1918, we got demos-crazy from 1918 until 1933, and we pretty much learned in these 15 years that democracy doesnt work. Even the majority of people who were neither members nor voters for the NSDAP and Hitler were not discontent with how things unfolded after he took over and brought back an order of things that we wanted, or at least didnt mind. Even today polls suggest that many people are tired of democracy and rather want a strong hand. It's entirely irrelevant whether we call the guy a Führer or a Kaiser. Both were OF the people, part of them, not seperate, mysterious entities who fell from the sky. They're supposed to be the culmination of the Volk Spirit, its representation and the One supposed to reinforce the Volk Spirit through leadership. It's not rocket science. It's just how things ought to be. Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer is in itself a spiritual concept promoting the holy unity of these aspects, it was the core belief of the Weltanschauung. Hitler (and his faithful crew) intended to create a spiritual awareness of this unity through Weltanschauung, and he happened to be the One who picked up the task to clean up the mess of the Weimar Republic. Had there been another taker? At that time? Probably not. Still, the "phenomenon" Hitler can only be understood on the backdrop of the German Reich, the history of the German people and its desires and sentiments. It's not intended to take something away from Hitler, quite the opposite!

    Why this disregard for the people who were the core and center of NS? Why the will to diminish the German Volk?
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to velvet For This Useful Post:


  10. #36
    Grand Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    3 Weeks Ago @ 04:26 AM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    English, Anglo-Saxon
    Country
    England England
    Location
    South Coast
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Aries
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Self Employed
    Politics
    Free Speech / Anti-EU
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    5,040
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,584
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,589
    Thanked in
    1,392 Posts
    Terminus: Actually, the view that Hitler essentially "invented" the "German people" was only pushed by Sebastian Haffner (who I just happened to have stumbled across a few days ago, looking into his memoirs as I type).
    I have a book by Sebastian Haffner entitled: "Von Bismarck zu Hitler".

    I found it at a car boot sale but never got round to reading the part about Hitler in any detail. The fact he was married to a Jewish woman and left NS Germany in 1938 probably rules out any real objectivity but what I did read seemed quite superficial; just regurgitating what can be read in dozens of other books without bringing any real insight into this period beyond that. His book "The Meaning of Hitler" is the one that receives all the accolades, but again only from all the mainstream toadies who will praise anything that fits the approved narrative.

    His view that Hitler "invented the German people" is dubious at best and should be seen from the perspective of someone who felt no real affinity with the German race.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. What do you Think of Hitler and National Socialism?
    By Evolved in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 691
    Last Post: Sunday, December 2nd, 2018, 06:46 PM
  2. What Would You Choose? National Socialism or National Anarchism?
    By DieMenschMaschine in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: Tuesday, June 28th, 2011, 06:51 PM
  3. Chauvinism, National-Socialism or Racial-Socialism?
    By Lusitano in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Thursday, May 4th, 2006, 07:02 PM
  4. On National Socialism & World Relations [Adolf Hitler, 30th of January 1937]
    By Prussian in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, November 22nd, 2004, 02:12 PM
  5. National Socialism and National Anarchism
    By Aethrei in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: Saturday, January 31st, 2004, 06:05 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
  •