[Wolfman]

I suggest you do much reading on the subject.

And I suggest the same of you, right as soon as you stop sucking off Hitler.

From conservation and animal protection

Both started (in general) before the Nazis, with conservation in Finland in the 1800s and various complaints about animal cruelty in the world for about a century with anti-animal abuse laws already existing, and more specifically since the Nazi environmental and more specific anti-animal abuse laws which were largely just building off of what already existed, and there's some support that anti-animal abuse laws were just a pretext to harass Jews. And you know what's generally a bad way to protect forests? Shelling them.

to the first anti-tobacco health program

Because Jews controlled tobacco. And the policy failed horribly anyways.

to reclaimation of lost territories

to the massive construction of a national freeway system

Started long before the Nazis, and heavily because of that nice economist I already mentioned.

[starman2003]

That said, technological invention would inevitably stagnate.

Could be true, based on the experience of another statist system, the USSR.

This couldn't be further from the truth in any way, shape, or form.

To deny that Germany was improved in almost every possible manner is to take a strikingly ideologically-charged view of history, as even rightist intellectuals will admit to the benefits of Soviet industrialization.

Ultimately of course, the reich was destroyed but I certainly agree there was enormous short term improvement. Besides less unemployment, and a much stronger nation with much higher morale, there was a great improvement in the health of people e.g. due to the Hitler Youth. Even Shirer noted the contrast between the healthy Germans and neglected British of the same generation.

[Far-Right Sage]

Both started (in general) before the Nazis, with conservation in Finland in the 1800s and various complaints about animal cruelty in the world for about a century with anti-animal abuse laws already existing, and more specifically since the Nazi environmental and more specific anti-animal abuse laws which were largely just building off of what already existed, and there's some support that anti-animal abuse laws were just a pretext to harass Jews. And you know what's generally a bad way to protect forests? Shelling them.

What form of perverse logic is this?

Classic example of changing the topic of an argument when one finds himself on the defensive. The statements which I made and which you debated were in response to your laughable claims that no Fascist state improved the nation or lives of its citizens. When valid examples to the contrary are brought up, you change the target to a discussion of where and when such policies or more vaguely, ideas leading to such policies, originated. Completely irrelevant!

Using your logic, nothing can be said about republicanism in early America, as many philosophic strains and broad ideas were borrowed from classical Athens, down to the imagery.

Beginning from such an extreme position in such argument is a sure way to have one’s assertions disproven. There are many systems I personally abhor, but do not allow my personal beliefs to taint an objective perspective on their performance in multiple arenas.

Because Jews controlled tobacco. And the policy failed horribly anyways.

The reason you want to assign to why such an information campaign was initiated is immaterial.

Medical doctors were advertising cigarettes and other tobacco products to us in the commercials paid for by large tobacco conglomerates just a few decades ago. Of course this subculture was and is entrenched, in German society, in American society, and elsewhere, but to discount the information put out by well-meaning German officials and associates of the German government on that basis is bizarre.

Are you claiming this isn't true?

Started long before the Nazis, and heavily because of that nice economist I already mentioned.

Are you referring to the failed effort which accomplished next to nothing under the Weimar regime?

The Third Reich built reality out of a pipe dream.

[Wolfman]

What form of perverse logic is this?

Classic example of changing the topic of an argument when one finds himself on the defensive. The statements which I made and which you debated were in response to your laughable claims that no Fascist state improved the nation or lives of its citizens. When valid examples to the contrary are brought up, you change the target to a discussion of where and when such policies or more vaguely, ideas leading to such policies, originated. Completely irrelevant!

Nothing the Nazis did improved the lot in life of the Germans, because the environmental and anti-animal abuse laws put in place by the Nazis were them just following what previous individuals had already done, both in Germany and elsewhere.

Using your logic, nothing can be said about republicanism in early America, as many philosophic strains and broad ideas were borrowed from classical Athens, down to the imagery.

Actually, the Founding Fathers were largely working in opposition to Athenian Democracy, and were more generally interested in Roman Republicanism and the already existing Republics in their time. Really, the only thing the Founding Fathers did, in terms of advancement of Republicanism, was take a bunch of already existing ideas, and put them together.

The reason you want to assign to why such an information campaign was initiated is immaterial.

It's actually very material. The only reason the Nazis were against smoking is because they were against Jews. Had the German-Jewish Community been anti-smoking, the Nazis would have encouraged smoking. And the anti-smoking campaign failed so hard that it increased smoking in Germany.

Are you claiming this isn't true?

