Calling them "far-right" was a trick by their leftist rivals against the actual right to associate them with something so widely despised. The German "far-right" were the monarchists (not very popular since the monarchy had been discredited by the conduct of the last Kaiser, who just fled before the war that he had started did even end, and then never returned).
So why can't you guys find anything else to associate with than a disastrously failed and long defunct socialist movement from, as you say, a century ago?
Even Mussolini was inspired by something that lasted way way longer than Hitler's "1,000-year Reich" of 12 years. And even after it did crash and burn even the people who did the burning (the Germans) would come to regret it, and so they would wear the Roman skinsuit to self-identify as the "Holy Roman Empire" (aka the Reich). You're wearing a Nazi skinsuit now, but they were a failure.
Nah the Nazi stuff is more like a badge on a Nascar-style sticker suit.
I like many of the ideas, but it's not all that encompasses my thoughts nor close to the majority.
Hitler's "1,000-year Reich" of 12 years. And even after it did crash and burn
Again, that's pretty disingenuous.
The NSDAP led Germany would probably have lasted many a year longer if they didn't draw the ire of international finance.
Even had Hitler not invaded Poland war would have been inevitable.
So why can't you guys find anything else to associate with than a disastrously failed and long defunct socialist movement from, as you say, a century ago?
As said above, I can and I do.
I just always find it so fascinating how everything about Nazism must under common social contention become a discussion of how bad it was without ever really discussing WHAT it was.
In my eyes there's no negative association whatsoever. Aspersions are cast blindly without any real appeal. Muh hoilocaust pulls a nice big blanket over the whole affair.
Personally, I blame the attacks on Nazism for the fall of Nationalism as a political concept. That is why I push for it to be discussed so much. Once that taboo is broken it becomes much more likely to have Nationalism rekindled.
The NSDAP led Germany would probably have lasted many a year longer if they didn't draw the ire of international finance.
Also if it didn't go around invading its neighbors. Or even if it had stopped doing that in 1939, and probably even 1940.
Even had Hitler not invaded Poland war would have been inevitable.
That is a counterfactual that you can't prove and no one can disprove. Maybe, maybe not.
Personally, I blame the attacks on Nazism for the fall of Nationalism as a political concept. That is why I push for it to be discussed so much. Once that taboo is broken it becomes much more likely to have Nationalism rekindled.
I'm sure nationalism will be much more successful once you associate it with the Nazis.
Before Poland the international community repeatedly did everything they could to avoid the war by just giving Hitler whatever he wanted. Including letting him occupy 2 entire countries.
As for "international finance", Poland that Hitler decided to destroy at all cost was discriminating against Jews even on the small business scale, and had outlandish ideas like sending the Jews away as colonists to Madagascar after aquiring it as an overseas colony (much more realistically, Poland was covertly helping the right-wing Zionists to achieve independence for Palestine from Britain so the Jews would go there - which was also the original Nazi plan before "the resettlement to the east").
The German "far-right" were the monarchists (not very popular since the monarchy had been discredited by the conduct of the last Kaiser, who just fled before the war that he had started didn't even end, and then never returned).
Calling them "far-right" was a trick by their leftist rivals against the actual right to associate them with something so widely despised. The German "far-right" were the monarchists (not very popular since the monarchy had been discredited by the conduct of the last Kaiser, who just fled before the war that he had started did even end, and then never returned).
You're still doing it.
I'm talking about TODAY.
Nazism is a "right-side" ideology TODAY.
Stop with the word games.
So why can't you guys find anything else to associate with than a disastrously failed and long defunct socialist movement from, as you say, a century ago?
Even Mussolini was inspired by something that lasted way way longer than Hitler's "1,000-year Reich" of 12 years. And even after it did crash and burn even the people who did the burning (the Germans) would come to regret it, and so they would wear the Roman skinsuit to self-identify as the "Holy Roman Empire" (aka the Reich). You're wearing a Nazi skinsuit now, but they were a failure.
Nah the Nazi stuff is more like a badge on a Nascar-style sticker suit.
I like many of the ideas, but it's not all that encompasses my thoughts nor close to the majority.
Again, that's pretty disingenuous.
The NSDAP led Germany would probably have lasted many a year longer if they didn't draw the ire of international finance.
Even had Hitler not invaded Poland war would have been inevitable.
As said above, I can and I do.
I just always find it so fascinating how everything about Nazism must under common social contention become a discussion of how bad it was without ever really discussing WHAT it was.
In my eyes there's no negative association whatsoever. Aspersions are cast blindly without any real appeal. Muh hoilocaust pulls a nice big blanket over the whole affair.
Personally, I blame the attacks on Nazism for the fall of Nationalism as a political concept. That is why I push for it to be discussed so much. Once that taboo is broken it becomes much more likely to have Nationalism rekindled.
Also if it didn't go around invading its neighbors. Or even if it had stopped doing that in 1939, and probably even 1940.
That is a counterfactual that you can't prove and no one can disprove. Maybe, maybe not.
I'm sure nationalism will be much more successful once you associate it with the Nazis.
Before Poland the international community repeatedly did everything they could to avoid the war by just giving Hitler whatever he wanted. Including letting him occupy 2 entire countries.
As for "international finance", Poland that Hitler decided to destroy at all cost was discriminating against Jews even on the small business scale, and had outlandish ideas like sending the Jews away as colonists to Madagascar after aquiring it as an overseas colony (much more realistically, Poland was covertly helping the right-wing Zionists to achieve independence for Palestine from Britain so the Jews would go there - which was also the original Nazi plan before "the resettlement to the east").
Wasn't Hindenburg a monarchist?
Hindenburg was only elected by running against Hitler.
What about the first time when he wasn't bothered by that Bohemian corporal?