Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Discussions on the propaganda, architecture and culture in the Third Reich.
Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10162
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 20 Jan 2021 13:34

Hi ljadw,,

You post, "Bernie Sanders defended the communist regimes in Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua and wanted to impose such a regime on the USA ." Evidence, please.

You post, "About Democratic Socialist parties : that such parties declare themselves democratic is not a proof that they are democratic . The communists also claim that they are democratic ." The difference between Social Democrats and Communists is that the former are democratic and conform to the electoral norms of liberal democracy. The latter do not. Bernie Sanders is one of the former.

Marx was a great German thinker. His critique of Capitalism was brilliant. The problem was that in Communism he didn't propose a viable alternative that has worked in practice.

Cheers,

Sid.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10162
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 20 Jan 2021 13:35

Oh, and ljadw, don't forget to answer or otherwise respond to some of the following questions you have evaded sometimes multiple times before:

I see that 10th and 11th on the list of donors to Bernie Sanders are those two well known Marxist organizations, the US Army and US Air Force! The US Department of Defence is in there as well! (I have no idea what the explanation for that is!)

Not only that, but Disney and a Facebook executive contributed to Donald Trump in 2016!

As usual you are neither supporting what you wrote earlier about "many, even most US billionaires are cultural Marxists.", nor providing, as I asked, the name of a single one who is.

Why do you write such nonsense if you can't, or won't, back it up?

There are 630 US billionaires and you can't name a single one to support your case? Not one?

Can we have a full list, please, showing their names and political affiliations as you see it?

Or failing that, a source or two that make the same claim?

So far, the only billionaire you have mentioned is (1) British, (2) was quite probably never actually a billionaire and (3) has been dead for thirty years!

You really need to tighten up your research!

You have other problems too, like establishing that Bernie Sanders is a Communist, rather than a Democratic Socialist.

And then there is the reciprocal question - if he is taking money from capitalist companies, is he really even a Socialist?

And while I am at it, you still haven't addressed the following:

You post, "left-wing organizations who advertise on the NYT do this to help the NYT to survive ."

Who? When?

Evidence and sourcing for this proposition, please.

Cheers,

Sid.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15693
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2021 18:16

There is no such thing as a Democratic Socialist .
Bezos, the CEO of Amazon, donated 780000 dollar to Sanders, and everyone knows the political opinions of Sanders .
Bezos gave $ 33 million to illegal immigrants .
Bezos saved the Washington Post from ruin and everyone knows the political opinions of the WAPO : Bozos bought the WAPO for $ 250 million ,and is thus the boss of this far left journal and responsible for every word that one can read in the WAPO .
Conclusion : Bozos is a cultural Marxist .
Apple : Steve Job was hostile to religion , a supporter of Obama, a liberal and a left wing liberal . Thus : a cultural Marxist .
The current bosses of Apple did cut of Parler,because they did not agree with what Parler said .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15693
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2021 18:34

About Sanders receiving money from left -wing capitalists : Stalin also received money from left-wing capitalists (Lend-Lease ) ,but that did not make him a capitalist .
But when Bezos spent $ 250 million to save the WAPO ,a far left journal, from ruin ,it is obvious that this was done for political motives .Without Bezos, the WAPO would no longer exist .
It is the same for the NYT ,which has very big financial problems (5 years ago its debts were $ 430 million ) and is,as the other journals, dying .
Thus, why is someone advertising and spending a lot of money,in a sinking ship ?
The reason is simple : to save the ship because one likes the ship .

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10162
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 20 Jan 2021 18:45

Hi ljadw,

There are Democratic Socialists all over the place. That is why, for instance, Western European countries all had separate Liberal, Socialist and Communist parties.

I posted above, "One of the problems of the Right in the USA is that they wouldn't know if they had been bitten on the bottom by a Liberal, Democratic Socialist or Communist, because they simply don't know the difference!" This would also appear to be your problem as well!

Being hostile to religion dioen't make one a Marxist, though it might make one an Atheist.

It is not true that "The current bosses of Apple did cut of Parler, because they did not agree with what Parler said." They cut out Parler because it wasn't doing enough to administer hate speech on its platform.

Jeff Bezos's father was a refugee from Communist Cuba in 1962.

Bezos is giving £33 million to help "Dreamers" with DACA status to get tertiary education. Why is this Marxist?

The Catholic bishops said, "To all Dreamers, the Catholic Church continues to stand with you and will advocate with you to ensure you reach your God-given potential here in the United States." Is the Roman Catholic Church Marxist, too?

