Author Topic: National Socialists were socialists  (Read 4185 times)

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 563
    • View Profile
Re: National Socialists were socialists
« Reply #30 on: January 30, 2022, 05:25:31 am »
Information from Otto Strasser's memoir "Hitler and I", published in 1940. In the book, he is bitterly anti-Hitler and anti-NSDAP.

Previously, we discussed numerous times how Hitler respected the Strassers, went out of his way to try to keep them in the party, and never criticized them for being leftist. Here is further evidence Strasser was indeed leftist/Socialist, and that he believed Hitler was leftist enough to be "used" to further the cause of Socialism.

Quote
Six months earlier the celebrated Kapp putsch had taken place in Berlin, on which occasion I had fought valiantly for the Weimar Republic. I had led three squads of Berlin workingmen against Colonel Erhardt’s Brigade and General Luttwitz’s Regiment.
[...]
I was a young student of law and economics, a Left-Wing student leader, and a leader of ex-soldier students.
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 2-3.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser

Quote
Gregor, as leader of the Nationalist ex-service men of Bavaria, had incorporated his followers in the National-Socialist movement that spring [1920]. He had founded the first provincial branch of the party, and was thus Hitler’s first Gauleiter.
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 6-7.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser

Quote
‘There is no question of revenge and there is no question of war,’ I replied. ‘Our Socialism must be “national” in order to establish a new order in Germany and not to set out on a new policy of conquests.’

‘Yes,’ said Gregor, who had been listening very seriously, ‘from the Right we shall take nationalism, which has so disastrously allied itself with capitalism, and from the Left we shall take Socialism, which has made such an unhappy union with internationalism. Thus we shall form the National-Socialism which will be the motive force of a new Germany and a new Europe.’

‘And,’ I continued, ‘the emphasis in this amalgamation must be on the socialism. Don’t you call your movement Nationalsozialist in a single word, Herr Hitler? German grammar tells us that in compound words of this kind the first part serves to qualify the second, which is the essential part.’
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 9.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser

Again, there was an understanding in the 1920s that Marx did not have a monopoly on the idea of Socialism:
Quote
The more persuasive Hitler tried to be, the more critical did I become. He stopped for breath and saw me smile.

‘You do not know the Jews, Herr Hitler, and permit me to tell you that you overestimate them,’ I replied. ‘The Jew, you see, is above all adaptable. He exploits existing possibilities, but creates nothing. He makes use of socialism, he utilizes capitalism, he would even exploit National-Socialism if you gave him the chance. He adapts himself to circumstances with a suppleness of which, apart from him, only the Chinese is capable. Marx invented nothing. Socialism has always had three sides. Marx, in collaboration with the good German Engels, studied its economic side, the Italian Mazzini examined its national and religious implications, and Bakunin, a Russian, developed its Nihilist side, from which Bolshevism was born. Thus you see that socialism was not of Jewish origin at all.’
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 11.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser

(For reference, Bakunin was very anti-Jewish.)


Like Hitler, the Strassers wanted a synthesis of Nationalism and Socialism:
Quote
As for Hitler, I thought him too servile towards the General, too quick in argument and in the art of isolating his opponent. He has no political convictions, he has the eloquence of a loudspeaker.’

‘Perhaps,’ said Gregor, ‘his corporal’s stripes are pinned to his body. All the same there’s something about him. He has a magnetic quality which it is difficult to resist. What fine things we could do if we could use him to express your ideas, employing Ludendorff’s energy and my own organizing ability to carry them out!’
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 13.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser


Ironically, the Strassers expressed disappointment that Hitler was making an actual synthesis of Nationalism and Socialism, as well as setting his sights on a radical and revolutionary transformation of politics. The Strassers were too bogged down in Western traditions...
Quote
Gregor had more solid arguments to justify his obstinacy.

I reminded him of Hitler’s successive acts of treachery.

‘We no longer talk the same language,’ I said. ‘We are socialists, and Hitler has already come to terms with the capitalists. We are republicans, and Hitler allies himself with the Wittelsbachs and even with the Hohenzollerns. We are European and liberal; we demand our liberty, but we also respect the liberty of others, while Hitler talks to his confidants of the domination of Europe. We are Christians; without Christianity Europe is lost. Hitler is an atheist.’

