U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 07-15-2010, 10:47 PM
 
12 posts, read 13,732 times
Reputation: 14
Why Are We Socialists?

by Joseph Goebbels

We are socialists because we see in socialism, that is the union of all citizens, the only chance to maintain our racial inheritance and to regain our political freedom and renew our German state.
Socialism is the doctrine of liberation for the working class. It promotes the rise of the fourth class and its incorporation in the political organism of our Fatherland, and is inextricably bound to breaking the present slavery and the regaining of German freedom. Socialism therefore is not merely a matter of the oppressed class, but a matter for everyone, for freeing the German people from slavery is the goal of contemporary policy. Socialism gains its true form only through a total combat brotherhood with the forward-striving energies of a newly awakened nationalism. Without nationalism it is nothing, a phantom, a mere theory, a castle in the sky, a book. With it it is everything, the future, freedom, the Fatherland!
The sin of liberal thinking was to overlook socialism's nation-building strengths, thereby allowing its energies to go in anti-national directions. The sin of Marxism was to degrade socialism into a question of wages and the stomach, putting it in conflict with the state and its national existence. An understanding of both these facts leads us to a new sense of socialism, which sees its nature as nationalistic, state-building, liberating and constructive.
The bourgeois is about to leave the historical stage. In its place will come the class of productive workers, the working class, that has been up until today oppressed. It is beginning to fulfill its political mission. It is involved in a hard and bitter struggle for political power as it seeks to become part of the national organism. The battle began in the economic realm; it will finish in the political. It is not merely a matter of pay, not only a matter of the number of hours worked in a day-though we may never forget that these are an essential, perhaps even the most significant part of the socialist platform-but it is much more a matter of incorporating a powerful and responsible class in the state, perhaps even to make it the dominant force in the future politics of the Fatherland. The bourgeois does not want to recognize the strength of the working class. Marxism has forced it into a straitjacket that will ruin it. While the working class gradually disintegrates in the Marxist front, bleeding itself dry, the bourgeois and Marxism have agreed on the general lines of capitalism, and see their task now to protect and defend it in various ways, often concealed.
We are socialists because we see the social question as a matter of necessity and justice for the very existence of a state for our people, not a question of cheap pity or insulting sentimentality. The worker has a claim to a living standard that corresponds to what he produces. We have no intention of begging for that right. Incorporating him in the state organism is not only a critical matter for him, but for the whole nation. The question is larger than the eight-hour day. It is a matter of forming a new state consciousness that includes every productive citizen. Since the political powers of the day are neither willing nor able to create such a situation, socialism must be fought for. It is a fighting slogan both inwardly and outwardly. It is aimed domestically at the bourgeois parties and Marxism at the same time, because both are sworn enemies of the coming workers' state. It is directed abroad at all powers that threaten our national existence and thereby the possibility of the coming socialist national state.
Socialism is possible only in a state that is united domestically and free internationally. The bourgeois and Marxism are responsible for failing to reach both goals, domestic unity and international freedom. No matter how national and social these two forces present themselves, they are the sworn enemies of a socialist national state.
We must therefore break both groups politically. The lines of German socialism are sharp, and our path is clear.
We are against the political bourgeois, and for genuine nationalism!
We are against Marxism, but for true socialism!
We are for the first German national state of a socialist nature!
We are for the National Socialist German Workers Party!

__________________________________________________ _______
Each socialist idealist believes the other socialist organizations, etc. are the "wrong" form of socialism and deny that they are socialists. Unfortunately, the end result is always bad for everyone.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-16-2010, 01:43 PM
 
31,308 posts, read 16,519,653 times
Reputation: 14235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not_Seeking_Susan View Post
Why Are We Socialists?

by Joseph Goebbels
It is interesting that a search of Google or Lexis-Nexis returns only one citation using those exact words for the author.

However, I did find this tasty morsel which begs the question of the authenticity of your post and the premiss upon which your post was offered.