Cheers,

Sid.
Last edited by Sid Guttridge on 20 Jan 2021 18:59, edited 2 times in total.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10162
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 20 Jan 2021 18:48

Another gentle reminder:

Don't forget to answer or otherwise respond to some of the following questions you have evaded multiple times before:

I see that 10th and 11th on the list of donors to Bernie Sanders are those two well known Marxist organizations, the US Army and US Air Force! The US Department of Defence is in there as well! (I have no idea what the explanation for that is!)

Not only that, but Disney and a Facebook executive contributed to Donald Trump in 2016!

As usual you are neither supporting what you wrote earlier about "many, even most US billionaires are cultural Marxists.", nor providing, as I asked, the name of a single one who is.

Why do you write such nonsense if you can't, or won't, back it up?

There are 630 US billionaires and you can't name a single one to support your case? Not one?

Can we have a full list, please, showing their names and political affiliations as you see it?

Or failing that, a source or two that make the same claim?

So far, the only billionaire you have mentioned is (1) British, (2) was quite probably never actually a billionaire and (3) has been dead for thirty years!

You really need to tighten up your research!

You have other problems too, like establishing that Bernie Sanders is a Communist, rather than a Democratic Socialist.

And then there is the reciprocal question - if he is taking money from capitalist companies, is he really even a Socialist?

And while I am at it, you still haven't addressed the following:

You post, "left-wing organizations who advertise on the NYT do this to help the NYT to survive ."

Who? When?

Evidence and sourcing for this proposition, please.

You post, "Bernie Sanders defended the communist regimes in Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua and wanted to impose such a regime on the USA ." Evidence, please.

Cheers,

Sid.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15693
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2021 19:02

Sid Guttridge wrote:
20 Jan 2021 13:34
Hi ljadw,,

You post, "Bernie Sanders defended the communist regimes in Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua and wanted to impose such a regime on the USA ." Evidence, please.

You post, "About Democratic Socialist parties : that such parties declare themselves democratic is not a proof that they are democratic . The communists also claim that they are democratic ." The difference between Social Democrats and Communists is that the former are democratic and conform to the electoral norms of liberal democracy. The latter do not. Bernie Sanders is one of the former.

Marx was a great German thinker. His critique of Capitalism was brilliant. The problem was that in Communism he didn't propose a viable alternative that has worked in practice.

Cheers,

Sid.
Social democrats CLAIM that they are democrats .And people who talk about democracy can not be trusted .
American billionaires also claim that they are liberal democrats ,while the truth is that there is no such thing as liberal democracy ,or even democracy .Democracy is different from country to country, from epoch to epoch ,and,'' liberal democracy'' as it exists in the West will very soon disappear .
Marx was a criminal ,that's all we need to know : he was a parasite, an idler who never worked and lived at the costs of
Engels .
Communism has failed and costed dozens of millions of lives .
Capitalism is successful .Only a fool from the Ivy League or a Jesuit would want to replace capitalism by communism.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15693
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2021 19:10

Sid Guttridge wrote:
20 Jan 2021 18:45
Hi ljadw,

There are Democratic Socialists all over the place. That is why, for instance, Western European countries all had separate Liberal, Socialist and Communist parties.

I posted above, "One of the problems of the Right in the USA is that they wouldn't know if they had been bitten on the bottom by a Liberal, Democratic Socialist or Communist, because they simply don't know the difference!" This would also appear to be your problem as well!

Being hostile to religion dioen't make one a Marxist, though it might make one an Atheist.

It is not true that "The current bosses of Apple did cut of Parler, because they did not agree with what Parler said." They cut out Parler because it wasn't doing enough to administer hate speech on its platform.

Jeff Bezos's father was a refugee from Communist Cuba in 1962.

Bezos is giving £33 million to help "Dreamers" with DACA status to get tertiary education. Why is this Marxist?

The Catholic bishops said, "To all Dreamers, the Catholic Church continues to stand with you and will advocate with you to ensure you reach your God-given potential here in the United States." Is the Roman Catholic Church Marxist, too?

Cheers,

Sid.
Dreamers are illegal immigrants .The father of Bezos is not Bezos .
The left wingers cut of Parler,because they disagreed with what Parler said :there is no such thing as a hate speech, but only a legal or illegal speech and that is the business of justice, not of big tech .What big tech did is a violation of the First Amendment .
What the US catholic bishops said is proving the influence, the domination of cultural Marxism .They said that they would help illegal immigrants .

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10162
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 20 Jan 2021 19:20

Hi ljadw,

You post, "Social democrats CLAIM that they are democrats." Yup, because that is what they espouse and practice.

