 |
| |
|
|
techumseh
|
 |
of the frozen North.
Apr 1999
time: 22:24
|
|
Shawnmmcc: I found a very good article in the English Le Monde on the role played by Ferdinand Porshe and Volkswagen in supporting the Nazi's war aims: http://mondediplo.com/1998/01/11volkswag
Here's an excerpt:
quote:
During the war in Europe (1939-41), followed by the world war (1941-45), millions of people were reduced to slavery, not to mention deportations and the extermination of millions of people belonging to defenceless minorities. The Barbarossa operation - the invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941 - was a particular opportunity for Volkswagen to improve its fortunes, in terms of the exploitation of forced labour. In early August 1940, even before the Battle of Britain, everything was in place to plunder the labour force and material resources of the communists.
Of the three million Soviet civilians reduced to slavery, more than half were women. This was the new order to which Ferdinand Porsche had committed himself. Although it must be said that he personally never had blood on his hands, as an SS activist, he was part of the extermination machinery. Without foreign labour, and in particular that of Soviet slaves, the whole of German industry would have collapsed: in the spring of 1945, Volkswagen’s workforce was 90% non-German. It is an extraordinary paradox that the victims of the fascist order helped to prolong the life of German industry. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro
|
 |
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by techumseh
I don't disagree, Bernd. The claim that capitalism and communism were both part of the same "Jewish conspiracy" was part of Nazi ideology and remains so amoung many neo-nazis today. I think it was part of an attempt to confuse people about the real political and economic forces at play. In practice though, the anti-capitalist and anti-industrialization part was just rhetoric. |
Yes, they didn't intend to go after the evil capitalists per se or to introcude social equality for everone. In that aspect national socialism was never much socialist anyway, despite all the rhetoric about the Volksgemeinschaft where only being German would count. And yes, most business guys were quick to support the nazis, or at least to ally themselves with them once they were in power (as unfortunately most Germans, esp. from the conservative side were).
However, it is also a fact that the nazis had no problem at all in going after business guys who did not fit into their picture, or would oppose their rule. In such cases business was treated like any other side that did not collaborate -- with repression and terror. Take the example of famous aircraft maker Hugo Junkers, who was forced to give up control over his factories soon after the nazis came to power because of his political views. Since those factories were regarded as critical for the military plans of the nazis, they did not want to have anyone there in control who was in disagreement with nazi ideology. They kept the name Ju for all the later military aircraft though (Ju87 Stuka, Ju88 etc.), but Junkers himself had nothing to do with that anymore, and he and his family were being put under arrest for some time. He died in 1935.
Also, foreign-politics-wise the anti-capitalist rhetoric served an important purpose as a propaganda tool in justifying hostility and later the wars against the western European countries, because here of course the "struggle against evil bolshewism" argument was useless.
IMO it also gives in interesting insight into the picture the nazis had of themselves. Of course they did not want or even could de-industrialize Germany, but "evil" capitalism became also a metaphorical figure for social changes the nazis hated, because it was in conflict with their pseudo-romantic idea of pre-industrial Germany. In this aspect their movement was rather anti-modernist, while on the other hand of course they used themselves the technical and technological results of modernization and industrialization to a large degree.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Techumseh - Porsche was one of the Wehrmacht's favored arms producer, the original Tiger II used a turret produced by them that was dropped due to expense issues for one by Henschel. The major producers of German armored vehicles in WW2 were Rheinmetall, Krupp, Henschel, MAN, and Daimler Benz plus some additional production by Alkett, FAMO, MIAG, and Wegmann. If memory serves me correctly both Damiler Benz and Volkswagen (primarily non-armored military vehicles) as well as Porshe were well-connected with the Nazis, as was IG Farben (which profited hugely from forced labor from the various Concentration and Death camps) which was in bed with the SS.
However, I believe you will find that their "support" for Barbarossa is after the fact, as in now that the Fuhrer is suggesting it, they supported it for the profits they could make. There had developed a feeling of German invincibility, and if you promise people something for nothing, most will fall for it. However, until official planning for Barbarossa was started, I believe you will find few sources outside of the Nazis discussing the invasion of the Soviet Union with enthusiasm.
