Author Topic: National Socialists were socialists  (Read 4198 times)

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 563
    • View Profile
Re: National Socialists were socialists
« Reply #45 on: February 10, 2022, 02:00:02 am »
Thus far, I have avoided relying on commentary from historians for 4 main reasons:

(1) Historians write their works by reading and synthesizing primary sources (i.e. the exact same process of what we are doing here by quoting National Socialists in their own words). If we want an actual understanding of the truth, we might as well cut out the middle-men.

(2) It is possible for two historians/individuals to read the EXACT SAME sources, but write two completely different narratives, depending on their own personal attitudes and values. (e.g. Rightists can quote the "great minds" of Western Civilization with admiration, while leftists like us can quote the same sentences and express our disgust.) Again, it is best to cut out the middle-men who try to tell us what to believe, and just read the original documents and decide for ourselves.

(3) Every time we quote a historian who acknowledges the Socialism of National Socialism, our enemies could quote a dozen other historians who claim National Socialism is far-rightism. The only way to cut through the propaganda and biased narratives to get down to the truth is by reading the actual primary source documents of what National Socialists believed in their own words.

(4) In any case, relying exclusively on a historian's opinion rather than the content of the actual source documents is an appeal to authority (a logical fallacy) and intellectual laziness.

----

However, the fact that many mainstream historians do acknowledge the leftism/Socialism of National Socialism demonstrates that even within Western academia there is far from a unanimous agreement that National Socialism was some far-right ideology. These historians will obviously quote excerpts of National Socialist writings in order to demonstrate their point--pointing us to valuable information for further study. Until we can find a full copy of the original source documents, then commentary from these historians will have to suffice.

----

Below is the book from which Wikipedia and other sources cite the following quote.
Quote
According to the idea of the NSDAP, we are the German left. Nothing is more hateful to us than the right-wing national ownership block.
   -Der Angriff (The Attack), (6 December 1931)

Wolfgang Venohr, Hellmut Diwald, and Sebastian Haffner. (1983). Dokumente deutschen Daseins: 500 Jahre deutsche Nationalgeschichte, 1445-1945 (Documents of German existence: 500 years of German national history 1445-1945). Krefeld: SINUS-Verlag. Page 279.
https://archive.org/details/dokumentedeutsch00veno/page/278/mode/2up

See the previous post about this and other Joseph Goebbels quotes. Hitler would have been fully aware of Goebbel's leftism for years at this point.
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/national-socialism-is-revolutionary-not-reactionary/msg10621/#msg10621

----------------

Page 276-277.

Quote
HAFFNER
Ich würde so sagen: Die Weimarer Parteien haben den nationalen Bereich nicht völolig ignoriert. Die Deutsch-Nationalen rührten ja auch die _nationale_ Trommel. Un die Sozialdemokraten rührten die _sozialistische_ Trommel. Aber die beiden Sachen mal zusammenzubringen: Das war eine bedeutende Idee! Und das zeigt, daß Hitler kein verächtlicher Politiker war, solange er sich noch Mühe gab, einer zu sein. Dieser Versuch, zwei großbe, damals ungeheurer schlagkräftige Ideen--den Nationalismus un den Sozialismus--miteinander zu fusionieren, das war eine große Sache!

Prof. DIWALD
Das allein hat aber das Besondere des Nationalsozialismus noch nich ausgemacht. Als drittes Moment ist dazu der ganz brutale Rassenantisemitismus gekommen! Es ist ein Phänomen, das es weder in Deutschland noch in der gesamten politischen Geschichte vorher in dieser Prägnanz und Entschiedenheit gegeben hat...

HAFFNER
Ja, das simmt schon, un ich mach' es auch den Deutschen etwas zum Votwurf, daß sie da nicht genauer hingehört haben, daß sie das sozusagen in Kauf genommen haben. Aber eines muß man da sagen: Hitler hat in der Zeit 1930 bis 1933 gerade den Antisemitismus verhältnismäßig in den Hintergrund treten lassen. Da redete er hauptsächlich von der sozialen Not und dem Versagen der Parteien und diesen Dingen.

