Why were so many high ranking nazis former communists or sympathetic to Marxist ideals?

Home Forums General & off-topic Why were so many high ranking nazis former communists or sympathetic to Marxist ideals?

  • This topic has 33 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 8 months ago by Anonymous.
Viewing 9 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #63361
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Why were so many high ranking nazis former communists or sympathetic to Marxist ideals?

    • #63362
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Because both nazis and communists are modernists and trace their ideological origins back to the French Revolution. Is really just one revolutionary side which developed on different lines, including liberalism. To give an example, Giuseppe Garibaldi could be regarded as both liberal and nationalist and maybe also social(ist). He was a key figure in the italian war of independence and italian nationalists regard him as a national hero, btw he was also a freemason like another italian nationalist poet, d’Annunzio. I can already imagine your shock when you read that the national heroes of the later italian fascists were freemasons kek. This isn’t a particular case, in Romania the guy who united the romanian countries was also a freemason(and so were at least half of the important figures in the romanian independence war, all of them educated in the west ofc..), Codreanu had a very good opinion about him btw.
      So yeah, I gave you more than what you asked for but in order to understand what you asked, you need to see the bigger picture. In conclusion: fascism/nazism, communism/socialism, liberalism/democracy are all products of modernity and false alternatives.

      • #63366
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >chock you he was a freemason
        Why would it?

      • #63367
        Anonymous
        Guest

        this is way to esoteric, constructing speculative identities over many generations. lets keep it simple.
        nazis and communists mostly agreed over the fact that the worker masses, demonstrators and street fighters, were the most important political agent of change during the era, hence they were constantly poaching lower rank members from each other and offering golden bridges to converted opponents. otherwise they were mortal enemies with diverging outlooks and objectives.
        the "party commune" was mostly the invention of ww2 black propaganda aimed at alienating the population and wehrmacht from NSDAP by suggesting that every party dignitary was hopelessly corrupt, that sabotage was done by nazi-communists secretly wanting to lose the war against soviet union. that there was an ongoing hidden civil war between hitler and party communists, blablabla. hitler was simply too popular to be attacked directly. it was similar bullshit like when they launched "they were all secretly zionist homosexuals" memes immediately after ww2. when somebody actually tried to kill hitler in 1944, the brits were caught off-guard and didn’t adapt their propaganda for many weeks, because they themselves didn’t believe such a thing was even possible.

      • #63372
        Anonymous
        Guest

        How many? Goebbels and Strasser bros?

        >Giuseppe Garibaldi could be regarded as both liberal and nationalist and maybe also social(ist)
        Not maybe. Red guerillas in RSI used to call themselves Garibaldians.

        • #63387
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Goering
          The leaders of the SA
          The people of the DAP from when it was like social democracy but without garden gnomes or libtards

          • #63389
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >goering
            Wasn’t he an aristocrat though?

            • #63391
              Anonymous
              Guest

              He seems to have hold some socialist like ideals of a folkgemeinschaft, of course there wouldn’t be any garden gnomes or undesirables in this
              And there would be capitalists still, but so are there in china

          • #63390
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Meyer was never a communist, (Going from the airforce to barnstorming to bumming around in Scandinavia, to studying pokitical science to the nazis) neither was Röhm (Going from the army, to a right wing freikorps to the nazis)
            What are you trying to pull?

          • #63393
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >Goering
            Goering was a nobleman, who also used to invest a lot into private property. He never was communist.
            >Leaders of SA
            Doubtful
            >DAP from when
            Conservative or retrograde socialist thought was known back in the times of Marx and it was criticised by him or Engels.
            Also, after 1914 marxists and SDs have had a major split.

            • #63394
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >Goering was a nobleman, who also used to invest a lot into private property. He never was communist.
              And Engels was an industrial capitalist
              >Doubtful
              They wanted a second social revolution, which is why Hitler had to purge them
              >Conservative or retrograde socialists
              Seems like the alternative at the time was jailing mandelan biologists

      • #63375
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Because both nazis and communists are modernists and trace their ideological origins back to the French Revolution.
        Hrm

      • #63383
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Because both nazis and communists are modernists and trace their ideological origins back to the French Revolution.

        Both Marxists and Nazis oppose Liberté
        Nazis oppose Égalité
        Marxists oppose Fraternité (nationalism).

        Napoleon would have been disgusted by all brands of socialism.

        • #63384
          Anonymous
          Guest

          You don’t know what the French revolution stood for, and you sure as shit don’t understand Napoleon.
          Napoleon famously betrayed the revolution.

    • #63363
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >why did many people who did not fit in the then current social order go from one totalitarian alternative to another?
      Gee, I don’t know…

    • #63364
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Because Fascism is just Socialism v2.0

    • #63365
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Capitalism is an inherently globalist/international force and capitalists owe allegiance to nothing but themselves.