You post, "And people who talk about democracy can not be trusted." So all democrats should stay entirely dumb on the subject? How is that going to help democracy?

You post, "American billionaires also claim that they are liberal democrats ,while the truth is that there is no such thing as liberal democracy ,or even democracy." The entire US, indeed, Anglosphere system of government is based on this non-existent Liberal Democracy of yours.

You post, "Democracy is different from country to country, from epoch to epoch". Yup, so?. Model Ts, Rolls Royces, Subarus, Kias and Teslas are all different but they are all still cars.

You post, ''liberal democracy'' as it exists in the West will very soon disappear." Whoa there! In the very same sentence you also say, "there is no such thing as liberal democracy".

Consistency is not exactly your middle name is it?

You post, "Marx was a criminal". For what was he convicted? The only time he was a defendant in court he was accused of not paying his taxes and found unanimously not guilty! (A better result than Al Capone! We have yet to see how Trump's case turns out.)

You go on, ".....he was a parasite, an idler who never worked and lived at the costs of Engels." Well, there goes the entire academic profession and university education with it!

By the way, did Engels ever ask for his money back? If not, I presume he was happy with the arrangement, so who are you to complain?

You post, "Communism has failed and costed dozens of millions of lives." Largely true.

Capitalism is successful. Relatively, yes.

You post, "Only a fool from the Ivy League or a Jesuit would want to replace capitalism with communism." I am just guessing here, but I suspect the proportion of proponents of Communism who were Jesuits or Ivy League graduates is vanishingly small!

And no, it is untrue that "What big tech did is a violation of the First Amendment." Have you read the First Amendment and who it applies to? I suggest you do. Spoiler alert - it is not private or public companies.

Cheers,

Sid.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15693
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by ljadw » 20 Jan 2021 21:51

Sid Guttridge wrote:
20 Jan 2021 19:20
Hi ljadw,

You post, "Social democrats CLAIM that they are democrats." Yup, because that is what they espouse and practice.



You post, ''liberal democracy'' as it exists in the West will very soon disappear." Whoa there! In the very same sentence you also say, "there is no such thing as liberal democracy".

Consistency is not exactly your middle name is it?

You post, "Marx was a criminal". For what was he convicted? The only time he was a defendant in court he was accused of not paying his taxes and found unanimously not guilty! (A better result than Al Capone! We have yet to see how Trump's case turns out.)

You go on, ".....he was a parasite, an idler who never worked and lived at the costs of Engels." Well, there goes the entire academic profession and university education with it!

By the way, did Engels ever ask for his money back? If not, I presume he was happy with the arrangement, so who are you to complain?

You post, "Communism has failed and costed dozens of millions of lives." Largely true.

Capitalism is successful. Relatively, yes.

You post, "Only a fool from the Ivy League or a Jesuit would want to replace capitalism with communism." I am just guessing here, but I suspect the proportion of proponents of Communism who were Jesuits or Ivy League graduates is vanishingly small!

And no, it is untrue that "What big tech did is a violation of the First Amendment." Have you read the First Amendment and who it applies to? I suggest you do. Spoiler alert - it is not private or public companies.

Cheers,

Sid.
1 Hitler claimed that he was for peace ,but a claim is not a proof .
2 People who talk about democracy can not be trusted : they are as a politician who talks about truth and honesty.
3 Both sentences about liberal democracy do not exclude each other .
4 It is not needed to be condemned for being a criminal : Hitler also was not condemned, neither was Himmler
5 About your defense of Marx : the fact remains that he was an idler ,a man who had a housemaid, which is in total opposition with his ideology ,and that he fathered her a child , for which he did nothing .
6 That Communism has failed is not largely true but totally true .
7 The Ivy League and the order of the Jesuits are swarming with communists, fellow travelers, crypto communists, moral Marxists.
8 About the First Amendment : its content is irrelevant : it is not the First Amendment that defines a violation of the Constitution, but a majority of Supreme Court : if 5 judges are saying that what big tech is doing is a violation of the First Amendment , it is so .

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10162
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 20 Jan 2021 23:00

Hi ljadw,

You post, "1 Hitler claimed that he was for peace ,but a claim is not a proof ." So what? Democratic Socialists have taken part in hundreds, possibly thousands of elections in which they have accepted the results, win or lose. (On the other hand, the same cannot be said of every Republican President of the USA!)

You post, "2 People who talk about democracy can not be trusted : they are as a politician who talks about truth and honesty." That is a ridiculous generalization without substance.

