It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

America's Nazi Party

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I came across this site while searching and it says they have intentions of having a Presidential Candidate in 2008. Just to let you know this group does not promote violence.

This info is towards the middle, in the right-hand collum.

www.nsm88.com...

What are your thouhts?

[edit on 12-7-2006 by Darth Sidious]




posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 02:57 PM
link   
A Nazi party leading America?


Would NEVER happen! The people of America would never let it happen. People in the U.S. still have it embeded in their mind from WW2 that Hitler and the Nazis were evil. Granted.. they were.

The reason the Nazi party was successful in Germany was because they used a real threat to the nation, Jews, and did somthing about it.. probably a little to much but they did somthing and it won the peoples support.

Here in America what leverage to they have? Why would people want a Nazi party that still hates Jews (for what reason IDK) and is pro white. Don't forget that more than 35% of the U.S. is black now.

Personally I don't hate Jews, IDK why people do, I don't hate black people either, but I am pro fascist but I'm NOT pro Nazi.

I think the Nazi party is a bad example of fascism. Anyway Hitler doesn't deserve the fame he gets, he didn't start fascism Mussolini did and Hitler just took it the extreme. I would say Mussolini is a better example of what fascism should be anlthough Hitler might have been a more inspiring leader but maybe not as good a leader as Mussolini.

Also any fascist party in the U.S. would most likely use a different symbol.
Although the sig-rune is a cool symbol (the rune for victory), it has a new meaning. It means I'm a Nazi, I hate Jews, I hate black people, all of which, I, and most people in the U.S. are not.



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow
Don't forget that more than 35% of the U.S. is black now.

Around 14% is black, fwiw.

Anyway Hitler doesn't deserve the fame he gets, he didn't start fascism Mussolini did and Hitler just took it the extreme.

Hitler started Nazism, which is different, though similar to, fascism.

The american nazi party has no chance of getting anyone voted in to major office, neo-nazi groups are part of racist groups, and racist groups account for around 1% of the US population.

Nazism is anti-business, anti-globalism, anti-constitutionalism, anti-private property, along with all the other garbage that is usually associated with it. It simply doesn't stand a chance in the US today. There are a couple of fascist parties in the US, they stand no more chance than the American Communist Party, etc.


darth sidious
What are your thouhts?


Nazis are pathetic and weak fools.



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   
How are Nazis pathetic and weak fools? For fighting for their beliefs? I agree that it was wrong that they killed a lot of innocents but what else did they do?


[edit on 12-7-2006 by Darth Sidious]



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 03:28 PM
link   
The Nazis wernt pathetic and weak fools but they are now.

Any neo-nazi or American Nazi is just... a fool.

They have no idea why Hitler did what he did and they have no idea why a Nazi party in the U.S. would never work, its laughable.



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 03:36 PM
link   
I am not a Neo-Nazi, but I do understand why Adolf Hitler did what he did..and I do know a Nazi Party in America would be a waste of time. And I also agree with you, Techsnow, 150%

[edit on 12-7-2006 by Darth Sidious]



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Well thats the last time I'm voting for the nazi party =/ (just kidding)
But yeah, theres still a Nationalist party, and becouse the USA is a free country, if people voted for them, they would get in.
Lets all vote for them and see what happens, would be interesting



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darth Sidious
How are Nazis pathetic and weak fools?

Because the individuals that make up the party are fools, and the parties 'goals' are pathetic.

techsnow
The Nazis wernt pathetic and weak fools but they are now.

They were pathetic then, and the neo-nazis are simply a joke now. The nazis were only able to bulk up germany's economy by taking it over, running it centrally, and making it a war economy, thats not a sensible economic policy, its a foolish one. And when it came to war, they were only able to win so long as they were overwhelming their less prepared neighbhors with sudden attacks. The party was assinine, and its 'final solution' killed nearly six million of its own citizens, while it was loosing the war on both fronts, it was idiotically busy trucking in people to gas chambers. Thats pathetic. The nazi party destroyed germany.



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 12:42 PM
link   


Elwood: Illinois Nazis.
Jake: I hate Illinois Nazis.

www.imdb.com...


I can't see how any form of socialist fascism could have any appeal outside of a state or federal penitentiary.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darth Sidious
How are Nazis pathetic and weak fools? For fighting for their beliefs? I agree that it was wrong that they killed a lot of innocents but what else did they do?