Your cite shows their support of Hitler's policies, and how they planned to profit from them. That in no way shows that there was any other motivator that was significant to the invasion of the Soviet Union except for Lebenstraum. The various vultures hovering around the regime of course made their own uses of the policy, but the policy itself was solely and completely driven by the Great Leader. Again, the cult-like analysis.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:24
|
|
Some firms were always going to profit from a remilitarization programme, or the more Poujadist elements of National Socialist philosophy, the more so after the purge of the Brownshirts and the decrees enacted against the power of the trade unions; it's also worth remembering that some of the bigger department stores were owned by German Jews, so what might seem like an avowedly anti-capitalist stance was in fact Nazi race policies in action.
I. G. Farben's labour force expanded by 50 per cent between 1938 and 1943, and its profits increased 150 per cent- to a massive 822 million Reichsmarks (as shown in the records of the International Military Tribunal).
It ran industrial 'enterprises' at Auschwitz and of course also contracted to supply Zyklon B, for which it held the patent.
One I. G. Farben director was a key bureaucrat in the offices of the administration of the Nazi's Four-Year Plan, and in the Reich Office for Economic Expansion, I. G. Farben men filled fully two-thirds of the posts.
The Nazis did compel large firms to 'invest' in Nazi Germany's military expansion, but this did not preclude the firms from making profits at the same time- Krupp was induced to support the Buna synthetic rubber project, I. G. Farben to invest (with others) in the Brabag scheme to extract liquid fuel from lignite, and the textile combines were encouraged to develop synthetic fibre manufactories.
There were anti-Nazi businessmen, such as Carl Bosch, but they could be 'encouraged' to retire, especially when they criticised Nazi corruption, or, like Ludwig Kastel, director of the National Federation Geheimrat, or Schlenker, secretary of the Langnam Verein, they could be dismissed for being Jewish.
(see 'Tycoons and Tyrant', by Louis P. Lochner, publ. Chicago 1954)
quote:
'The elections of March 5th will only be of use if they are to last for a long time... Only if no heed needs to be paid to votes can the outstanding great changes in constitutional, administrative, fiscal and social matters be carried out.' |
Editorial in 'Stahl und Eisen', journal of the Ruhr industry, quoted in Werner Sorgel's 'Metallindustrie und Nationalsozialismus', publ. Europaische Verlagsanstalt, Frankfurt
I recommend Chapter 12, 'Business', from 'A Social History of the Third Reich', by Richard Grunberger, publ. Penguin Books, 1974
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Molly - if you have read that book (it's on my to-do list) what does it say about ancillery groups supporting German facism/the Hitler state encouraging Barbarossa, versus simply supporting the Fuhrer's decision (as if after 1938 anyone else's opinion made a rat's *ss difference?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sandman
|
 |
Sinister Penguin
Aug 2001
time: 05:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
They did. Doing this does not preclude exterminating the peoples living there. Consider Leopold and the Congo. This doesn't mean there weren't other reasons for the invasion as well.
The Nazis never intended to kill everyone. "Lessor" races would be slaves for the German colonists, mush like Indians were for the Spanish, Indians were for the Brits, and Africans were for Brits and the French. If you forget that the Slavs are white for a moment, then the colonization of Eastern Europe seems more logical. |
I don't think Leopold ever tried to convert the Congo into a captive market; his goal was simply resource extraction, by the most depraved means imaginable. The high price of ivory and rubber allowed him to sustain his genocidal campaign. Above all, he was driven by a desire for profit.
Compare that to the German plans for Russia and Eastern Europe. They planned to exile 50 million Slavs to Siberia, and keep the rest as slaves for German settlers, as a part of Hitler's plans for a 'new order of ethnographical relations'. Such plans would be extraordinarily expensive, even with slave labour.
But do you think that Hitler would care? Do you think that he would be constantly checking the balance books, as Leopold did, fretting over whether he was making enough money? I do not think that he would. He'd be quite happy to make a 'loss' in the East, probably for decades, as long as the Germanisation continued apace.
