T Nation

"Nazi Punching": Good or Bad?


Not after the government boondoggles, which I’m sure Bernie Sanders would have loved and goose-stepped right along with. Virtually all the labor, funds, engineering resources and material that went into the Segfried Line could have been re-appropriated to something that actually got used, if not for a big-government dictator’s insistence that it be built. All of the concrete that went into it and now serves as a nuisance to those living around it could have been used years later for the Atlantic Wall, and all of the German labor that went into that fortification could have been directed to something else.

Yes I agree those specialty materials were the bottleneck for most of the high tech stuff. Even so, is it out of the realm of possibility for Germany to field a force of, let’s say, 5000 Tigers and 5000 ME-262’s by the start of 1943 if priority was granted to those weapons? That might have been enough, even without a strategic bomber force to level the industry of Great Britain…

This is mostly a fun discussion for me now since I’m five beers deep into my foot-sprain recovery six pack. It is always a pleasure to read your posts @loppar. It really is.


The original Siegfried line was more propaganda than concrete - the Allies could have plowed through it in 1939 while the bulk of the German forces were engaged in Poland.

A massive building effort was expended on it in the autumn of 1944, the so-called “miracle in the West” when the Germans regrouped nd established a defensive line after their rout in France. Say what you want, but this new Siegfried line thwarted the Allies for seven months, and all that with the Wehrmach being bled dry in the East.

I know that you’re trying to link lefties with Nazis (why? you’ve got Stalin and Mao) but there’s a significant difference.

German privately owned industrial companies (Rheinmetall, Krupp, Bayer, IG Farben, BMW…) had record profits during the Nazi reign - Nazi inefficiency and Hitler’s social darwinist concept where different service branches, ministeries and Nazi organizations fought each other for scant industrial resources meant that private companies could drive up prices while benefitting from concentration camp and slave labor which was almost cost-free for them.

It can’t be socialism if the industrialists prosper. Even more telling example was in Fascist Italy - industrial companies like Fiat were producing tanks, guns and planes that were obsolete for almost a decade (the CR42 biplane being the most telling example) because the fascist government didn’t want to cancel lucrative defense contracts - they were in cahoots with the industrialists.

How many rich industrialists prospered in the USSR? Zero. They were the first to be eliminated. While you’ve got a remarkable continuity among enterprises and even families - the father of Angela Merkel’s hugely influential Minister of Interior conducted daily briefings for Hitler in the Chancellery bunker.

Not enough fuel for all those Me262s. The Luftwaffe had in 1943 and 1944 thousands of planes lying idly because there wasn’t enough fuel nor pilots.

That’s why the came up with the (failed) idea of He-162 when they realized only a handful of very experienced pilots - the Experten - could actually fly the Me-262.

Thanks man. I need only the flimsiest of excuses to discuss history while sipping some double chocolate stout.


Classical. And by looking at what they did and to whom, they would have seen modern “liberalism” as even more perverse. The problem with Americans is that they like everything to be neatly labeled and categorized. So we have two pretty much two parties: GOP and Dems. Then we have to stick liberal and conservative in one of those groups because if we didn’t we would have four things to think about instead of two. And liberal and conservative are not really opposites but that doesn’t matter because Reagan convinced people they were. Then you have left and right which have to be added to an existing category because again, it would be too many things to think about.

Thus, you get a failed comedian like Steven Crowder (I think that’s how it’s spelled) going to college campuses and showing kids how smart he is and how dumb they are by pointing how the Nazis were socialists (because the word socialist is in their name) and therefore leftists and therefore liberals. Of course he doesn’t go and confront someone like Ian Kershaw on the subject and so doesn’t get called on his ignorance. The Nazis and fascists don’t fit into one of our two categories. The fascists purposely avoided placing themselves into one of our neat and simple categories to avoid any ideological barriers to their concept of the ends justifies the means.


On this we are in total accord.


Capitalism is on the right. Fascism is on the left - state based control.


Wrong. Fascism was extreme socialism. It was based on state control.


“That doesn’t make him a socialist.”

He was hardcore socialist.




Wrong, he expanded on socialism to develop fascism. That’s all fascism is - a stronger nationalistic version of socialism.

Capitalism is based on individual freedom which is polar opposite so by definition fascism is left wing.


By this definition, communism would be on the right.


Saying the left or liberals are actually socialists and socialists = Nazis so the left are Nazis…is a way for the right, ie real Nazis, to demonize the left.

For decades in this country the left has been called Commies, Pinkos, etc. Only the Russian internet trolls who were or are themselves on the left, ie old Communists or coming from a Communist background would call the left wing in this country Nazi’s, because a Nazi would be something a Communist would obviously demonize.