Isn't that enough

[edit on 19-7-2006 by danwild6]



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
They were pathetic then, and the neo-nazis are simply a joke now.


The Nazis weren't all so pathetic actually. Many were monsters and what they did and believed was horrific. But please don't completely shroud yourself in what they did and condemn the whole regime, calling such a regime pathetic is highly underestimating them. What they achieved was not something a pathetic party does. The majority absolutely evil I know, but i'm surprised you call them pathetic.

Neo-Nazis on the other hand are pathetic. This skin head culture of trying to raise their cause is stupid and quite ridiculous.


The nazis were only able to bulk up germany's economy by taking it over, running it centrally, and making it a war economy, thats not a sensible economic policy, its a foolish one. And when it came to war, they were only able to win so long as they were overwhelming their less prepared neighbhors with sudden attacks.


foolish eh?!
The Nazis needed oil- they went into the Middle East.
The US needs oil..hmmmm

Sudden attacks.. what did you want a written warning sent to all neighbouring countries? Surprise is always the best tactic when it comes to war. I'm surprised they had no idea Germany was about to expand with an absolutely gigantic army, many Jews knew what was coming, hence trying to move completely out of all neighbouring countries. I'm sure most countries had an inkling of what was to come. Britain seemed to know.


The party was assinine, and its 'final solution' killed nearly six million of its own citizens, while it was loosing the war on both fronts, it was idiotically busy trucking in people to gas chambers. Thats pathetic. The nazi party destroyed germany.


The final solution was absolutely appaling. I'm not sure who I would blame. Many Germans were brought up being fed hatred on a daily basis- as many in the Middle East are now I presume. Does this give an excuse? I'm not sure. As for trucking people to gas chambers- well that was their ultimate goal in all of the wars- to eliminate all Jews. They knew they were doomed so tried to kill as many as possible in that short amount of time, to further their ridiculous goal.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Knights
But please don't completely shroud yourself in what they did and condemn the whole regime, calling such a regime pathetic is highly underestimating them.

Underestimating them?

THey lost the war, horribly. They were a complete failure on every one of their 'platform planks', and they wanted to turn all of germany into a totalitarian dehumanized state. It was a patehtic attempt.


What they achieved was not something a pathetic party does.

They acheived nothing other than the ruination of germany, before the nazis, germany was a country that had economic problems, serious ones. After the nazis, germany had been ripped in two, occupied by a mutlitude of foreign powers, half of it ruled by a foreign dictatorship, and the economic situation was far worse. It wasn't the nazis that brought germany to its current heights.





Surprise is always the best tactic when it comes to war.

Indeed. What I am saying is, they conquered chechslovakia, poland, and parts of france, by useing hyper-advanced technology, lighting war, and completely overwhelming power.
Big whoop. I mean, we're supposed to be impressed that german panzers supported by the luftawaffe conquer horse-riding poles? Or the french? The Nazis weren't military geniuses, infact, their war plan was horribly flawed. Hitler wouldn't even stockpile war making resources, because he was commited to a 'lightening war' that would be fast and furious. Thats why they couldn't beat the Russians, and thats why they were doomed so long as they couldn't conquer britain quickly too. It was an idiotic plan, one that would give them a lot of terrirory quickly, but be unable to hold it.





The final solution was absolutely appaling. I'm not sure who I would blame. Many Germans were brought up being fed hatred on a daily basis

Its one thing to hate another people, another to systematically try to exterminate them. The conditions amoung the germans were what made the holocaust possible, but it was nazi thinking that came up with the idea at all. THe nazis were all about sacrifice for teh state, going 'beyond good and evil' and wrenching a new world into existence, even if the costs were terrible. Hating jews, that was practically universal amoung europeans at the time, but the holocaust, it squarely, in my mind, belongs to the Nazi party, its part and parcel of it.


to further their ridiculous goal.

Indeed, and that was pathetic, and a crime against germany itself, those jews were germans (and of course other nationalities too). Thats why it was pathetic. The british, facing war, stiffened their resolve and slogged on, even at great and horrible expense to themselves, they were impressive. The Nazis, they cowered behind the army, festered in their hatred of the jews and communists, and in the end, rather than put up a valiant defense of germany, busied themselves on weak and helpless civilians. That's pathetic.



posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 03:57 AM
link   
um...

why is this in the socialism forum?

the nationalist socialist party was a facist party not a socialist party....

could the mods move this to general ideological forum?



posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Actually, while the National Socialists were socialist in name only, there is some relevance to socialism in this topic, because, as pointed out above, the Nazis did heavily regulate the German economy and engage in huge amounts of public spending (the bulk of it on the military). So this addresses the question of government involvement in the economy.