In a word? Yes. The only thing Germany lost was chunks of land to countries that had beaten Germany in WWI. And you know what? The whole country of France was not German, neither was the vast majority of the Nazis took over.

The Third Reich built reality out of a pipe dream.

No, they built hell on earth to satisfy an asshole so retarded he was probably the greatest ally to Churchill, Stalin, and FDR/Truman.

[starman2003]

No, they built hell on earth to satisfy an asshole so retarded he was probably the greatest ally to Churchill, Stalin, and FDR/Truman.

Adolf had his faults but he sure came far for a retard. He'll live on in the history books forever--I don't think many people here will get a tenth as far. If or when democracy breaks, he'll be seen as an antecedent to what ultimately triumphed--a flawed one to be sure but fundamentally on the right track.

[Wolfman]

Adolf had his faults but he sure came far for a retard.

His faults are pretty much the only reason Nazi Germany lost the war. I don't suppose you've heard the story about the British opting out of assassinating the man?

[nucklepunche]

No, they built hell on earth to satisfy an asshole so retarded he was probably the greatest ally to Churchill, Stalin, and FDR/Truman.

The entire Nazi movement was largely a movement that appealed to crass fears of middle class Germans. It was the original Tea Party. I'm going to get a lot of heat for that comment but it is true. The Tea Party is made up of middle class white people who fear that The Other, as defined as "socialists" but fearing a coalition of young people and minorities led by a half black president that is taking away their America. The same was true of Nazism, only they were worried Jews were taking over. In both cases, middle class Germans and middle class white Americans today, the two social groups found their standard of living under threat due to issues outside their control and this was exploited by a bunch of populist demagogues. The difference is that the national socialists actually had a powerful orator and captivating leader in Hitler (albeit a nutter who was obsessed with Jews), something the Tea drinkers lack and thank God for it. I'm not saying that the Tea Party wants to kill Jews or set up labor camps, I'm just saying the demographics and situation are similar. The Tea Party is far more harmless than the Nazis, however it just so happened that anti-semitism had a long history in German society and became the flavor of the day, in the same way anti-government sentiments have boiled under America since day one so that became the flavor of the day. These middle class mass movements are inherently conservative in that they gravitate toward what are seen as established cultural values. America is rooted in a lot of libertarian rhetoric so it makes sense that these groups would migrate toward this. If anti-semitism or something else were the defining historical cultural values this group would have migrated to this. Every capitalist society has this issue. I do not consider Nazism to be authentic fascism since fascism is elitist and Nazism is a populist ideology. Fascism really has not existed in any of the so-called "fascist" societies of the past 100 years. The closest we have come recently is in the East Asian meritocratic/confucian culture.

[Preston Cole]

It was the original Tea Party.

The Tea Party is a faggotty street movement made of disgruntled anti-statist capitalist libertarians whose political agenda is mostly economic, eg. the capitalist class asserting position in society. The NSDAP was nothing of the sort. It did degenerate into racial struggle insanity, yes, but it started out as an authentic nationalist movement aiming to unite the classes and replace the communist class frenzy of the time with something far better--Volksgemeinschaft. That's what anti-communism/socialism should be about, not a bunch of corporate managers getting all pissy about a black president and a social liberal state. There's really no common ground between the Tea Party and the NSDAP, and to think there is is absurd.

I do not consider Nazism to be authentic fascism since fascism is elitist and Nazism is a populist ideology. Fascism really has not existed in any of the so-called "fascist" societies of the past 100 years. The closest we have come recently is in the East Asian meritocratic/confucian culture.

I tend to agree with that. Fascism is ultimately a populist movement due to its nationalist nature, but incorporates aspects of elitism under the Social Darwinistic points of its ideology. Japanese, Chinese, and Asian (even North Korean) culture in general seem inherently fascistic due to their leader worship, nationalist and class collaborationist cultural values.

[starman2003]

His faults are pretty much the only reason Nazi Germany lost the war.

Na, if Adolf had as much industrial and raw material resources as the US... Both sides goofed at times. The allies had the resources to recuperate and go on, the reich was at a disadvantage.

I don't suppose you've heard the story about the British opting out of assassinating the man?

Sure but that was in '44 when the reich was doomed anyway. If he had been assassinated in 1933 it's doubtful Germany would've gotten as far as it did by mid 1940.

There's really no common ground between the Tea Party and the NSDAP..

Couldn't agree more. The "tea party" is worthless at best...