With citiation:

Goebbels On National-Socialism, Bolshevism, and Democracy

(September 10, 1938)

Men and women of the National-Socialist Party: Public life in Europe to-day is influenced by three striking political phenomena which I will group together under the popular heading 'National-Socialism, Bolshevism, and Democracy.' It is, however, clear to me that these names cannot define their full significance. The general public thinks of them as a triangle of irreconcilable contrasts. It would be understandable and logical if their reactions upon political personalities, actions, achievements, negotiations, and developments showed a corresponding degree of contrasts, but this is only the case to a limited extent. Often, and indeed mostly, we find, where decisive political problems are concerned, a united front of democracy and Bolshevism opposed to the nationalist, authoritarian States and their representatives. This is one of the most puzzling phenomena of modern politics. It can only be explained by the essential nature of the three political systems. I therefore think it necessary to analyse them in some detail from the theoretical point of view and in their effect on racial relations in Europe.

The political starting-point of democracy dates from the storming of the Bastille in 1789. The new principles of the State and social life which were then proclaimed, as previously in liberal philosophy, were Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. ... Economic and cultural liberty was proclaimed. The individual, who in the authoritarian State was of secondary importance, emancipated himself and was released from the authoritarian tie to the State. The ideas and conceptions of this so-called 'Great Revolution' were expressed in the popular and psychologically prevalent slogan that all those who bear human form are equal. ... Everywhere the more or less complete severance of the tie which binds the individual to the community was elevated into a principle. The Revolution thus carried within it the seeds of the Marxist-Bolshevist conceptions which were later to arise. It was not until the twentieth century that this lack of connexion found its ultimate expression in the Bolshevist system. ...

The fact that the causes and effective potentialities of Bolshevism were already existent in a latent form in democracy explains why Bolshevism flourishes only on democratic soil, and is indeed generally the inevitable consequence of a radical and excessively democratic conception of the State. Bolshevism allegedly makes a classless society its aim. The equality of whatever bears a human form, which democracy applied only to political and social life, is set up as a ruling principle for economic life also. In this respect there are supposed to be no differences left. But this equality of all individuals in respect of economic goods can, in the Marxist-Bolshevist view, result only from a brutal and pitiless class struggle. ... It is only logical that in connexion with this, Bolshevism should proclaim the equality of nations and races. ... The opposition between the democratic and the Bolshevist mentality and conception of the State are in the last resort merely theoretical, and here we have the answer to the mysterious riddle which overshadows Europe and the explanation both of the opposition in the lives of nations to-day and of the things which they have in common. It enables us to see at once why democracy and Bolshevism, which in the eyes of the world are irrevocably opposed to one another, meet again and again on common ground in their joint hatred of and attacks on authoritarian nationalist concepts of State and State systems. For the authoritarian nationalist conception of the State represents something essentially new. In it the French Revolution is superseded. ...

It is no proof to the contrary that democracy and Bolshevism will not make public admission of any common cause. ... They put up artificial oppositions of a purely theoretical character which on closer inspection are seen to be without substance. ... They do not touch the root on the matter. At heart democracy and Bolshevism are closely related and indeed almost identical. They represent merely different stages in the development of a common outlook. Bolshevism is in a sense the bad boy of democracy. Democracy gave it birth, brought it up, and alone keeps it alive. It may be ashamed of the connexion now and again, but at critical moments in European life the maternal instinct breaks through and the two again present a common front, united above all by the violence of their assault upon authoritarian-nationalist State concepts, which they have come to recognize as their bitterest, most dangerous foes. ...

We have modernized and ennobled the concept of democracy. With us it means definitely the rule of the people, in accordance with its origin. We have given the principle of Socialism a new meaning. ... Never have we left anyone in doubt that National-Socialism is not for export. ... We do not aim at world domination, but we do intend to defend our country, and it is our new conceptions which give us the inexhaustible and ever-renewed strength to do so. ...

We Germans were strong in the past, but nothing more than strong; and when our weapons were taken from us, we lay helpless. In that time of national suffering we learned that the strength of nations lies not only in weapons, but in ideas. A great idea and the faith which it inspires can remove mountains. Weapons cannot produce ideas, but, as Germany has shown, ideas can produce weapons. ... The Fuehrer himself gave us this great and vivid idea of liberty which fills and inspires us all to-day. And, most essential of all, he is producing the weapons with which to defend the ideas and their political and economic outcome. Now we no longer fear anyone or anything. ...