Last edited by Sandman on 12-09-2005 at 22:31
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by techumseh
No, and here we get to the nub of the issue. We need to define fascism by looking at it externally, analizing it's real goals and makeup, and seeing how it evolves. Much of the stuff H&M wrote was ideological mumbo jumbo to justify their broader goals. It was designed to befuddle the masses with mysticism and psuedo-science. To place it on a par with Voltaire, Hegel or Marx is an act of intellectual vandalism. The ideology of H&M was designed to mislead and confuse. It's clearly still doing so.
|
What Mussolini and HItler wrote were their own political tracts, with very clear goals and intentions. Most people in Germany never thought the Nazi's would actually go to war, but anyone who had read Mein Kampf would have known war was coming, because Hitler spells it out.
Its incredably funny to see any communist talk about how one needs to look from the outside to know the true intentions...you might as well just conceded then to the people who view communism as nothing more than gulags and forced labor and lack of good toilet paper, because, newsflash, that's how it evolved, the policies that were enacted in communist states.
The irony is in fact too massive to miss.
NO, if you want to understand a complex and actually not too very well fleshed out political ideology, you have to, first of all, read those works seminal to that ideology. Nothng else comes even close to being as important. Again, you might as well claim that instead of reading Marx and Engels when I want to learn about Marxism, I should isntead read what William F buckley wrote about it, cause heck, its obvious, from all the debates that have come up over history, that was Marx wrote was confusing and misleading.
quote:
Don't lecture me on Marxism, you liberal. |
And yet to think you can lecture ANYONE on fascism!?!? 
quote:
Fascism arose after the rise of communism, and in response to it. There is not a fundamental difference between German and Italian fascism, nor between them and the Chilean version. All arose out of a desperate desire of the elites of their respective countries to prevent a socialist takeover. In all cases, these classes threw over their democratic trappings and jumped in with the ultra right who promised to save them, which they all did, by means of violence and terror. In all cases there were ideological justifications, but these differed in each case. Basing your analysis on the ideological trappings would lead you to believe they are all quite different. And that's the source of your error. |
Wrong. There were deep and fundamenatal differences between the German and Italina forms of fascism, and no, there has been no Chilean form. I think the whole race war and extermination of the weak should be a dead giveaway about some fundamental differences between the Italians and the German forms of fascism.
HIlter was not an elite, he was a shlub from Vienna who never rose further than a sargent in WW1. Mussolini was no elite either. Elites looked down at the clowns and lower class dolts who made up the Nazi leadership, and they certainly viewed Mussolini as a clown.
To call those that formed the fascists and nazi parties elite is strenching that word rather stunningly.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Brachy-Pride
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
quote:
Originally posted by Sandman
If Hitler had invaded the USSR for capitalist reasons, he would have tried to turn it into a captive market for German goods, like Britain did in India. |
They did. Doing this does not preclude exterminating the peoples living there. Consider Leopold and the Congo. This doesn't mean there weren't other reasons for the invasion as well.
The Nazis never intended to kill everyone. "Lessor" races would be slaves for the German colonists, mush like Indians were for the Spanish, Indians were for the Brits, and Africans were for Brits and the French. If you forget that the Slavs are white for a moment, then the colonization of Eastern Europe seems more more logical. |
well, the spanirds were quite bad, but, actually they thought the indians were humans, they married indians, and the continent is largely mestizo nowadays-
The nazis thought slavs were subhuman, and I dont think they would have mixed with the slavs.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sandman
Compare that to the German plans for Russia and Eastern Europe. They planned to exile 50 million Slavs to Siberia, and keep the rest as slaves for German settlers, as a part of Hitler's plans for a 'new order of ethnographical relations'. Such plans would be extraordinarily expensive, even with slave labour. |
Imperialism is always expensive, and when looked at from the standpoint of the state, it never really makes sense. This was something Hobson (not a Marxist) noted in the very first systematic study of imperialism. Lenin was the first to point out that it only makes economic sense when you look at it from a perspective of which groups in the imperialist society benefit.
While it would have been very costly from the standpoint of Germany, German capital would have made a lot of money off of transporting Slavs, rounding them up for work camps, creating the necessary infrastrcutre for eastern colonization, selling all those products to growing markets, etc.
Today, we would call it corporate welfare, i.e., the state subsidizing business ventures.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Imperialism is always expensive, and when looked at from the standpoint of the state, it never really makes sense. This was something Hobson (not a Marxist) noted in the very first systematic study of imperialism. Lenin was the first to point out that it only makes economic sense when you look at it from a perspective of which groups in the imperialist society benefit.