The whole thing is a lie, spread by Russian trolls, with a skewed political scale, to split this country into warring factions. That’s my opinion on this deal.


Not necessarily. Sure, anti-Nazi rhetoric during communism was dusted off for special occasions such as WW2 anniversaries and as explanations for the Western economic success, but foaming at the mouth rage was reserved for liberals - well, classical liberals.


So are the left in fact Nazi’s? Are Antifa and the Tiki Torch guys the same? How could you be an anti- Fascist Nazi? Or is Nazi now a generic term, like Soup Nazi, Femi-Nazi…liberal Nazi (?), (like a liberal to the maximum extent of being a liberal?)


Well, I think he was mainly an opportunist.

But for a solid 20 years, he spoke and acted in socialist terms, as socialism is the best means to control the citizenry and consolidate power, which is what he needed for his Reich. Some quotes:

"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”

[I desire to] “convert the German people to socialism without simply killing off the old individualists”

And my personal favorite, taken to heart by ANTIFA and the “One Percent” (aka “Jews” movement):

"If we are socialists, then we must definitely be anti-semites – and the opposite, in that case, is Materialism and Mammonism, which we seek to oppose.” “How, as a socialist, can you not be an anti-semite?”

Regarding why he left his cronies in charge of industry (or kicked the owners out and put his cronies in): “Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings.”

And some bits from the Nazi Party platform sound familiar (not to mention 100% socialized healthcare, banning guns (which failed, so he just took guns from Jews), and giant make-work projects like the Autobahn:

  1. That all unearned income [aka interest, profit, dividends], and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

  2. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

  3. We demand the nationalization of all trusts (the means of inheritance in Germany – so a 100% death tax in most cases).

  4. We demand profit-sharing in large industries (Bernie would be proud!).

  5. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.


  1. In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.

The formation of professional committees and of committees representing the several estates of the realm, to ensure that the laws promulgated by the central authority shall be carried out by the federal states.

The leaders of the party undertake to promote the execution of the foregoing points at all costs, if necessary at the sacrifice of their own lives

Now, was he really a true believer socialist? Meh, probably not.

It was probably just B.S. plied on the masses to get them to create a system where he and his cronies had complete control.

But, then again, that’s all any socialism talk is – B.S. for the useful idiots to lap up in order to create a system so a certain group (whatever said group is) can have complete control, be it Hitler, or Hugo Chavez, or Hillary Clinton.

So, when recognizing that socialism is always just a scam, yes, then, Hitler was a socialist.


Before coming to power, the Nazis routinely accused IG Farben of being an “international capitalist company”, to which IG Farben responded after Nazis came to power…by purging all Jewish employees and becoming the biggest donor of the Nazi party.

Many historians have argued that without the unwavering support of the existing German (not Nazi nominated) industrial elite (see example above) the Nazis could have run their spluttering war machine.

The Bolsheviks on the other hand deployed a scorched earth policy when it came to pre Revolution industry.


Communists or Marxists control all business and most aspects of life.

Fascists is an allegiance between the business and the government to promote their own gain.


Definition of fascism

1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control early instances of army fascism and brutality

Fascism could be an allegiance between business and government or it could be communist, socialist, or even a monarchy. Any system with a lot of government control works for fascism. The only requirement is raw government power.

In the National Socialist approach, it happened to be socialism combined with crony capitalism.


Well, yes. As noted above, Hitler, like a good socialist, made good friends with the uber-wealthy, as they were happy to join the party.

To again quote Hitler himself:

“Regarding why he left his cronies in charge of industry (or kicked the owners out and put his cronies in): “Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings.””

IG Farben played the socialist game.

Remember, socialism is just a scam to play on class warfare. Excepting the disfavored (us Jews in this instance), nothing changes. The rich remain rich. Indeed, they get richer. Hence, why unscrupulous rich people like Soros push socialism. It’s an opportunity for more money and more power, while keeping the middle class and other undesirables in their place — all while pretending to be benevolent.

It’s genius in its evil, actually. Brilliant.


This seemingly trivial clip from the brilliant movie called the Death of Stalin perfectly encapsulates communist/fascist totalitarianism.

It’s amazing how they’ve managed to get everything right - the verbiage, body language…


None of those one-dimension models really work. Much better are examples with two or more axis.

For example, “Archy” complete government control (could be a king in Saudi Arabia, Hitler, or Stalin) – to Anarchy being but one axis

There are about thirty models. Here is the common “Political Compass.” It still has many flaws, but is far superior to a one dimension left-right.