Gregor listened to me gravely, his brows contracted in a frown.

‘No!’ he exclaimed, ‘I won’t allow myself to be unhorsed. I shall tame him.’

Did Gregor really believe he would tame Adolf? Was he not bound to him by one of those obstinate fidelities that nothing could shake?
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 93.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser

See the previous post of Hitler's conversations with Otto Strasser in 1930, where Hitler reaffirmed his Socialism and criticized Strasser for being too Marxist-sympathetic and not radical enough. (A different translation of that conversation is also included in the book I'm quoting from.)
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/national-socialists-were-socialists/msg10620/#msg10620


Strasser speaks very negatively of Goebbels, but never does he portray Goebbels as a rightist. This occurred in 1925 I believe:
Quote
When Feder protested in Hitler’s name, Goebbels leapt to his feet and made a sensational speech in our support.

‘In these circumstances I demand that the petty bourgeois Adolf Hitler be expelled from the National-Socialist Party,’ he thundered. I may add that he was loudly applauded.
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 86.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser

Otto Strasser claims Goebbels helped organize the coup attempt led by Stennes (which Otto Strasser supported). (This also means Stennes would have been a leftist Socialist. So many leftist factions within the NSDAP!)
Quote
On Good Friday, 1931, the Berlin S.A., in full uniform, with Stennes at their head, seized the building in which Goebbels lived and the Angriff was printed.
[...]
Stennes informed me of what had happened. ‘Goebbels is in flight, but the police are on the move against us,’ he said.

I immediately joined him at the Angriff building.

‘What are we to do?’ he asked me. ‘The revolt was planned in agreement with Goebbels, but at the last moment he betrayed us, warned the police, and fled to Munich to take refuge in Hitler’s bosom.’

‘A revolt which does not develop into a revolution,’ I replied, ‘is doomed in advance. We must hold out.’

The S.A. occupied the Angriff works for three days, publishing the paper on their own. Hitler and Goebbels were declared to have been dethroned. The Gauleiters of North Germany decided to support Stennes in the total revolution, and Goebbels’ second betrayal was reported in large type in all their papers.
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 126-127.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser


Strasser also claims Goebbels was assuring Roehm that the right-wing elements of the party would soon be purged, in the days leading up to the Night of the Long Knives! Strasser insults Goebbels for seemingly favoring whichever faction is more likely to emerge victorious, even if it means 'betraying' his Socialist ideals, but Strasser never suggests that Goebbels was insincere in his initial support of the leftist plotters of the party. He does not suggest Goebbels was a rightist in disguise who was trying to gain the confidence of the leftists!

Furthermore, the way Strasser describes things, Hitler was ready to side with Roehm and the leftist radical/revolutionary faction over the right-leaning faction of the party, but Hitler's hand was forced by President Hindenburg's threats of using the military against him if he couldn't control agitation within the party, the danger of alienating the industrial powers, and Goering siding with the military/industrialists.

(Note that when Strasser says "radical", he means leftist.)
Quote
The conversations between Roehm and Goebbels at the Bratwurst-Glockle became much more animated. When the landlord or the waiters entered their private room, they heard only fragments.

‘Mussolini demanded the sacrifice of the radicals... The reactionaries grow more and more insolent... The Marburg speech was a provocation... Adolf will put these gentlemen of the Herrenklub in their place... We’ll make a clean sweep.’

They didn't hear much, but it was too much.

When Hitler finally came down on the side of the reactionaries a few days later, it was important that nobody should be left alive who knew that a few days earlier Goebbels had been discussing with Roehm the liquidation of the capitalist and bourgeois clique.
[...]
Adolf need only have taken one further step to have created a fait accompli, but Roehm, the soul of the revolutionary movement, was absent, and Blomberg and even Goering kept silence.
[...]
He made up his mind to deal once and for all with the reactionary gentlemen, if not tomorrow, then next day or next week.

What he needed now was the President’s consent to the formation of a new Cabinet built on real Nazi lines.
[...]
Hitler was accompanied by Goebbels, by Hofmann the photographer, and by Herr Schreck, the leader of the S.S. These three represented the radical wing of the party in South Germany.
[...]
Did not Goering belong to the Party? Did he not owe everything to Adolf? Yet he dared come out on the side of the Reichswehr and the police against the Party and the S.A. Blomberg and Goering against Hitler and Roehm...