While it would have been very costly from the standpoint of Germany, German capital would have made a lot of money off of transporting Slavs, rounding them up for work camps, creating the necessary infrastrcutre for eastern colonization, selling all those products to growing markets, etc.
Today, we would call it corporate welfare, i.e., the state subsidizing business ventures. |
Except that corporate welfare exists because the business elite run the government, and give their buddies a handout.
That businessmen would in theory get rich from contracts to enslave and eradicate the slavs is an incidental benefit, just as business making money from hurricane relief is an incidental benefit, unless you want to say businesses caused the Hurricane.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
techumseh
|
|
of the frozen North.
Apr 1999
time: 22:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
What Mussolini and HItler wrote were their own political tracts, with very clear goals and intentions. Most people in Germany never thought the Nazi's would actually go to war, but anyone who had read Mein Kampf would have known war was coming, because Hitler spells it out. |
Yes, he does. But that doesn't mean that reading the crap that passed for political philosophy in the book will explain the real nature of the beast. I have my copy of Mein Kampf right here. Here's a sample: quote:
"Without suspecting it, the bourgeois world itself was inwardly infected with the deadly poison of Marxist ideas and it's resistance often sprang more from the competitor's envy of ambitious leaders than from a fundamental rejection of adversaries determined to fight to the utmost. In these long years there was only one who kept up an imperturbable, unflagging fight, and this was the Jew. His Star of David rose higher and higher in proportion as our people's will for self-preservation vanished." |
(edit: back to GePap)
quote:
Its incredably funny to see any communist talk about how one needs to look from the outside to know the true intentions...you might as well just conceded then to the people who view communism as nothing more than gulags and forced labor and lack of good toilet paper, because, newsflash, that's how it evolved, the policies that were enacted in communist states.
The irony is in fact too massive to miss. |
You shouldn't jump to any conclusions.
quote:
NO, if you want to understand a complex and actually not too very well fleshed out political ideology, you have to, first of all, read those works seminal to that ideology. Nothng else comes even close to being as important. Again, you might as well claim that instead of reading Marx and Engels when I want to learn about Marxism, I should isntead read what William F buckley wrote about it, cause heck, its obvious, from all the debates that have come up over history, that was Marx wrote was confusing and misleading. |
I'm not saying that they shouldn't be read, rather that believing these books explain the true nature of fascism is like believing a spam message that tells you you've just won a million dollars.
quote:
quote:
Don't lecture me on Marxism, you liberal. |
And yet to think you can lecture ANYONE on fascism!?!? |
Fair enough.
quote:
Wrong. There were deep and fundamenatal differences between the German and Italina forms of fascism, and no, there has been no Chilean form. I think the whole race war and extermination of the weak should be a dead giveaway about some fundamental differences between the Italians and the German forms of fascism.
HIlter was not an elite, he was a shlub from Vienna who never rose further than a sargent in WW1. Mussolini was no elite either. Elites looked down at the clowns and lower class dolts who made up the Nazi leadership, and they certainly viewed Mussolini as a clown.
To call those that formed the fascists and nazi parties elite is strenching that word rather stunningly. |
You're not listening, er reading. I said the elites were afraid a socialist takeover, threw their democratic values overboard, and "jumped in with the ultra right, who promised to save them..." I did not say the ultra right WAS the elite. So you need to read more carefully.
This is the pattern for all fascist takovers. The elite (or big business, etc.) fearing a socialist takeover that can't be stopped by normal democratic means, abandons democracy and seeks a saviour amoung ultra rightists, who they had previously ignored. This could be a fascist party or right wing army officers. The elite provide the support which allows the ultra right to seize power. This is then followed by arrests and murders of the left, including political and trade union leaders and anyone else who opposes the new regime. The new government crushes independent labor and sustains capital.
Lots of variations in the particular circumstances occur. There could be an external factor, like the CIA. There are different styles, different methods, and different ideologies, but the underlying pattern is consistent.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by techumseh
Hurricanes are natural events. Wars are not. They are deliberate, planned, human directed events. They are entered into deliberately, and for concrete reasons.
So it's not incidental. Wars are not driven by books. They are driven primarily by greed. Why can't you see the link between the attempt to seize land, labour and capital in Eastern Europe, which directly benefitted German business, and their support for the Nazi's? |
Because the German business eleite no more expected war than the general German public. The guys running business in Germany already had the same experience of war all germans had, and that experience had been a bad one. Germany was poorer in 1920 than 1913. Why would any German industrialist be jumping up and down for war? re-armament, fine, money to be made. But actual WAR?