Und bei der Gelegenheit möchte ich doch eines auch sagen: Daß Hitler nur das Werkzeug der Kapitalisten war, das ist ja Unsinn! Die Kapitalisten mißtrauten ihm sogar noch in der Zeit seines Erfolges 1930/31, und erst 1932 hat er sie--ich möchte mal hamburgisch sagen--"begöscht", mit der berühmten Rede in Düsseldorf vor dem Rhein-Ruhr-Club der Industriellen.

Prof. DIWALD
Ja, Seihne Ausrichtung auf den Arbeiter, die lief damals durchaus in dem, was man als sozialistisch oder links bezeichnet hat (natürlich nict zu verwechseon mit dem, was man heute unter links oder sozialistisch versteht). Die Hauptpropaganda, die hat er ausgerichtet auf den einfachen Bürger, auf den Bauern und auf den Arbeiter!

HAFFNER
Wobei immerhin zu beachten ist: beim Bauern und beim Kleinbürger hatte er sofort großen Erfolg. Beim Arbeiter zunächst nicht! Das kam erst später. Bis 1933 wählten die Arbeiter kommunistisch oder sozialdemokratisch; mit einer Linksverschiebung. Zuerst mehrheitlich sozialdemokratisch, dann wurde die Mehrheit immer dünner. Aber was die Sozialdemokraten verloren, gewannen nicht die Nazis. Das gewannen die Kommunisten! Nach 1933/34 hat er dann auch die Arbeiter 'rumgekreigt.

Prof. DIWALD
Es kommt noch dazu, und das ist eine der Erklärungen, die man nicht vergessen darf: Die Parteien hatten bis zu den Präsidialkabinetten gezeigt, daß sie nicht in der Lage warren, mit den Schwiergkeiten fertigzuwerden. Hitler hat den Konterpart gespielt. Er hat gesagt, ich werde mit allem fertig...

Google translate:
Quote
HAFFNER
I would put it this way: the Weimar parties have not completely ignored the national sphere. The German nationalists also beat the _national_ drum. And the Social Democrats beat the _socialist_ drum. But to bring the two things together: That was an important idea! And that shows that Hitler was not a contemptible politician while he still tried to be one. This attempt to fuse two great ideas, which at the time were enormously powerful -- nationalism and socialism -- was a big deal!

Prof. DIWALD
But that alone did not make up what was special about National Socialism. The third moment was the very brutal racial anti-Semitism! It is a phenomenon that has never existed before in Germany or in all of political history with such conciseness and decisiveness...

HAFFNER
Yes, that's true, and I also blame the Germans for not listening more carefully, for accepting it, so to speak. But one thing has to be said: in the period from 1930 to 1933 Hitler allowed anti-Semitism to recede into the background. He talked mainly about the social misery and the failure of the parties and things like that.

And I would like to take this opportunity to say one thing: hat Hitler was only the tool of the capitalists, that's nonsense! The capitalists mistrusted him even during the period of his success in 1930/31, and it was not until 1932 that he--I would like to say Hamburgian--"begged" them with the famous speech in Düsseldorf before the Rhein-Ruhr-Club of the industrialists.

Prof. DIWALD
Yes, his orientation towards the worker was definitely part of what was called socialist or left (of course not to be confused with what is meant by left or socialist today). The main propaganda he aimed at the simple citizen, at the peasant and at the worker!

HAFFNER
However, it should be noted that he immediately had great success with the peasants and the petty bourgeoisie. Not with the worker at first! That came later. Until 1933 the workers voted communist or social democratic; with a left shift. At first the majority was social democratic, then the majority became thinner and thinner. But what the Social Democrats lost, the Nazis did not gain. The communists won! After 1933/34 he then also 'round the workers' around.

Prof. DIWALD
What's more, and this is one of the explanations that must not be forgotten: the parties had shown up to the presidential cabinets that they were unable to cope with the difficulties. Hitler played the counterpart. He said I can handle anything...

----
Page 278-278.