You post, "3 Both sentences about liberal democracy do not exclude each other." Firstly they were in the one sentence and, secondly, they certainly contradict each other directly.

You post, "4 It is not needed to be condemned for being a criminal : Hitler also was not condemned, neither was Himmler." The only reason they never got to court was that they committed suicide before facing justice. Marx lived a full life and was never convicted of anything.

You post, "5 About your defense of Marx : the fact remains that he was an idler ,a man who had a housemaid, which is in total opposition with his ideology ,and that he fathered her a child , for which he did nothing ." Yup. So?

You post, "6 That Communism has failed is not largely true but totally true ." Nope, it largely failed. However, it unarguably achieved some things, such as near universal literacy in societies were literacy was previously limited.

You post, "7 The Ivy League and the order of the Jesuits are swarming with communists, fellow travellers, crypto communists, moral Marxists." Even if it were true, their combined numbers are far too small for the Communist movement to be swarming with Ivy Leaguers or Jesuit priests. What is your evidence of this claim?

You post, "8 About the First Amendment : its content is irrelevant : it is not the First Amendment that defines a violation of the Constitution, but a majority of Supreme Court : if 5 judges are saying that what big tech is doing is a violation of the First Amendment , it is so ." No, its content is key. The Supreme Court does not make laws, it interprets them. Anyway, when did this judgement extending the First Amendment to public and private companies occur? I must have missed it.

Cheers,

Sid.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15693
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by ljadw » 21 Jan 2021 10:16

Sigh : 8 The First Amendment : the key is not the content, but what the Supreme Court is saying : SCOTUS decides what is legal,what is the content , not the Constitution .And, no one can nullify a decision of SCOTUS, unless SCOTUS itself : 50 years ago SCOTUS decided that death penalty was illegal,although the Constitution did not defend death penalty ,later it changed its opinion .
In 1896 SCOTUS decided that segregation was legal, in 1954 it said that it was illegal .
Scotus is omnipotent ,that's why the nominations for SCOTUS are fought that acrimoniously : when Kavanaugh was confirmed, his opponents attacked the SCOTUS building ,and ,the media remained silent .
The reality is that an activist SCOTUS ( and til today the Supreme Court was activist ) makes laws by interpreting them not from a legal point, but from a political view .
The judges of the Supreme Court are politicians nominated by politicians for political reasons : FDR nominated left-wingers as Hugo Black , Trump conservatives .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15693
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by ljadw » 21 Jan 2021 10:22

Point 6 : universal literacy : this has nothing to do with communism ,as it also existed in capitalist societies .
Communism has failed totally as it was rejected by the people who lived in communist states : millions left communist states ...for capitalist states .Even in NK it is dying .
It survives only in the Western media and universities,proving that one should not take seriously intellectuals .
Marx also claimed to be an intellectual .

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10162
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 21 Jan 2021 11:26

Hi ljadw,

To repeat:

You post, "8 About the First Amendment: its content is irrelevant: it is not the First Amendment that defines a violation of the Constitution, but a majority of Supreme Court : if 5 judges are saying that what big tech is doing is a violation of the First Amendment , it is so ." No, its content is key. The Supreme Court does not make laws, it interprets them. Anyway, when did this judgement extending the First Amendment to public and private companies occur? I must have missed it.

SCOTUS only adjudicates on matters of law. If there is no original law passed by Congress, then there is nothing for SCOTUS to adjudicate upon. Therefore the content of the First Amendment is fundamental.

And the content of the First Amendment says absolutely nothing about it applying to public or private companies.

It may be objectionable to ban Parler for other reasons, but not on First Amendment grounds. Try reading it.

Cheers,

Sid.
Last edited by Sid Guttridge on 21 Jan 2021 11:29, edited 1 time in total.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15693
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Why didn't Hitler advocate Austrian nationalist ideas?

Post by ljadw » 21 Jan 2021 11:28

Point 7 : I did NOT say that the Communist movement (in the US ) was swarming with Ivy League members and that the Communists (in Latin America ) were swarming with Jesuits, but I said the opposite : that Jesuits and Ivy League are swarming with communists, fellow travelers,etc ..
A proof ( for the Jesuits ) is the intervention from Pope John Paul II to stop the election of a new general of the Jesuits .
For the Ivy League : since 2013 US universities received $ 1 billion from China, Harvard alone : $ 93,7 million,the Biden Centre of the University of Pennsylvania received between 2017/2019 $ 70 million .
Every one knows that Cambridge and Oxford also were infiltrated : the Cambridge 5 , the Secret State (Peter Hennessy )

Return to “Propaganda, Culture & Architecture”