Source: "Documents on International Affairs," vol. II, 1938, pp. 17-19.


Goebbels On National-Socialism, Bolshevism, and Democracy
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2010, 02:12 PM
 
12 posts, read 13,732 times
Reputation: 14
The source: Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932).
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2010, 02:16 PM
 
12 posts, read 13,732 times
Reputation: 14
Why Are We Socialists?

We are socialists because we see in socialism,that is the union of all citizens, the only chance to maintain our racial inheritance and to regain our political freedom and renew our German state.
Socialism is the doctrine of liberation for the working class. It promotes the rise of the fourth class and its incorporation in the political organism of our Fatherland, and is inextricably bound to breaking the present slavery and regaining German freedom. Socialism, therefore, is not merely a matter of the oppressed class, but a matter for everyone, for freeing the German people from slavery is the goal of contemporary policy. Socialism gains its true form only through a total fighting brotherhood with the forward-striving energies of a newly awakened nationalism. Without nationalism it is nothing, a phantom, a mere theory, a castle in the sky, a book. With it it is everything, the future, freedom, the fatherland!
The sin of liberal thinking was to overlook socialism’s nation-building strengths, thereby allowing its energies to go in anti-national directions. The sin of Marxism was to degrade socialism into a question of wages and the stomach, putting it in conflict with the state and its national existence. An understanding of both these facts leads us to a new sense of socialism, which sees its nature as nationalistic, state-building, liberating and constructive.
The bourgeois is about to leave the historical stage. In its place will come the class of productive workers, the working class, that has been up until today oppressed. It is beginning to fulfill its political mission. It is involved in a hard and bitter struggle for political power as it seeks to become part of the national organism. The battle began in the economic realm; it will finish in the political. It is not merely a matter of wages, not only a matter of the number of hours worked in a day — though we may never forget that these are an essential, perhaps even the most significant part of the socialist platform — but it is much more a matter of incorporating a powerful and responsible class in the state, perhaps even to make it the dominant force in the future politics of the fatherland. The bourgeoisie does not want to recognize the strength of the working class. Marxism has forced it into a straitjacket that will ruin it. While the working class gradually disintegrates in the Marxist front, bleeding itself dry, the bourgeoisie and Marxism have agreed on the general lines of capitalism, and see their task now to protect and defend it in various ways, often concealed.
We are socialists because we see the social question as a matter of necessity and justice for the very existence of a state for our people, not a question of cheap pity or insulting sentimentality. The worker has a claim to a living standard that corresponds to what he produces. We have no intention of begging for that right. Incorporating him in the state organism is not only a critical matter for him, but for the whole nation. The question is larger than the eight-hour day. It is a matter of forming a new state consciousness that includes every productive citizen. Since the political powers of the day are neither willing nor able to create such a situation, socialism must be fought for. It is a fighting slogan both inwardly and outwardly. It is aimed domestically at the bourgeois parties and Marxism at the same time, because both are sworn enemies of the coming workers’ state. It is directed abroad at all powers that threaten our national existence and thereby the possibility of the coming socialist national state.

Explanation: “The thinking worker comes to Hitler,” the caption says. A communist and a socialist are accusing each other of betraying the working class.

Socialism is possible only in a state that is united domestically and free internationally. The bourgeoisie and Marxism are responsible for failing to reach both goals, domestic unity and international freedom. No matter how national and social these two forces present themselves, they are the sworn enemies of a socialist national state.
We must therefore break both groups politically. The lines of German socialism are sharp, and our path is clear.
We are against the political bourgeoisie, and for genuine nationalism!
We are against Marxism, but for true socialism!
We are for the first German national state of a socialist nature!
We are for the National Socialist German Workers Party!


