User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 31

Thread: Ideology

  1. #11
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    On the other hand could you have Nazism without Hitler?
    To some extent yes. There were National Socialists before Hitler came onto the scene in the late 19th century, and there was the Strasserite faction that broke with Hitler.

    One element of ideologies one has to keep in mind is their reductionist quality. Reality is determined by one primary factor. For Communists this is class, for Nazis race, for Feminists gender, etc. Through abstract(often with pretense towards "scientific") understanding of this can one see how society is currently (dis)ordered and how it should be properly re-ordered so to speak.

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    German nazism is a form of fascism.
    Technically no it isn't. Himmler for example once said that National Socialism had nothing to do with fascism. Fascism is more about the primacy of the state, Nazism about the primacy of volk.

  2. #12
    Superwoman Red Herring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,647

    Default

    The Volk as in the ethnic group/community, not as in the people. Big difference. Otherwise it should have been a lovefest of grass roots democracy with plebescites on every issue and self administrating councils on every corner.

    It's Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer (one people, one country, one leader), i.e. the party is the people, the state is the party ergo a rule of the party (and it's leader) is the rule of the people. A similar logic was used on the other side of the scale a few kilometers to the east.
    The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand Russell
    A herring's blog
    Johari / Nohari

  3. #13
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    To some extent yes. There were National Socialists before Hitler came onto the scene in the late 19th century, and there was the Strasserite faction that broke with Hitler.

    One element of ideologies one has to keep in mind is their reductionist quality. Reality is determined by one primary factor. For Communists this is class, for Nazis race, for Feminists gender, etc. Through abstract(often with pretense towards "scientific") understanding of this can one see how society is currently (dis)ordered and how it should be properly re-ordered so to speak.

    Technically no it isn't. Himmler for example once said that National Socialism had nothing to do with fascism. Fascism is more about the primacy of the state, Nazism about the primacy of volk.
    I'm inclined to agree, Nazism is a whole different species to fascism, that's without trying to diminish the horror of what fascism but there where before after and probably still are regimes which could be labelled or label themselves fascist without it compelling any international response, couldnt see the same being said for Nazism, the ones I can think of include Franco's Spain, Peron, even the Ba'thist Party (spelling) in Iraq.

    Any nation gets close to ethnic cleansing and it gets shut the f**k down, often too damn late and Rwanda was a total and utter shame on the world, that shit was Holocaust 2 with due respect to the European victims of Nazism, but it happens. Even the Serbs know about it. There was a lot of weirdness went on over Kosovo, I know the stories about KLA irregulars being mercs first hand from UK service men who where there after the crisis but that was a big marker for the Serbs.

    Peguy, I'd really like to discuss that history with you because I tend to think that the party which Strasser and co. would have created could very well have been different compared to what resulted when Hitler, Himmler et al became ascendent, it may not have been any prettier but there may not have been ethnic cleansing or a bid for world domination, war with Russia would probably have been inevitable though.

    Ideologies can be reductive and that's a good insight Andrew Vincent's book has a good angle on that in so far as he chooses things particular ideologies are supposed to be known for, for instance class or equality and socialism, and demonstrates how in theory and practice, and not simply as a matter or expediency or result of corruption, that's not necessarily so. He does it for all the ideologies, to be honests its one of the few times I didnt feel cold, hard hate for conservatives was reading his book. He has some really decent chapters on fascism, nationalism and ecologism too.

  4. #14
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    The Volk as in the ethnic group/community, not as in the people. Big difference. Otherwise it should have been a lovefest of grass roots democracy with plebescites on every issue and self administrating councils on every corner.

    It's Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer (one people, one country, one leader), i.e. the party is the people, the state is the party ergo a rule of the party (and it's leader) is the rule of the people. A similar logic was used on the other side of the scale a few kilometers to the east.
    If Strasser and the blood and soil rural faction had been able to form up with the conservative elements in the military against Hitler and his bizarro factions it would have looked a lot like your plebescites but your point's correct.