And HItler's wars were not driven by simple greed-they were driven by megalomania and a biological imperative.
That's my point. Not everything is driven by material concerns. Hitler didn't want war for the sake of getting rich. He wanted war for its own sake. If war came and swallowed the German people and left them in ruins and dead, that was fine for Hitler in so far as the German getting what they deserved for being weak and unworthy.
The business elite backed Hitler because he promised to squelsh communism and Marxism, which to tbe business elite in their own greed was all that mattered-he was the best one to keep the damned Communist in line. He was that BECAUSE he lead a mass movement, because his supporters were lower middle classes and not just the top elite who could get swept aside. HItler lead a popular national movement, a movement he parcelled together out of a lot of contradictory motives-I doubt most Germans did have a clue- I doubt most Nazi's had a clue. BUt the elites needed Hitler because he was leading a popular mass movement, and only a rightwing mass movement could keep a left-wing mass movement in check.
None of that means that Hitler had any love for the elite. He hated the elite. It was that elite that had lead to defeat in WW1. The old men in top hats had done nothing of note for Germany. They were useful allies, just as all the Prussian Junkers types in the Army that looked at Hitler with little more than utter contempt could be momentary allies.
But the old oligarchs and the Junkers hardly had much of a future in the real dream of Hitler's Germany.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
techumseh
|
|
of the frozen North.
Apr 1999
time: 22:24
|
|
Here's an interesting account: (apologies to anyone who thinks any documentation is just one sided and irrelevent) http://reformed-theology.org/html/b.../chapter_07.htm
quote:
Hitler expounded his political views to the assembled businessmen in a lengthy two-and-one-half hour speech, using the threat of Communism and a Communist take-over to great effect:
"It is not enough to say we do not want Communism in our economy. If we continue on our old political course, then we shall perish .... It is the noblest task of the leader to find ideals that are stronger than the factors that pull the people together. I recognized even while in the hospital that one had to search for new ideals conducive to reconstruction. I found them in nationalism, in the value of personality, and in the denial of reconciliation between nations ....
Now we stand before the last election. Regardless of the outcome, there will be no retreat, even if the coming election does not bring about decision, one way or another. If the election does not decide, the decision must be brought about by other means. I have intervened in order to give the people once more the chance to decide their fate by themselves ....
There are only two possibilities, either to crowd back the opponent on constitutional grounds, and for this purpose once more this election; or a struggle will be conducted with other weapons, which may demand greater sacrifices. I hope the German people thus recognize the greatness of the hour." 24
After Hitler had spoken, Krupp von Bohlen expressed the support of the assembled industrialists and bankers in the concrete form of a three-million-mark political fund. It turned out to be more than enough to acquire power, because 600,000 marks remained unexpended after the election. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
Imagine my surprise as I check this thread for the first time and find a debate about Hitler.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by techumseh
"Without suspecting it, the bourgeois world itself was inwardly infected with the deadly poison of Marxist ideas and it's resistance often sprang more from the competitor's envy of ambitious leaders than from a fundamental rejection of adversaries determined to fight to the utmost. In these long years there was only one who kept up an imperturbable, unflagging fight, and this was the Jew. His Star of David rose higher and higher in proportion as our people's will for self-preservation vanished." |
That quote is not too hard to interpret, and its a common right-wing complaint.
The point there is that the masses become infected with the class divisions of the Marxists ideas, and you start seeing all these socialists and others splitting the nation and the people with stupid concerns and petty arguements. That people sometimes fought off these new and dangerous ideas had more to do with them hating the messanger than the message.
Yet one kind of people you never saw doidng this, being devided by class and so forth, the Jews. They "stuck together", you have the Rothschilds raising money for their lower class buddies, and the Jews always clung to their idendity, even as the masses allowed theirs to be sapped by these stupid class distinctions.