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


The source: Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932).
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2010, 02:36 PM
 
12 posts, read 13,732 times
Reputation: 14
"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler
(Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)

Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2010, 02:53 PM
 
28,009 posts, read 10,391,663 times
Reputation: 7290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not_Seeking_Susan View Post
"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler
(Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)

Hitler and Goebbels were National Socialists, but they weren't socialists. The socialist party in Germany at the time were the Democrat Socialists, who were Hitler's enemies. Hitler was a proponent of fascism. His argument against the capitalistic economic system wasn't opposition to capitalism, is was against a government that didn't do enough to enable business. That's fascism. Fascism is a form of government that takes capitalistic principles and strips them of any and all socialist influences. In the instance of this quote, who do you think Hitler was referring to as exploiter? He wasn't referring to the moneyed classes in 1920's Germany. He was referring to Jews. He was referring to a heritage of the Jewish community that had often been barred from being active in some economic sectors that had led the Jewish community to become bankers, money-lenders, and to acquire influence that way. The sentiment at the time was that the Jewish people had too much control of business because of their concentration in financial careers.

Instead of focusing on campaign rhetoric, actually look at the policies of Hitler's government. He was anti-union. He was anti-socialist. He supported a strong central government, with an emphasis on government policy that would assist, and enable monopolistic business growth. The idea is that a pro-business environment builds a wealthy country, and when it is sufficiently wealthy, all citizens benefit. Socialism strongly supports unions. It believes that the decisions of a business should be made by the people doing the work, not a management level. This is not something that Hitler believed.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2010, 03:01 PM
 
12 posts, read 13,732 times
Reputation: 14
The Nazis are widely known as nationalists, but that label is often used to obscure the fact that they were also socialists. Some question whether Hitler himself actually believed in socialism, but that is no more relevant than whether Stalin was a true believer. The fact is that neither could have come to power without at least posing as a socialist. And the constant emphasis on the fact that the Nazis were nationalists, with barely an acknowledgment that they were socialists, is as absurd as labeling the Soviets "internationalists" and ignoring the fact that they were socialists (they called themselves the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics). Yet many who regard "national" socialism as the scourge of humanity consider "international" socialism a benign or even superior form of government.


According to a popular misconception, the Nazis must have been on the political right because they persecuted communists and fought a war with the communists in Russia. This specious logic has gone largely unchallenged because it serves as useful propaganda for the left, which needs "right-wing" atrocities to divert attention from the horrific communist atrocities of the past century. Hence, communist atrocities have received much less publicity than Nazi war crimes, even though they were greater in magnitude by any objective measure.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2010, 03:27 PM
 
28,009 posts, read 10,391,663 times
Reputation: 7290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not_Seeking_Susan View Post
The Nazis are widely known as nationalists, but that label is often used to obscure the fact that they were also socialists. Some question whether Hitler himself actually believed in socialism, but that is no more relevant than whether Stalin was a true believer. The fact is that neither could have come to power without at least posing as a socialist. And the constant emphasis on the fact that the Nazis were nationalists, with barely an acknowledgment that they were socialists, is as absurd as labeling the Soviets "internationalists" and ignoring the fact that they were socialists (they called themselves the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics). Yet many who regard "national" socialism as the scourge of humanity consider "international" socialism a benign or even superior form of government.


According to a popular misconception, the Nazis must have been on the political right because they persecuted communists and fought a war with the communists in Russia. This specious logic has gone largely unchallenged because it serves as useful propaganda for the left, which needs "right-wing" atrocities to divert attention from the horrific communist atrocities of the past century. Hence, communist atrocities have received much less publicity than Nazi war crimes, even though they were greater in magnitude by any objective measure.
No, the label is to clarify that they were NOT socialists. As any student of history could tell you. In fact, if you study Goebbels, you will see that it was his socialist leanings that caused his falling-out with Hitler. Hitler recognized Goebbels talents and value, and finally asked Goebbels to meet with him. During that meeting Hitler convinced Goebbels to completely abandon socialism and to embrace Hitler's policies. Thereafter, Goebbels was especially adept at attacking prominent socialists in Germany at the time. If Hitler and his Nazi's were so supportive of socialism, why did they persecute socialists so vehemently?