    I also think its one of the things which makes Nazi Germany one of the few examples of actually real totalitarian states as opposed to police or authoritarian states or dictatorships, a hell of a lot of the war crimes where spontaneous grass roots deals, extermination squads would turn up to find the locals who thought they had the opportunity had fufilled their mission. Comparisons with Rwanda are apt in that respect. In both instances while you could execute leaders or orchestraters its not exactly killing those responsible or ensuring similar things wont ever happen again by providing a deterrant example to others. Its too spontaneous to be simply state action.

  5. #15
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,530

    Smile Extraordinary and Extravagant

    Ideology -

    1. is predigested thought

    2. serves interests

    3. and has a demonology.

    And ideology is neither true nor false, rather ideology is plausible or implausible.

    And of course the naive ideologist believes their own ideology.

    Some nations like Oz are based on history, while others like the USA are based on ideology.

    Fortunately English makes no sense without history, not withstanding Noah Webster who tried to write history out of English with his American Dictionary.

    In Oz we live our contradictions, while contradictions are anathema to American ideology.

    And for 7,000 posts Americans have been pointing out my contradictions in the mistaken view that I share their ideology. Extraordinary and extravagant.

  6. #16
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    The Volk as in the ethnic group/community, not as in the people. Big difference.
    What is the essential difference in this context? Populism by nature is nationalistic and folkish.

    Otherwise it should have been a lovefest of grass roots democracy with plebescites on every issue and self administrating councils on every corner.
    Yeah what a shame the Fatherland didn't follow that path. Oh well. :rolli:

    It's Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer (one people, one country, one leader), i.e. the party is the people, the state is the party ergo a rule of the party (and it's leader) is the rule of the people.
    I don't know how this refutes my argument. The primacy of the Volk was made clear plenty of times by Hitler, even once proclaiming in 1938 "in the beginning was the Volk, and only then came the Reich." This is quite a contrast with Mussolini's dictate that "it is not the people who make the state but the state that makes the people." This makes much sense considering Italy's history and cultural makeup.

    A similar logic was used on the other side of the scale a few kilometers to the east.
    Although there is debate about how much influence Bolshevism had on Nazism(and there was some), it's best not to dismiss the significance differences between the Soviet and Nazi regimes as well. There is however evidence of possible influence of White emigres on the Nazi movement, since many German nationalists fought alongside them in the Baltic and elsewhere. Ernst Roehm I know was sympathetic to the Ukrainian nationalist cause too for example.

    Michael Kellogg's Hitler’s “Russian” Connection: White Émigré Influence on the Genesis of Nazi Ideology, 1917-1923 is one source on this. He has also expanded this into a book, but I haven't gotten around to reading that yet. I do have a copy of John J. Stephan's Russian Fascists, about such movements in the Russian emigration.

  7. #17
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I'm inclined to agree, Nazism is a whole different species to fascism, that's without trying to diminish the horror of what fascism but there where before after and probably still are regimes which could be labelled or label themselves fascist without it compelling any international response, couldnt see the same being said for Nazism, the ones I can think of include Franco's Spain, Peron, even the Ba'thist Party (spelling) in Iraq.

    Any nation gets close to ethnic cleansing and it gets shut the f**k down, often too damn late and Rwanda was a total and utter shame on the world, that shit was Holocaust 2 with due respect to the European victims of Nazism, but it happens. Even the Serbs know about it. There was a lot of weirdness went on over Kosovo, I know the stories about KLA irregulars being mercs first hand from UK service men who where there after the crisis but that was a big marker for the Serbs.
    The strong emphasis on ethno-racial purity and genocide certainly does help distinguish German National Socialism and Latin fascism. Fascists by nature were not that concerned about race so much, and certainly not in regards to anti-semitism. Jews were active in the Fascist party, and Mussolini confessed privately he did not agree with Hitler's anti-semitism but simply went along to stay on his good side.


    Peguy, I'd really like to discuss that history with you because I tend to think that the party which Strasser and co. would have created could very well have been different compared to what resulted when Hitler, Himmler et al became ascendent, it may not have been any prettier but there may not have been ethnic cleansing or a bid for world domination, war with Russia would probably have been inevitable though.