      To a Nationalist this is pretty sick, so of course they turn to socialism. You have to remember that the drive behind Nationalism is a desire to help one’s own people and nation, and that lines up better with socialism than capitalism.

      • #63368
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Is that why ameriKKKa import shitskins and shove alphabet "people" everywhere?

        • #63380
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Unironically yes.

          Open borders and accepting migrants is entirely about importing cheap, Union free psuedo-slave labor to lower wages. Same with H1b visas. Incidentally "women’s lib" was also about lowering wages and increasing the labor pool (and putting more money in the hands of women since they spend more than men).

          Unironically if you want to know why anything is, the way it is in the modern capitalist west, it’s because someone profits from it.

          To a Nationalist this is freaking disgusting. Markets and trade should serve the needs of the state/nation, and not the needs of individuals. Nationalists capable of thinking rationally about their convictions always wind up becoming either socialist or at least wanting restrictions on international finance in some capacity.

          Interestingly, interruption of International finance is also what caused WWII, not "teh holocaust" or whatever the fuck else. The Nazis didn’t play by international financial or diplomatic rules and had to be snuffed out because of it.

    • #63369
      Anonymous
      Guest

      whore chew theory

    • #63370
      Anonymous
      Guest

      the same reason that china today is moving towards nazism. two sides of the same coin.

    • #63371
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Anyone who believes Fascism is by any means "traditional" is a fool. It was fundementally counter-cultural.

      • #63373
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Just like heckin’ LULZ!

      • #63374
        Anonymous
        Guest

        This, there’s a reason the NSDAP got on better with German communists than with the old aristocracy.

        • #63376
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >This, there’s a reason the NSDAP got on better with German communists than with the old aristocracy.
          Didn’t they form an alliance with the old aristocracy and throw the communists in concentration camps? Yeah, they shot some aristocratic types in 1944 when they tried to shoot Hitler but people have weird ideas about the Nazis. They were also tried up in ideas about Romanticism. They seem to have far more in common with modern-day Bronze Age Pervert weirdos and so on but much more in terms of biological notions of race and blood for the Nazis than culture.

          >Within the race, there is therefore no historical evolution. Elsewhere, Rosenberg formulates this fundamental dogma of National Socialism with an even more explicit orientation against the Hegelian concept of development: “The life of a race, of a people is not a philosophy that develops logically, neither is it a process that occurs according to the laws of nature, but the constitution of a mystical synthesis, a spiritual activity that cannot be explained by logical reasoning, nor understandable by the exposed causes and effects.” There are only periods of degeneration and decomposition (due to racial miscegenation) and periods of regeneration, periods of complete restoration of the original and unchanging particularities, thanks to the action of “genius Fuhrers” in which the original spirit of the race is wonderfully incarnated.
          https://www.marxists.org/archive/lukacs/works/1943/hegel-nazis.htm

          • #63377
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >Didn’t they form an alliance with the old aristocracy and throw the communists in concentration camps?
            After rising to power when they realised they needed them, yes. If you look into what happened prior to that (which is why I phrased it as the NSDAP rather than the third reich or Hitlers government) their most vocal and significant opponents were the established aristocrats, specifically the Catholic nobility.

            • #63378
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Really? I’ve read there were hundreds of political killings between communists and Nazis in the leadup to the Nazis eventually taking power. The situation seemed to polarize and radicalize where the Communist Party was absorbing votes from the SPD while the Nazis absorbed the votes from the center and right-wing parties.

            • #63392
              Anonymous
              Guest

              And that alongside the internal purges of socialist elements in the party was also the moment when nazis absolutely cemented themselves as bourgeo-fascists instead of proper socialists. When capital demands compliance, the bourgeo-facist bows, being too frightened to resist.

          • #63379
            Anonymous
            Guest
          • #63388
            Anonymous
            Guest

            You know who else shot a lot of communists? A guy who also had a moustache?

        • #63381
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >This, there’s a reason the NSDAP got on better with German communists than with the old aristocracy.
          The Nazi party was positively filled with old aristocrats, and had direct ties to the DNVP the old monarchists party.

          >Didn’t they form an alliance with the old aristocracy and throw the communists in concentration camps?
          After rising to power when they realised they needed them, yes. If you look into what happened prior to that (which is why I phrased it as the NSDAP rather than the third reich or Hitlers government) their most vocal and significant opponents were the established aristocrats, specifically the Catholic nobility.

          Nonsense. The communists were literally fighting them in the streets. Both the SA and the SS were Set up to fight communists.

    • #63382
      Anonymous
      Guest

      They weren’t.
      But many low ranking Nazis were former communists who saw that the National Socialism was far better for the working class than communism.

    • #63385
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Was Goebbels ever actually sympathetic to socialism?

      • #63386
        Anonymous
        Guest

        No. But he was originally a follower of the Strassers but got poached by Hitler.

Viewing 9 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.