From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Were Nazis socialist? (Was Re: Anti-religious fanatics )
Reply-To: Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 20:55:48 GMT

In article <1992Aug23.001107.542@brownfield.glv.com>, brownfield!jbrow (Jim
Brownfield) writes:
|>In article <1992Aug22.190539.20845@isc-br.isc-br.com> steveh@thor.isc-br.com 
|>|>(Steve Hendricks) writes:
|>> In article <ATAYLOR.92Aug17180945@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)  
|>writes:
|>[stuff deleted]
|>> 
|>> >
|>> >	However, let's continue in this direction: socialism, as
|>> >	religion, has killed more than all previous religious
|>> >	crusades.
|>> >
|>> >	* The 1920's purges of "kulaks" in the USSR
|>> >	* The 1930's purge of the Communist Party of the USSR
|>> >	* The 1930's purge of Communists by the NSDAP in Germany
|>> >	* The 1930's purge of the Army in the USSR
|>> >	* War in Europe from 1939 to 1945, instigated by Socialists,
|>> >	  continued by Socialists.
|>> 
|>> Now this is interesting.  It should be noted that "socialism" as
|>> practiced by the CPSU (Communist Party, Soviet Union) has never been
|>> the sole example of international socialism.  In fact, much of the 
|>> international socialist movement has consistently rejected the practices
|>> Of the CPSU.  You obviously have little understanding of the political
|>> conflicts that have characterized the international socialist movement
|>> since the early 19th century.  Suffice to say that most western 
|>> democracies have included both "socialist" and "communist" parties 
|>> since at least the late 19th century and that the two groups have 
|>> rarely been allies.
|>> 
|>> Even worse, to lump the Nazis in as examples of socialists simply because
|>> it was appropriated by the NSDAP as part of the name indicates a woeful
|>> ignorance of European history. 
|>
|>This view of European history is shared by a number of people including the  
|>late Friedrich Hayek (_The Road to Serfdom_) and Paul Johnson (_Modern
|>Times_). 

Quoting extreeme right wing loonies views on socialism is a bit rich. I suppose
the poster would concur with Tony Benn's views on capitalism?

  
|>It is possible that you wish to dismiss the consistent application of  
|>authoritarianism that acompanies socialism.  By socialism's nature, people
|>will  
|>not follow an agenda for the "public good" unless they are forced to.

Authoritarianism is not the exclusive preserve of left wing governments. Bush
and Thatcher have headed the most authoritarian governments in their countries
since the war. Neither would thank you to be called Socialist.

Neither the NAZIs nor Stalin ever made an attempt to ensure that the workers by
hand or brain recieved the full fruits of their labour and their idea of common
ownership was indistingushable from that of the Shah of Iran. 

These attempts to frighten people of learning about a political ideology which
predates Marx by a hundred years merely shows how desperate the extreeme right
are. In fact it was the Conservative Government who made the shoddy deal at
Munich, it was the Socialist opposition which rejected it and voted against it.
This fact may be easily confirmed by reading Hansard for the debate in
question.


--
Phill Hallam-Baker
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43787 talk.politics.mideast:19620 misc.headlines:6202