    Ideologies can be reductive and that's a good insight Andrew Vincent's book has a good angle on that in so far as he chooses things particular ideologies are supposed to be known for, for instance class or equality and socialism, and demonstrates how in theory and practice, and not simply as a matter or expediency or result of corruption, that's not necessarily so. He does it for all the ideologies, to be honests its one of the few times I didnt feel cold, hard hate for conservatives was reading his book. He has some really decent chapters on fascism, nationalism and ecologism too.
    Sure I'd like to discuss this some great extent. However I'll have to get into this later, as it's getting late and I'm getting tired.

  8. #18
    Superwoman Red Herring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    What is the essential difference in this context? Populism by nature is nationalistic and folkish.

    When you first suggested a substancial difference you said nazism was about the primacy of the Volk while fascism was about the primacy of the state (by the way, I'm talking about fascism, the system, not Fascism the specific Italian phenomenon, just to reduce the misunderstandings). I tried to explain that while the rhetoric was indeed about the Volk, the Volk was equated with the leader and the aim was a total presence of the state. The leader, the state, the party would all be the same. There was a strong ideological infiltration on just about every level. I assume you have seen the school books, the state (and its ideological influence) was in sport associations, designed leisure programs for workers, it had its grip on the church...it was omipresent. This was systematic. So while in the rhetoric everything was about the people, the suggested way to get there was through total infiltration of everday life. Don't get me wrong, this was more than welcome. I hate it when people talk as if this is something that was imposed on a people against their will. Even today, among the older generation there is sometimes still some talk along the lines of "well, what could we have done, they were stronger..." A delusion for self preservation if you ask me. Or maybe I read too much Goldhagen.

    Yeah what a shame the Fatherland didn't follow that path. Oh well. :rolli:
    Might be an idea for a science fiction novel. And don't try an ironic use of that term on me, brother, I hate that word and the pathetic ring it has to it.


    I don't know how this refutes my argument. The primacy of the Volk was made clear plenty of times by Hitler, even once proclaiming in 1938 "in the beginning was the Volk, and only then came the Reich." This is quite a contrast with Mussolini's dictate that "it is not the people who make the state but the state that makes the people." This makes much sense considering Italy's history and cultural makeup.

    Oh well, if Hitler said so. Seriously, see above reply.
    In my eyes, and according to the official interpretation you'll hear everywhere in this country at least, nazism is fascism with the whole ethnic thing pasted on. Yes he actually believed in that stuff and set everything on increasing the ethnic cleansing when things went down the drain on the eastern front, but structurally it was clearly a form of fascism. Italy and Germany also have a lot in common in their history as late nations that had to grow an identity as a nation state which at least in the case of Germany led to an identification through culture rather than through citizenship/the state. That might have contributed to the rhetorical emphasis on the Volk rather than the state which was still perceived as an artificial unit.



    Although there is debate about how much influence Bolshevism had on Nazism(and there was some), it's best not to dismiss the significance differences between the Soviet and Nazi regimes as well. There is however evidence of possible influence of White emigres on the Nazi movement, since many German nationalists fought alongside them in the Baltic and elsewhere. Ernst Roehm I know was sympathetic to the Ukrainian nationalist cause too for example.

    Oh, you misunderstood me. I hate it when people try to equate the two! I was merely saying that the logic party=proletariat ergo dictatorship of the party=dictatorship of the proletariat has some parallels to party=Volk ergo dictatorship of the party= dictatorship of the people, referring purely to the "logic" used in that reasoning. I am by no means trying to equate the systems or the ideologies!!!

    Michael Kellogg's Hitler’s “Russian” Connection: White Émigré Influence on the Genesis of Nazi Ideology, 1917-1923 is one source on this. He has also expanded this into a book, but I haven't gotten around to reading that yet. I do have a copy of John J. Stephan's Russian Fascists, about such movements in the Russian emigration.