Quote
Der Stabchef der SA, Ernst Röhm, hatte auf dem Neujahrsempfang des diplomatischen Korps in Berlin, zu Beginn des Jahres 1934, damit gedroht, daß SA bald zur "zweiten Revolution" schreiten würde, zu einer Revolution, in der mit dem Sozialismus in Deutschland ernst gemacht werden sollte. Die Bourgeoisie war auf's höchste alarmiert! Sie setze Himmel und Hölle in Bewegung, Hitler--vor allem auf dem Umweg über die Heeresgeneralität--under Druck zu setzen und gegen seine "alten Kämpfer" zu mobilisieren, indem man frei erfundene Gerüchte in die Welt setzte, die SA wollen gegen ihren eigenen Führer und Reichskanzler putschen.

Tatsächlich gab es starke sozialistiche bzw. sozialrevolutionäre Kräfte in der NSDAP; vor allem im Raum Berlin-Brandenburg. Hier herrschte so etwas wie Horst-Wessel-Geist, und ganz in diesem Sinne schrieb der NS-Gauleiter von Großberlin, Dr. Joseph Goebbels, am 6. 12. 1931 im "Angriff", dem Berliner Kampfblatt der Hitlerbewgung:

"Der Idee der NSDAP entsprechend sind wir die deutsche Linke. Nichts ist uns verhaßter als der rechtsstehende nationale Besitzbürgerblock." Und zehn Monate später, am 9. 10. 1932--also nur ein Vierteljahr vor der Machtäbernahme!--erklärte er, daß es die große Idee Adolf Hitlers sei, "aus Deutschland den sozialistischen Arbeiterstaat zu machen".

Das fiel vor allem bei der kämpferischen SA auf fruchtbaren Boden. Das Wort von der "antikapitalistchen Sehnsucht", das einer der höchsten NS-Funktionäre, Gergor Strasser, vor dem Deutschen Reichstag gesprochen hatte, gab exakt die Gefählslage in diesen bärgerkreigserprobten Formationen wieder.

Von konkreten Putschplänen der SA gegn Hitler konnte im Ernst keine Rede sein; Wohl aber vom Anwachsen einer vorrevolutionären Stimmung, die sich immer deutlicher gegen das Großkapital richtete. Im Südwesten des Reiches ließ SA-Gruppenführer Hanns Ludin den Nationalkommunisten Richard Scheringer Schulungsvorträge über den Weg zum deutschen Sozialismus vor seinem Führerkorps halten. In Berlin-SIemensstadt veruschten SA-Leute in spontaner Aktion, das Großunterehmen Siemens zu sozialisieren und dort die Macht zu übernehmen. Sa-Gruppenführer  Karl Ernst von Berlin-Brandenburg erklärte dem KPD-Richstagsabgeordneten Torgler, man werde wohl bald gemeinsam gegen die Bourgeoisie marschieren.

Der Antifaschist Willy Brandt schrieb in der Zeitschrift "Sozialistische Arbeiterpartei" im Jahre 1932 treffend: "Das sozialistiche Element im Nationalsozialismus, im Denken seiner Gefolgsleute, das subjektiv Revolutionäre an der Basis, muß von uns erkannt werden." Das deutsche Großkapital sah die Hitlerpartei ganz genauso! und umischtig sorgte es dafür, daß die nationalen Sozialisten der NSDAP rechtzeitig liquidiert wurden.

Google translate:
Quote
At the New Year's reception of the diplomatic corps in Berlin in early 1934, the Chief of Staff of the SA, Ernst Röhm, had threatened that the SA would soon proceed to the "second revolution", a revolution in which socialism in Germany was taken seriously should be done. The bourgeoisie was extremely alarmed! They set heaven and hell in motion to put pressure on Hitler--above all by way of the army generals--and to mobilize against his "old fighters" by spreading fictitious rumors that the SA wanted against theirs own leaders and chancellors.

In fact, there were strong socialistic or social-revolutionary forces in the NSDAP; especially in the Berlin-Brandenburg area. Something akin to the Horst Wessel spirit prevailed here, and it was in this spirit that the Nazi Gauleiter of Greater Berlin, Dr. Joseph Goebbels, on December 6, 1931 in "Angriff", the Berlin newspaper of the Hitler movement:

"According to the idea of ​​the NSDAP, we are the German left. Nothing we hate more than the right-wing national property-owning block." And ten months later, on October 9, 1932--that is, only three months before the seizure of power!--he declared that Adolf Hitler's great idea was "to turn Germany into a socialist workers' state."