We must recognize that this effort, unlike some of his others, was wildly successful. Hitler reneged on the war reparations Germany owed the victorious Allies of World War I, thus saving the German government a lot of money. He regulated the economy to provide living wages for all workers (while also outlawing unions), and spent a lot of public money, thus creating jobs, which generated consumer demand, which boosted the German economy out of the Depression.

This same combination of regulation to boost working-class income, together with a huge amount of government spending, also brought the U.S. economy out of the Depression some years later.

The Great Depression was, at root, a failure of consumer demand. In order for business to be profitable, the goods and services it offers must be bought. In order for them to be bought, money must be available in the hands of those who might wish to buy. Thus, a capitalist economy requires a broadly generous distribution of wealth, and hence benefits from high wages. But individually, businesses are motivated to reduce wages as far as they can and still get the quality and quantity of work they need. When the government sides with capital in the class struggle, and helps keep wages down, it undermines the consumer basis of business and generates panics and depressions.

What Hitler (and Roosevelt) did was to shift the government's emphasis towards supporting labor's interest in the class struggle rather than capital -- not so far that we should call either administration truly socialist, but each was closer to being socialist than its predecessor. Roosevelt's version was not immediately successful for the simple reason that he didn't willingly spend enough public money to jump-start the U.S. economy. Once the U.S. entered World War II, public money finally was spent in sufficient amounts, and the economy pulled out of the Depression at last.

After the war ended, when millions of service men were discharged, there was some concern voiced that the U.S. would slide back into depression. But this, again, showed that many didn't understand just how demand-driven an industrial economy is. During the war years, Americans enjoyed full employment at lucrative wages, but also suffered under wartime rationing restrictions. Just the opposite conditions prevailed from the Depression, in that Americans had plenty of money but nothing to spend it on. (In the Depression, abundant goods piled up in warehouses because nobody could afford them.) All this pent-up demand justified, and so generated, industrial investment, which created jobs, which kept the economy rolling, and the nation enjoyed unprecedented, indeed near-mythic, prosperity -- which continued until the 1980s, when a shift in government support back toward capital undercut it and produced the dismal economy we have today.

Because Hitler was a tyrant, a warmonger, and a racist butcher, it's easy to condemn literally everything the Nazis did as a failure or something evil. But in fact, the Nazi approach to the economy worked extremely well. Stripped of its anti-labor-union, anti-democratic paternalism, and of course of its absurd racist and anti-Semitic provisions, it provides not a bad model for a modern industrial economy.



posted on May, 5 2007 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow
They have no idea why Hitler did what he did and they have no idea why a Nazi party in the U.S. would never work, its laughable.


I'll have to agree with that. Neo-Nazi's and "Skins" don't quite understand what truly happened during WWII. They hate just because people are different, they don't quite see the whole picture.

-FK



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 08:01 AM
link   
The Jews were not a threat to Germany or to anyone else techsnow... they played on the anti-semitism already current in most of Europe (a legacy of the Middle ages) and took it to its logical extreme.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 11:05 AM
link   
The Nazis were called the National Socialist party, that's why we're talking about socialism.
The Jews in Europe had a long history as bankers and financiers. This was because for many centuries they were forbidden to do any other type of work except moneylending and later on, jewelers.
Germany had gone through a major depression and in order to mobilize people against the Jews, Hitler blamed the Jews as scapegoats because they were easy targets, being in finance. They weren't a threat to Germany or anyone else, for that matter. But Germany bought that fabrication and the result was horrific.

This is what happens when you trust your govt to always tell you the truth.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 12:00 AM
link   
Just to say how great Two Steps Forward post was. Completely agreed with everything. Anyway here's my post.

Originally posted by Nygdan

The nazis were only able to bulk up germany's economy by taking it over, running it centrally, and making it a war economy, thats not a sensible economic policy, its a foolish one.

Well they turned a wreck into a super power in about 8 years (they only had twelve in total). They very nearly won the war several times, most notably with their invasion of Russia which if it hadn’t been for the Russian winter they would have conquered for sure; especially as they were only about 2 miles from Moscow when the winter set in.