[Wolfman]

Na, if Adolf had as much industrial and raw material resources as the US... Both sides goofed at times. The allies had the resources to recuperate and go on, the reich was at a disadvantage.

What put the Nazis at a disadvantage was fighting the vast majority of the world on four fronts.

Sure but that was in '44 when the reich was doomed anyway. If he had been assassinated in 1933 it's doubtful Germany would've gotten as far as it did by mid 1940.

We must have heard different stories, because the one I'm thinking of happened in the late 30s. But really, considering the war accomplished nothing for the Germans, is it really even something to be proud of?

[Preston Cole]

What put the Nazis at a disadvantage was fighting the vast majority of the world on four fronts.

This.

By simply looking at a WWII map you can see the sheer overwhelming Allied-Soviet encirclement of the Axis powers, even with the absorption of Eastern European states into the Axis. Italy with its meager and disconnected Libyan and Ethiopian colonies couldn't stand a chance confronting the British Empire. Japan with its modest empire was extremely vulnerable to Soviet and American attacks. And Spain remained neutral. The survival of the Axis depended upon the success of Barbarossa. The Axis was doomed to fail in time.

[Far-Right Sage]

But really, considering the war accomplished nothing for the Germans, is it really even something to be proud of?

Yes, for reasons that you could probably never agree with or even begin to understand.

There are more important things than the modern materialistic concept of life.

[Wolfman]

Yes, for reasons that you could probably never agree with or even begin to understand.

Such as?

There are more important things than the modern materialistic concept of life.

And what is more important then living that was accomplished by the Germans in WWII?

[Far-Right Sage]

Clearly this entered the realm of a more philosophical discussion than anything else.

To put it in far more simplistic and less cryptic terms, certain ideals which were fought for are more important than life or death. The entire ethos was worth fighting for, even in the most suicidal of manners. And just as the European world moved sharply away from the legacy of Sparta as it "progressed" and finally suffered the Age of Enlightenement and all its hideous values, so too has the world condemned wholism and heroism since the fateful days of the war. History runs in cycles however. I have seen blood shed, and I don't fear one defeat in one war in time or one hundred million deaths for where there is furious vengeful death there is also beauty, life, and rebirth. History ebbs and flows.

Believe me, my view on this has much less to do with whether National Socialist governance gained or lost Danzig than you could ever know.

[Wolfman]

Should I take the lack of a real answer to mean that you have no way of actually answering the question?

[Far-Right Sage]

Sigh. I'm quite finished with this farce.

"Such as?" You are essentially asking me to "prove" an ideological and personal philosophic worldview. Ridiculous.

Take whatever you choose from wherever you choose, Wolfman. I have only been honest about my personal views in this discussion. If my words aren't real enough or don't synchronize with your word games, I truly don't give a damn.

Many anti-Nazi intellectuals and leaders, from David Lloyd George to Mahatma Gandhi to Thomas Edison would even find your position laughable.

[TropicalK]

Or maybe you could state a single thing that Nazis and German's should be proud of via WW2. We can't read your mind.

Publius and I aren't asking you to *prove* anything. You haven't even satisfactorily stated your claim yet.

[Far-Right Sage]

National pride, strength, and unity. Class cooperation. Spiritual purification. The reclaimation of lost land. Ambitious national construction products. Youth health and martial spirit. The formation of an ethnic state with a sense of its own history. These are undoubtably values which are lost on today's generations.

I'm so very pleased to know in my heart I raised my sons right, contrary to the whorehouses of Marxist thought they call our public schools.

What is and is not satisfactory to a libertarian I care not one iota, sir.

[nucklepunche]

National pride, strength, and unity. Class cooperation. Spiritual purification.

These are all buzzwords and abstract concepts. So was killing millions worth getting a few jollies about buzzwords?

The reclaimation of lost land. Ambitious national construction products. Youth health and martial spirit. The formation of an ethnic state with a sense of its own history. These are undoubtably values which are lost on today's generations.

And thank God for it. I hope they get even more lost over time.

I'm so very pleased to know in my heart I raised my sons right, contrary to the whorehouses of Marxist thought they call our public schools.

What is and is not satisfactory to a libertarian I care not one iota, sir

For once I find myself agreeing with the libertarians over this emotivist nonsense. "National pride" and "racial consciousness" are a bunch of outdated, emotional, tribal hooey.

[Far-Right Sage]

These are all buzzwords and abstract concepts

If you believe that, we have absolutely nothing to discuss.

Quite honestly, there is a difference in value systems here. It's pointless to debate in such a framework.