This fell on fertile ground, especially in the militant SA. The phrase "anti-capitalist longing" spoken by one of the highest NS officials, Gergor Strasser, before the German Reichstag, accurately reflected the emotional state of these formations, which had been tried and tested in the Civil War.

There could seriously be no talk of concrete putsch plans by the SA against Hitler; But it was due to the growth of a pre-revolutionary mood, which was directed more and more clearly against big business. In the southwest of the Reich, SA group leader Hanns Ludin had the national communist Richard Scheringer give training lectures to his leadership corps on the road to German socialism. In Berlin-Siemensstadt, SA men attempted spontaneous action to socialize the large company Siemens and take over power there. SA group leader Karl Ernst from Berlin-Brandenburg explained to Torgler, a KPD [Communist party] member of the Reichstag, that they would soon march together against the bourgeoisie.

The anti-fascist Willy Brandt wrote in the magazine "Socialist Workers' Party" in 1932: "The socialistic element in National Socialism, in the thinking of its followers, the subjectively revolutionary at the base, must be recognized by us." German big capital saw the Hitler party in exactly the same way! and it cunningly ensured that the national Socialists of the NSDAP [die nationalen Sozialisten der NSDAP] were liquidated in good time.
The last sentence seems to be specifically stressing the Socialist elements of the NSDAP, since "Nationalsozialist" (referring to the ideology and party name) is a single word in German. These historians also suggest the evidence of Roehm/the SA planning to commit a coup was fabricated by rightists in order to force a purge of the leftist agitators who were unwilling to make practical compromises. As we saw previously, even Otto Strasser (who had been expelled from the party and bitter at that point) acknowledged that Hitler did not actually want to purge Roehm or other leftists, but his hand was forced by President Hindenburg and others. Perhaps I was too critical of Roehm in earlier posts.
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/national-socialism-is-revolutionary-not-reactionary/msg10915/#msg10915


To add some commentary on the last paragraph of the quote, from 1931 to the end of WWII, Willy Brandt was part of the (Communist/Marxist) Socialist Workers' Party of Germany. Apparently he drifted towards the "right-wing" of the mainstream Social Democratic Party by the time he became Chancellor. Consider the significance of this--a (future) German Chancellor acknowledged the leftism of National Socialism while being a member of a Communist party!!
Quote
Willy Brandt (18 December 1913 – 8 October 1992) was a German politician and statesman who was leader of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) from 1964 to 1987 and served as the chancellor of West Germany from 1969 to 1974.

He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1971 for his efforts to strengthen cooperation in western Europe through the EEC and to achieve reconciliation between West Germany and the countries of Eastern Europe.[1] He was the first Social Democrat chancellor[2] since 1930.

Fleeing to Norway and then Sweden during the Nazi regime and working as a left-wing journalist, he took the name Willy Brandt as a pseudonym to avoid detection by Nazi agents, and then formally adopted the name in 1948. Brandt was originally considered one of the leaders of the right wing of the SPD, and earned initial fame as Governing Mayor of West Berlin. He served as the foreign minister and as the vice-chancellor in Kurt Georg Kiesinger's cabinet, and became chancellor in 1969.

As chancellor, he maintained West Germany's close alignment with the United States and focused on strengthening European integration in western Europe, while launching the new policy of Ostpolitik aimed at improving relations with Eastern Europe. Brandt was controversial on both the right wing, for his Ostpolitik, and on the left wing, for his support of American policies, including the Vietnam War, and right-wing authoritarian regimes. The Brandt Report became a recognised measure for describing the general North-South divide in world economics and politics between an affluent North and a poor South. Brandt was also known for his fierce anti-communist policies at the domestic level, culminating in the Radikalenerlass (Anti-Radical Decree) in 1972.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willy_Brandt


While the most important focus of this thread is how National Socialists viewed Socialism in their own words, further evidence that non-NS leftists (especially those who were contemporaries with the living National Socialist movement) viewed National Socialism as a genuinely Socialist/leftist ideology is welcome as well.