That idea that somewho the Jews always keep their own identity separate and intact and avoid the same problems others do is a common "fault" that those people obssesed with identity have. They point and ask "why aren;t the Jews falling on each other like we are?""Must be because they are devious, and in fact they are at fault for weakening us-its all part of their devious plan".
quote:
I'm not saying that they shouldn't be read, rather that believing these books explain the true nature of fascism is like believing a spam message that tells you you've just won a million dollars. |
There is a difference between theory and practice. If we want to undertand why anyone would be a fascist, then these books are crucial. To study how fascism can come into being into the cold hard real world, then we opbviously need other sources, smoe with more detanchment than those form people liable to make excuses about their failures.
quote:
You're not listening, er reading. I said the elites were afraid a socialist takeover, threw their democratic values overboard, and "jumped in with the ultra right, who promised to save them..." I did not say the ultra right WAS the elite. So you need to read more carefully.
This is the pattern for all fascist takovers. The elite (or big business, etc.) fearing a socialist takeover that can't be stopped by normal democratic means, abandons democracy and seeks a saviour amoung ultra rightists, who they had previously ignored. This could be a fascist party or right wing army officers. The elite provide the support which allows the ultra right to seize power. This is then followed by arrests and murders of the left, including political and trade union leaders and anyone else who opposes the new regime. The new government crushes independent labor and sustains capital.
Lots of variations in the particular circumstances occur. There could be an external factor, like the CIA. There are different styles, different methods, and different ideologies, but the underlying pattern is consistent. |
Yeah, but in that explination lies the problem. You are not differentiating between what group of right wingers the elite are willing to jump to to save them. The actions you mention, political repression and the destruction of any means of political opposition, would be taken by any group looking to eliminate any political competition.
The arguement here is whether some Junta of Generals can be labelled fascists. Pinochet is a murderous bastard, but he was a bulkward of old conservative values tacking reactionary policies against the revolutionaries. He is akin to Kolchak, Denikin, Wrangel, NOT Hilter or Mussolini. Pinochet wanted to keep the old Chile, the backwards, God fearing, unequal Chile. He did nothing revolutionary whatsoever.I doubt General Pinochet ever had an original thought in his mind.
Mussolini and HItler were also bastards, but they were bastards with a mission, dreams, grand ambitions. They had radical views about reshaping their countries in radical ways. They held on to some of the very old values, but they were still seeking radical change.
The Elites backed them not because either of these men were like them or shared any real dreams with them, but because they were men with strong popular movements who happened not to be communists and who had strong disagreements, or outright hate, of communism. BUt in the end the Elites were expecting nothing more than bafoons. Men of charism, but no real ambition. The Elites were wrong, and paid for their mistakes.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by techumseh
Hitler expounded his political views to the assembled businessmen in a lengthy two-and-one-half hour speech, using the threat of Communism and a Communist take-over to great effect:
"It is not enough to say we do not want Communism in our economy. If we continue on our old political course, then we shall perish .... It is the noblest task of the leader to find ideals that are stronger than the factors that pull the people together. I recognized even while in the hospital that one had to search for new ideals conducive to reconstruction. I found them in nationalism, in the value of personality, and in the denial of reconciliation between nations ....
Now we stand before the last election. Regardless of the outcome, there will be no retreat, even if the coming election does not bring about decision, one way or another. If the election does not decide, the decision must be brought about by other means. I have intervened in order to give the people once more the chance to decide their fate by themselves ....
There are only two possibilities, either to crowd back the opponent on constitutional grounds, and for this purpose once more this election; or a struggle will be conducted with other weapons, which may demand greater sacrifices. I hope the German people thus recognize the greatness of the hour." 24
After Hitler had spoken, Krupp von Bohlen expressed the support of the assembled industrialists and bankers in the concrete form of a three-million-mark political fund. It turned out to be more than enough to acquire power, because 600,000 marks remained unexpended after the election. |
Thanks for the quote. Lets examine it:
Not a single mention of private enterprise. No praise of capital or big business. Look at what Hilter views as the greatest values I found them in nationalism, in the value of personality, and in the denial of reconciliation between nations. Agressive nationalism, international dischord, the cult of personality. These are the things Hitler was speaking to to a bunch of big business wigs. Of course he would court these men in an importan election. But even here, in a private election rally to a bunch of rich fat men, even here he is talking about having to do things violently if need be.
Given that the Socialists and Communist were such big parties, who else were the rich fat elite supposed to back given their fear of Bolshevism?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-09-2005 07:38
|