4 ms·

> I just think people should acknowledge the role that socialists played in helping him rise to power. I think practically everyone, including myself agrees wi

by scrose 6y ago

> I just think people should acknowledge the role that socialists played in helping him rise to power. I think practically everyone, including myself agrees with that. And I pointed that out in my original posts. Power doesn't occur in a vacuum and the Nazi's capitalized on peoples (mostly unfounded) fears and anger to grow their base. My original point was that the Nazi's themselves were not socialists. Referencing a name they came up with and their published propaganda was not a convincing argument to say otherwise.

leereeves 6y ago
Hitler wasn't the only Nazi. Some socialists, like Gregor Strasser, weren't merely supporters, they were full members and even leaders of the Nazi party. Their brand of Nazism survives to this day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism So I don't think it's accurate to say "the Nazi's themselves were not socialists", as if none of them were.
- scrose 6y ago
  > Hitler wasn't the only Nazi. I never said that. > I don't think it's accurate to say "the Nazi's themselves were not socialists", as if none of them were. I never claimed that none of them were. Making it sound as if I and others are talking in absolutes and manufacturing talking points around that is a waste of everyones time.
  - leereeves 6y ago
    > Making it sound as if I and others are talking in absolutes and manufacturing talking points around that is a waste of everyones time. I joined this discussion because you said "The Nazis were socialist only in name." Only. That sounds fairly absolute to me.
    - scrose 6y ago
      Do you not see the irony in the fact that you had to grab a tiny snippet of a response several posts prior to 'prove' your counterpoint to a criticism made towards you in regards to practically every response you've had in this thread thus far? I'm going to give this thread a break since it seems as though you're simply looking for arguments where none exist.
      - leereeves 6y ago
        That was your first statement in this discussion, and I consider it the central claim I'm arguing against. But if you don't consider it an important claim, then let's move on. I'm satisfied that I've shown a fair amount of evidence that it's untrue.

by scrose 6y ago

leereeves 6y ago

Hitler wasn't the only Nazi. Some socialists, like Gregor Strasser, weren't merely supporters, they were full members and even leaders of the Nazi party. Their brand of Nazism survives to this day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism So I don't think it's accurate to say "the Nazi's themselves were not socialists", as if none of them were.

scrose 6y ago
> Hitler wasn't the only Nazi. I never said that. > I don't think it's accurate to say "the Nazi's themselves were not socialists", as if none of them were. I never claimed that none of them were. Making it sound as if I and others are talking in absolutes and manufacturing talking points around that is a waste of everyones time.
- leereeves 6y ago
  > Making it sound as if I and others are talking in absolutes and manufacturing talking points around that is a waste of everyones time. I joined this discussion because you said "The Nazis were socialist only in name." Only. That sounds fairly absolute to me.
  - scrose 6y ago
    Do you not see the irony in the fact that you had to grab a tiny snippet of a response several posts prior to 'prove' your counterpoint to a criticism made towards you in regards to practically every response you've had in this thread thus far? I'm going to give this thread a break since it seems as though you're simply looking for arguments where none exist.
    - leereeves 6y ago
      That was your first statement in this discussion, and I consider it the central claim I'm arguing against. But if you don't consider it an important claim, then let's move on. I'm satisfied that I've shown a fair amount of evidence that it's untrue.