With reference to national socialist ambigous political nature, a French historian formulated Nazism, as well as all 20th century totalitarianisms, was the direct heir of Bonapartism wich he defined as a "centrism through addition of the extremes". I wrote about that on my substack: https://scriptamanent.substack.com/p/fascism-as-degenerate-centrism?r=33qtk5
That's an interesting analysis. I'd say that, propagandistically, the Nazis promoted the idea of making "the internal divisions of the nation inoperative by the union of opposite tendencies." But Hitler and his inner circle intended to transcend nationalism and socialism via a race-based worldview, not to unify them. Their radical core was revealed after they gained power, especially during the course of the war when they were able to implement their vision without internal opposition; not in their earlier attempts to co-opt socialists and conservatives in order to gain power.
This article has to be a misinformation record for 2024. It's rare to see someone get so many things completely wrong and backward in one short article. Congrats.
Nazis were as much materialists as Communists. The difference between them being that Communists were universalists while Nazis were particularists (essentially tribalist). Both parties were hostile to God as conceived by Christians. Both inflicted enormous brutality on behalf of a godless utopian ideology.
If I feel any sympathy for the Germans (I do) it is in spite of the Nazis. But they're gone now, so it's time to stop punishing/trashing Germans for that unfortunate 12-year political interlude.
As for allied sins during the war, such as firebombing civilians, yes we should openly discuss them. Refusal to acknowledge faults is a characteristic of the regimes we fought and shouldn't characterize our own society.
I'm not in favor of "punishing/trashing" contemporary Germans, but nor do I think anti-German sentiment is a pressing issue in 2024. Germany is the third-largest economy in the world and a leading member of the EU and NATO. Rather than seeking economic revenge on Germany, the United States spent billions of dollars helping to rebuild the country via the Marshall Plan. Western treatment of post-war Germany stands in stark contrast to the way the Nazis treated the countries they defeated.
As for Allied actions during a brutal war for national (indeed, civilizational) survival, absolutely, they should be openly discussed. However, they should also be placed in their proper context. As Victor Davis Hanson writes: "The Luftwaffe first indiscriminately bombed civilian targets in Poland to instill panic, terror, and mass death. It continued that tactic unapologetically in Holland by destroying the center of Rotterdam during the first two weeks of May 1940. And despite Hitler’s false claims that the Allies had started bombing civilians first, he soon honed his air strategy of incinerating civilians against Coventry and London. In terms of soldiers lost versus civilians killed, Britain waged a less lethal war than most of the other belligerents, losing fewer soldiers than its two allies and killing far fewer of their enemies as well."
By his own telling Hitler's ideology wasn't informed by anything conservative or libertarian at all. His formation was being threatened with being murdered by trade unions allied with the SDAP, and after concluding he was in a way beaten he decided to study their tactics and literature. This was when he concluded that political violence worked. Later he even warmed to the unions, concluding they allied with the hated SDAP only because the bourgeois ignored them.
Hitler's party was very clearly based on the hard left that was in ascendancy during his formative years. He explained so clearly in Mein Kampf. The military uniforms, the street armies, the marching, even the way Nazis called each other comrades (a fact never mentioned in modern histories) are all clearly and directly left wing. No surprise as he devoured left wing propaganda specifically to learn from it.
A relevant quotation from Benedict Anderson: "The dreams of racism actually have their origin in ideologies of class, rather than in those of nation: above all in claims to divinity among rulers and to 'blue' or 'white' blood and 'breeding' among aristocracies."
With reference to national socialist ambigous political nature, a French historian formulated Nazism, as well as all 20th century totalitarianisms, was the direct heir of Bonapartism wich he defined as a "centrism through addition of the extremes". I wrote about that on my substack: https://scriptamanent.substack.com/p/fascism-as-degenerate-centrism?r=33qtk5
That's an interesting analysis. I'd say that, propagandistically, the Nazis promoted the idea of making "the internal divisions of the nation inoperative by the union of opposite tendencies." But Hitler and his inner circle intended to transcend nationalism and socialism via a race-based worldview, not to unify them. Their radical core was revealed after they gained power, especially during the course of the war when they were able to implement their vision without internal opposition; not in their earlier attempts to co-opt socialists and conservatives in order to gain power.
This article has to be a misinformation record for 2024. It's rare to see someone get so many things completely wrong and backward in one short article. Congrats.
The Knotseas are not on your side, either.
The truth is on my side. I don't know about yours.
Nazis were as much materialists as Communists. The difference between them being that Communists were universalists while Nazis were particularists (essentially tribalist). Both parties were hostile to God as conceived by Christians. Both inflicted enormous brutality on behalf of a godless utopian ideology.
If I feel any sympathy for the Germans (I do) it is in spite of the Nazis. But they're gone now, so it's time to stop punishing/trashing Germans for that unfortunate 12-year political interlude.
As for allied sins during the war, such as firebombing civilians, yes we should openly discuss them. Refusal to acknowledge faults is a characteristic of the regimes we fought and shouldn't characterize our own society.
I'm not in favor of "punishing/trashing" contemporary Germans, but nor do I think anti-German sentiment is a pressing issue in 2024. Germany is the third-largest economy in the world and a leading member of the EU and NATO. Rather than seeking economic revenge on Germany, the United States spent billions of dollars helping to rebuild the country via the Marshall Plan. Western treatment of post-war Germany stands in stark contrast to the way the Nazis treated the countries they defeated.
As for Allied actions during a brutal war for national (indeed, civilizational) survival, absolutely, they should be openly discussed. However, they should also be placed in their proper context. As Victor Davis Hanson writes: "The Luftwaffe first indiscriminately bombed civilian targets in Poland to instill panic, terror, and mass death. It continued that tactic unapologetically in Holland by destroying the center of Rotterdam during the first two weeks of May 1940. And despite Hitler’s false claims that the Allies had started bombing civilians first, he soon honed his air strategy of incinerating civilians against Coventry and London. In terms of soldiers lost versus civilians killed, Britain waged a less lethal war than most of the other belligerents, losing fewer soldiers than its two allies and killing far fewer of their enemies as well."
By his own telling Hitler's ideology wasn't informed by anything conservative or libertarian at all. His formation was being threatened with being murdered by trade unions allied with the SDAP, and after concluding he was in a way beaten he decided to study their tactics and literature. This was when he concluded that political violence worked. Later he even warmed to the unions, concluding they allied with the hated SDAP only because the bourgeois ignored them.
Hitler's party was very clearly based on the hard left that was in ascendancy during his formative years. He explained so clearly in Mein Kampf. The military uniforms, the street armies, the marching, even the way Nazis called each other comrades (a fact never mentioned in modern histories) are all clearly and directly left wing. No surprise as he devoured left wing propaganda specifically to learn from it.
A relevant quotation from Benedict Anderson: "The dreams of racism actually have their origin in ideologies of class, rather than in those of nation: above all in claims to divinity among rulers and to 'blue' or 'white' blood and 'breeding' among aristocracies."