    Interesting. I might look into that.
    I am not underestimating the importance of the whole ethnic componant, just making a case that on a structural level you are dealing with one of many varieties of fascism.
    The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand Russell
    A herring's blog
    Johari / Nohari

  9. #19
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    For the future, can you please not write within quotes? It's more difficult to distinguish your words from mine.

    As far as classifying Nazism as categorically "fascist", that has been a matter of debate among scholars. John Lukacs offers a good take on this:
    http://www.nationalism.org/library/s...-TMPR-2002.pdf

    Stanley Payne and Robert Paxton also delve into detail about this.

    Might be an idea for a science fiction novel. And don't try an ironic use of that term on me, brother, I hate that word and the pathetic ring it has to it.
    You mean fatherland?


    Oh well, if Hitler said so.
    Well if we want a definition of what National Socialism is and its theoretical presuppositions, where else are we to turn?

    Italy and Germany also have a lot in common in their history as late nations that had to grow an identity as a nation state which at least in the case of Germany led to an identification through culture rather than through citizenship/the state. That might have contributed to the rhetorical emphasis on the Volk rather than the state which was still perceived as an artificial unit.
    Even so there are still significant differences between the Italians and Germans even culturally speaking. Italian nationalism(even fascism) bears more resemblences to its counterpart in Spain and Portugal, and even France to some extent. German nationalism was originally based on language, even dating to von Herder. Race doesn't become much of a factor untill the latter half of the 19th century. It's more comparable to certain strains of East European nationalisms in some ways.

    Oh, you misunderstood me. I hate it when people try to equate the two! I was merely saying that the logic party=proletariat ergo dictatorship of the party=dictatorship of the proletariat has some parallels to party=Volk ergo dictatorship of the party= dictatorship of the people, referring purely to the "logic" used in that reasoning. I am by no means trying to equate the systems or the ideologies!!!
    Ahh I see. Burnham I know noted the Nazi regime as a larger trend towards the Managerial state, which existed in Russia and even America under the New Deal.

    I'll have to add more later.

  10. #20
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,630

    Default

    The Nazis had a greater tendency to managerialism because they wherent wedded to any specific economic doctrine, their insistence upon an "organised" as opposed to "planned" or "centralised" economy and I'm not sure if it was Hitler himself who suggested a business man, who was a good business man, shouldnt be reprimanded in business on the basis of whether or not he was a good national socialist.

    That kind of versatility and adaptability economically may have permitted the managers to outlive the ones in Russia who where afraid to tell the truth about logistics and capacity in the economy on fear of torture or death, which IS the calculation debate argument which Hayek was able to make against state managerialism in the economy, on the other hand it would have always had to contend with the Peter Principle.

    Italian fascism was different to Germany, in fact I see Italian fascism as something that can be and is repeated, sometimes even remarkably similar things can happen even within a democracy, there are some parallels with Burlesconi for instance but Nazism hasnt been repeated. The only thing that remotely parallels it in ethno-nationalist terms has been Israel but there's greater potential for change from within Israel itself than I believe there ever was or would be in Nazi Germany.

    The volk has different meanings to different people though, Fichte (spelling) the primary advocate of autarky in economics (this guy would have put the think global, act local greens to shame) for instance, likewise Landauer (spelling again) who was killed when the Bavarian council republic was finished off by the Freekorps (if I got my history right there) he used to concept in his book For Socialism but not in an exclusive or exclusionary way.

    Its also important to remember that the way people sometimes use race, people or ethnicity as exclusionary that citizenship was once used the same way, to denote outsiders, others and to subordinate or subdue.

Similar Threads

  1. Are Ideology and Morality like AIG and Citibank?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-09-2009, 04:47 AM
  2. Why is ideology like a prism?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-07-2009, 07:50 AM
  3. Can a sophisticated individual rise above ideology?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-27-2009, 04:43 PM
  4. Most apt ideology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 09:46 PM
  5. Engaging Economica on Libertarian Ideology
    By reason in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-25-2007, 08:39 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO