ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Monday, August 14, 2006

Majikthise Likes Her Nazis!

And not just your run-of-the-mill, "I joined the Nazi party because everyone was doing it" type...

no, she goes for the true believers, the elite, those that were willing to impose National Socialism through brute force.

H/T To Tim Blair

Gunter Grass in SS?

The BBC reports that novelist the Gunter Grass now claims to have served in Waffen-SS. His memoirs are due out in September. Make of this revelation what you will. Frankly, if he did serve in the SS, I'm surprised the news hadn't come out already.

Regardless of whether GG served in the SS, I'm still looking forward to reading The Tin Drum, because Amanda totally sold me on the book on the drive back from the NOW conference in Albany.

Either that, or she just likes his writing style and couldn't be bothered with that whole holocaust-thingy...

(I knew I had her on the Lefty Moonbat blogroll for a reason.)

I seem to recall Pope Benedict (aka Ratzinger) getting a lot of criticism for being alive during the Nazi regime.... I don't remember any discussion along the lines that the Waffen-SS wasn't as bad as the Totenkopf-SS.

Let me just point something out here... the Waffen-SS was directly under Heinrich Himmler's control.

Wikipedia sums it up nicely:
In the Nuremberg Trials, the Waffen-SS was condemned as part of a criminal organisation due to their involvement with the National Socialist Party (NSDAP), and Waffen-SS veterans were denied many of the rights afforded other German combat veterans who had served in the Wehrmacht, Luftwaffe or Kriegsmarine.

And, as Jonah Goldberg and I will point out from time to time, besides all of the genocidal racism of the Nazi regime, many on the left would have difficulty identifying nazi policies with which they disagree?

And, as Hayek points out in his excellent The Road to Serfdom, the centralized planning required under a socialist regime is no better than the centralized planning that the Brits were fighting in WWII.

Sentence following wikipedia entry quoted above should have been included:
Conscripts, however, were exempted from that judgment, as many of them were forced to join the organisation by German authorities.

No doubt this was a comfort to those that came under the boot of the Waffen-SS.

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: St Wendeler

Comments (9)
Anonymous said...

OK, that's nonsense. You're saying Majikthise "likes Nazis"? You quote a Wikipedia article, but you leave out the next line of the Wikipedia article, which clearly states that SS conscript divisions, like Gunter Grass's division (he was a conscript as a teenager, having tried to join the U-boats), were not considered criminal. That looks a lot like lying to me.

There's a huge difference between the teenage conscripts who wore the uniform at the end of the war, and the SS units like the Totenkopf, the concentration camp guards, and the Gestapo. The Nuremberg trials felt the same way. Why would you whitewash that little difference? Just to smear Majikthise?

St Wendeler said...

Over the top? sure...

but, as I mentioned, I don't seem to recall that much of a distinction being made regarding Pope Benedict's past.

Next time I write that I'm going to pick up the latest book of some former SS stormtrooper, I'm sure you'll be just as willing to come to my defense.

Immoral Majority said...

Socialism and Facism are actually the two opposite ends of the extreme, and despite the fact that the official name of the Nazi party was the Socialist German Workers Party, there are no additional similarities. The Socialists were the primary opposition to the Nazi party in Germany, and during the war, they, along with labor union leaders and other political dissidents, were the first to be put into concentration camps, even before the Jews [1]. The rise of fascism in Germany was welcomed by right-wing elements in Europe due to it's opposition to socialism [2].

One of the fundamental aspects of socialism is decentralization of the production and government. The central planning that you speak of is more indicitive of Stalinist or Maoist communism, which has similarities to fascism, however, fascist states always retain private ownership, and a consistant element of fascism is the extensive collusion between the state and private industry to increase profit and productivity. Socialists seek to unite workers against powerful corporate interests, while fascism uses state power to control workers for the benefit of private economic interests.

Anonymous said...

Wow, who knew that reading a book means that you endorse everything about the author?

This must be why all economists are Marxists.

St Wendeler said...

Socialism and Facism are actually the two opposite ends of the extreme

The ends of extreme points often have commonalities which do not appear on the surface. I subscribe to the idea that the political spectrum is not linear, but spherical.


Nazism was National Socialism and many, such as Ernst Roehm, were ticked that Hitler emphasized the nationalist aspects over the socialist aspects - and promised another revolution to come.

And the difference between oppression of workers by communist governments and oppression of workers by state-supported private enterprise is??? One will note that while much of the private enterprise in Nazi germany was not nationalized (in the traditional sense), the Nazi regime certainly had strict control over much of the decisions facing a "private" enterprise:

Most industry was not nationalized, and businesses were still motivated by pursuing profits. However, industry was closely regulated with quotas and requirements to use domestic resources. These regulations were set by administrative committees composed of government and business officials. Competition was limited as major companies were organized into cartels through these administrative committees. Selective nationalization was used against businesses that failed to agree to these arrangements. The banks, which had been nationalized by Weimar, were returned to their owners and each administrative committee had a bank as member to finance the schemes.

In addition, price controls were a key feature of the Nazi regime, something that most supporters of free markets would abhor.

The key is that neither of these systems are considered to be free markets and as Hayek points out, as you begin to move towards a socialist state, more and more areas of life must come under the control of the government.

Tony Blare said...

You probably get this a lot, so this won't come as news, but you're a major -league asshole.

Jim said...

Nazism was National Socialism

Oh boy, argument by dictionary.

Here's a brain-teaser for you. There was once an American political party called the Democratic Republicans. Discuss.

St Wendeler said...

Jim - my point was that the Germans, known for their directness, don't use euphemisms when they label something. When they called their party the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (National Socialist German Workers Party), they meant just that.

My larger point is that National Socialism is nowhere near free market capitalism economically nor libertarianism or even conservatism socially, primarily due to the amount of planning and power left to the government in all things personal and economic. Socialism, while seeking to purely focus on planning of economic matters, must expand to include social and personal matters since we are all (in effect) economic actors.


Although it has been a year since you closed this thread, your stupid, mean-spirited post comes back to haunt you. Here is a cross-post to Lindsay's site. Read it and weap, you sleazy dick-head:
In his last edition of "In Memory of W. B. Yeats," W. H. Auden eliminated three stanzas which bear upon this thread. For those of you unfamiliar with these missing stanzas, here they are:

Time that is intolerant
Of the brave and the innocent,
And indifferent in a week
To a beautiful physique,

Worships language and forgives
Everyone by whom it lives;
Pardons cowardice, conceit,
Lays its honours at their feet.

Time that with this strange excuse
Pardoned Kipling and his views,
And will pardon Paul Claudel,
Pardons him for writing well.

Too bad Auden chose to eliminate those lines. In my opinion, these words are among his best and deserving of an audience today more than ever. For me, "intellectual disgrace" describes the right wing assault machine that engages in verbal bombast and hyperbole, that seeks to attack and discredit all those who disagree with them. Yes, Lindsay, to be called an anti-semite or a "self-hating Jew" can be very hurtful. You are not alone in this; but history is on your side.