Goebbels reflected. From the corner of his eye he watched Hitler pass from violent anger to complete prostration. The little cripple had betrayed Gregor Strasser at Bamberg, he had betrayed Stennes in Berlin, and he would betray Adolf too if the latter were obstinate, for he knew that power was on the side of the Reichswehr ... But Hitler must realize that too ... Hitler would reflect, he had already reflected, he would go back on his original intentions. Goebbels was sure of it. Only one petty act of treachery would be necessary, and the Minister of Propaganda cheerfully reconciled himself to it. What, after all, had he promised Roehm? Nothing at all. Roehm must be sacrificed.
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 184-187.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser

This is similar to how Rauschning said Hitler was considering regaining control of the party by leading the revolutionary leftist element of the SA himself, rather than purging them:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/national-socialists-were-socialists/msg10719/#msg10719


Weeks before the Night of the Long Knives, Hitler again offered Gregor Strasser additional power in an attempt to retain his loyalty. There is no way Hitler would have offered Strasser the position of Minister of the National Economy had Hitler been a far-rightist trying to stamp out left-wing elements of the party! Furthermore, Otto Strasser's narrative that Hitler was basically right-leaning and had "betrayed" the Socialist aspects of National Socialism from the outset make little sense, given how willing Hitler was to continuously empower Gregor Strasser and Roehm (who Otto Strasser says was aligned with their overall Socialist goals).
Quote
He was at the cross-roads. One way led towards a peaceful German revolution and the regeneration of the country; this was the way of Roehm, Gregor Strasser, and General von Schleicher. The other was the Imperialist way of old Germany, which led inevitably to war. At this time I wrote a pamphlet, Social Revolution or Fascist War? of which thousands of copies were sold throughout the country.

On June 13, before leaving for Venice to meet the Duce, Adolf sent for Gregor; the two had not met since the stormy interview provoked by the intrigues of Papen, Goering, and Goebbels.

‘I offer you the Ministry of National Economy, Strasser. Accept, and between us we can still save the situation.’

‘I accept, Herr Hitler,' said Gregor, ‘on condition that Goering and Goebbels are removed; an honest man cannot work with these individuals.’
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 179.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser

Even the former Marxist Mussolini was apparently worried about just how leftist National Socialism was. (And he even recommended purging Goebbels for his unrepentant leftism.)
Quote
Adolf had two meetings with Mussolini, on June 14 and 15. The Duce, however, failed to succumb to the German Chancellor’s charms. ... Mussolini, however, went still further. Would it not be prudent, he suggested, purely of course as a friend, to restrain somewhat the radical actions and speeches of the Left Wing of the National-Socialist Party? Would it not be wise to dissolve the S.A., which formed a state within the state, and was led by that notorious freebooter Roehm, in association with notorious characters such as Heines, Ernst, etc.?  ...and of Goebbels, who dared speak of the possibility of a second revolution?
Otto Strasser. (1940). Hitler and I. Translated by Gwenda David and Eric Mosbacher (1940). Page 181.
https://archive.org/details/HitlerAndIOttoStrasser


These quotes once again demonstrate that the Strassers genuinely believed themselves to be Socialists, and Otto Strasser seems to believe Hitler only ultimately sided with the "reactionary"/non-Socialist-leaning faction of the party in 1934 when Hitler had to make political compromises to keep the NSDAP in power. Recall also that when Strasser was writing this, he was bitterly anti-Hitler and anti-NSDAP. So even if he was exaggerating things to make them seem worse than they were, even he cannot deny Hitler and the party's Socialism--even if he thinks Hitlerism betrayed "real" Strasserist Socialism.

We must ask ourselves, would the democratic and Marxist-sympathetic Strassers have been able to have more success than Hitler in furthering radical Socialism? I think this is unlikely. Socialist Otto Wagener also agreed that Hitler's synthesis of Socialism was likely more successful than a more conventional Marxist-leaning form of Socialism would have been:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/national-socialists-were-socialists/msg10723/#msg10723