It was Hitler himself, rather than his economic or military ideology that cost him and Germany the War. He made many mistakes like ordering the invasion of Russia when there wasn’t any immediate need and the winter would set in and German tanks couldn’t operate, he shunned work on the atomic bomb on the grounds it was “a Jewish science” he interfered with the Normandy evacuation with the result that hundreds of thousands of allied soldiers escaped who otherwise wouldn’t have, he demanded that instead of bombing key military sites like our RAF bases the Germans air force concentrate on bombing London in the belief it would cause a anti-war backlash against Jewish Churchill, when instead all it did was strengthen our resolve and make Churchill probably one of the most popular, most celebrated leaders ever.

1. In short World War Two happened because the Germans let themselves elect an extremist party, and there are many reasons for this.
2. And the extremist party they elected was the Nazi party in large part thanks to Hitler’s brutality as well as organisational, and verbal skills.
3. Ironically ultimately Germany loses the war because by heading the Nazi party Hitler was able to infer with the Generals, when (whatever his skills as a dictator) he was a very bad military man, and would perhaps have seen this if he didn’t have such deluded self-image in this respect.

You can go along all you like about how much Germany was in a state after the war. Well of course it was, they had just been defeated in a war they had been unable to give up (despite the efforts of some very brave senior military men who tried to assonate Hitler) because Hitler was the sort of psychopath who would refuse to acknowledge defeat, until it arrived outside his bunker.

However the state Germany ended up at was the fault of not the fault of the Nazi party, the military strength of the countries around Germany, the mineral resources of Germany and these countries, or a lack of German industry, or a lack of German productivity. The credit for loosing the war is split between the extreme bravery of our soldiers, the co-operation of Europe and the United States, and most importantly of all the arrogant, deterministic, and psychopathic personality of Hitler, (and maybe a few others he had selected to be very close to him).


and they wanted to turn all of germany into a totalitarian dehumanized state. It was a patehtic attempt.


No they succeeded, it was totalitarian, though I would describe it as militarised as opposed to merely dehumanised (there’s a fine line between the two, but still quite a difference).
And it was an efficient state too (far more than Russia or even the U.S GDP per head).


They acheived nothing other than the ruination of germany

No (as said) there are many times when if it hadn’t been for the interference of Hitler, or the extraordinary bravely-brilliance of individuals Germany might have won the war, or even the path to world domination. To have come close is still an achievement regardless of whether that achievement was successfully realised.

Personally
The only thing in this thread that is “pathetic” Nygdan is you’re inappropriate use of that word to masks a poor understanding (though I dare not say knowledge) of WW2 history. I mean I know it’s fashionable to slander people like Hitler, but it’s so adolescent unless you make the correct criticisms.
What Hitler did was obviously a disaster for Germany and Worldwide humanity, and although from you’re posts you obviously know this to be true (from e.g. before and after comparisons) you still retain a limited understanding as to why. And it’s really quite an interesting knowledge to have (though it makes you feel sad as it makes all that suffering so much more real just than pictures without much of logical documented story).

“Frightening” is a far better description of German Nazis than “pathetic”; although being better, and through the rules of logic, it isn’t so loosely usable. But at least it makes more sense.
Hell if the Nazis (distinction from Hitler) had actually been as pathetic as you make out then either only say a million people would have died During World War 2 (as opposed to over 50) or that military, and stable society that manned and maintained it in the real war would have, to have been given out of the sky by a certain God.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 04:51 PM
link   
The original Nazi party in Germany rose out of social discontent, hard times, and poverty, keep in mind they did not start off their campaign with the whole "let's kill the Jews" mess that they ended up in, they began as a German worker's party, fighting for the working class, that is why so many Germans were pulled in. Many of the world's greatest evils gained the majority of their followers and power under the mask of benevolence, it was only after they had enough power that the mask was removed and the darker undertones of their philosophies came to light. It was only after the Nazis made some positive changes for the people that they used the peoples' newfound loyalty and obligations against them. Humanity is capable of great atrocities, especially in groups- atrocities most individuals would not knowingly commit on their own. An us-versus-them group mentality and general need for a scapegoat has a lot to do with it. I could explain better but I'm a bit drained of energy at the moment. Sorry if this is not the most coherent post, I know what I'm trying to say just having trouble finding the right words.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join