Your entire second paragraph is nonsensical. The Nazis persecuted socialists and communists. The Soviet Union political ideology was communism as a goal, socialism in practice. Hitler never, ever embraced socialist ideology, he embraced nationalism ardently, and fascism pragmatically.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2010, 03:37 PM
 
12 posts, read 13,732 times
Reputation: 14
To reinforce the point that Nazism was in fact Leftist, we might also note: Hitler always campaigned as a socialist and champion of the worker and the full name of Hitler's political party — generally abbreviated as "Nazi" — says it all: Die Nazionalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei ("The National Socialist German Worker's Party"). So, as a good socialist does, Hitler justified everything he did in the name of "the people" (Das Volk). The Nazi State was, like the Soviet State, all-powerful, and the Nazi party, in good socialist fashion, supervised German industry minutely. And of course Hitler and Stalin were initially allies. It was only the Nazi-Soviet pact that enabled Hitler's conquest of Western Europe. The fuel in the tanks of Hitler's Panzers as they stormed through France was Soviet fuel.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2010, 03:39 PM
 
12 posts, read 13,732 times
Reputation: 14
Why Are We Socialists?

We are socialists because we see in socialism,that is the union of all citizens, the only chance to maintain our racial inheritance and to regain our political freedom and renew our German state.
Socialism is the doctrine of liberation for the working class. It promotes the rise of the fourth class and its incorporation in the political organism of our Fatherland, and is inextricably bound to breaking the present slavery and regaining German freedom. Socialism, therefore, is not merely a matter of the oppressed class, but a matter for everyone, for freeing the German people from slavery is the goal of contemporary policy. Socialism gains its true form only through a total fighting brotherhood with the forward-striving energies of a newly awakened nationalism. Without nationalism it is nothing, a phantom, a mere theory, a castle in the sky, a book. With it it is everything, the future, freedom, the fatherland!
The sin of liberal thinking was to overlook socialism’s nation-building strengths, thereby allowing its energies to go in anti-national directions. The sin of Marxism was to degrade socialism into a question of wages and the stomach, putting it in conflict with the state and its national existence. An understanding of both these facts leads us to a new sense of socialism, which sees its nature as nationalistic, state-building, liberating and constructive.
The bourgeois is about to leave the historical stage. In its place will come the class of productive workers, the working class, that has been up until today oppressed. It is beginning to fulfill its political mission. It is involved in a hard and bitter struggle for political power as it seeks to become part of the national organism. The battle began in the economic realm; it will finish in the political. It is not merely a matter of wages, not only a matter of the number of hours worked in a day — though we may never forget that these are an essential, perhaps even the most significant part of the socialist platform — but it is much more a matter of incorporating a powerful and responsible class in the state, perhaps even to make it the dominant force in the future politics of the fatherland. The bourgeoisie does not want to recognize the strength of the working class. Marxism has forced it into a straitjacket that will ruin it. While the working class gradually disintegrates in the Marxist front, bleeding itself dry, the bourgeoisie and Marxism have agreed on the general lines of capitalism, and see their task now to protect and defend it in various ways, often concealed.
We are socialists because we see the social question as a matter of necessity and justice for the very existence of a state for our people, not a question of cheap pity or insulting sentimentality. The worker has a claim to a living standard that corresponds to what he produces. We have no intention of begging for that right. Incorporating him in the state organism is not only a critical matter for him, but for the whole nation. The question is larger than the eight-hour day. It is a matter of forming a new state consciousness that includes every productive citizen. Since the political powers of the day are neither willing nor able to create such a situation, socialism must be fought for. It is a fighting slogan both inwardly and outwardly. It is aimed domestically at the bourgeois parties and Marxism at the same time, because both are sworn enemies of the coming workers’ state. It is directed abroad at all powers that threaten our national existence and thereby the possibility of the coming socialist national state.

Explanation: “The thinking worker comes to Hitler,” the caption says. A communist and a socialist are accusing each other of betraying the working class.

Socialism is possible only in a state that is united domestically and free internationally. The bourgeoisie and Marxism are responsible for failing to reach both goals, domestic unity and international freedom. No matter how national and social these two forces present themselves, they are the sworn enemies of a socialist national state.
We must therefore break both groups politically. The lines of German socialism are sharp, and our path is clear.
We are against the political bourgeoisie, and for genuine nationalism!
We are against Marxism, but for true socialism!
We are for the first German national state of a socialist nature!
We are for the National Socialist German Workers Party!


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


The source: Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932).
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top