Who is more like the Nazi Party?

On August 10, 2009, In Domestic Policy, Evolution, Foreign Policy, Racism, By Andrew Schwartz

 

Nazi Propaganda Poster

Nazi Propaganda Poster

Godwin’s law states (paraphrased) that the longer an argument ensues, the probability of one side accusing the other of behaving like Nazis reaches 1 (a perfect probability). Despite its humorous pretenses, this law has certainly been proven in the recent debate over health care reform. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) accused protestors of carrying swastikas; Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) compared their actions to “Brown Shirt tactics.” Prominent conservative radio host, Rush Limbaugh, in turn made similarities between Obama’s health care logo and Nazi propaganda, and even made comparisons between the Nazi party and the Democratic party.

 

 

What makes the argument confusing is when most of us learned about the political spectrum in a publicly funded educational institution, we were taught that Communists are on the far left of the spectrum and Fascists/Nazis are on the far right. This is not accurate by any means if one accepts a more modern definition of the spectrum that puts increased government involvement on the left and less government involvement on the right. In other words, Communists would still be on the far left, but Anarchists would be on the extreme right.

 

 

But which party is more like the Nazis? Is it the left-wing Democrats or the right-wing Republicans. Where does fascism really lie? To shed light on this argument, I have listed the 25 point program adopted by Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist German Workers’ (Nazi) Party, and compared them with modern-day viewpoints from mainstream political affiliations. Scores are tabulated at the end of each point.

 

 

 

1. We demand the union of all Germans in a Great Germany on the basis of the principle of self-determination of all peoples.

 

            Principles of self-determination is a very right-wing mindset, as is American Exceptionalism. However, the word “demand” (fordern in German) is a very authoritarian verb and would require a large-scale government to enforce, which is typically a left-wing idea. Nevertheless, the principle is right-wing. RW-1, LW-0

 

2. We demand that the German people have rights equal to those of other nations; and that the Peace Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain shall be abrogated.

            This assertion is politically benign, as it is only demanding the basic rights of a state. Its demand that the treaties of Versaille and St.Germain-en-laye be rescinded was an attempt to regain its standing as a legitimate country. Those treaties broke up the German Empire—which is important in the next point—and redrew the map of Europe; they forced Germany to accept guilt in starting World War I, a highly debatable attestation at best; they also limited the size of the army Germany was allowed to maintain. Point number two does not reflect any specific view on the political spectrum; it only wished to remove the implication of international subservience that Germany was currently under. RW-1, LW-0

 

3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the maintenance of our people and the settlement of our surplus population.

            This appears to be a right-wing attitude, as that spectrum recently has been viewed as imperial and expansionist. However, this demand was an extension of the previous point. Germany wanted its land that was hers prior to World War I in order to feed (Ger. Ernährung) its outlying loyalists. Be that as it may, its smack of neo-conservatism forces a score. RW-2, LW-0

 

4. Only those who are our fellow countrymen can become citizens. Only those who have German blood, regardless of creed, can be our countrymen. Hence no Jew can be a countryman.

            Irrelevant in American politics. Some would argue that racism and anti-Semitism is a right-wing characteristic, but they do so on the assumption that Nazism and fascism are right-wing philosophies. Stalin’s Soviet Union killed more Jews than Hitler did, but that does not mean a left-wing Communist philosophy is racist. Despite common portrayals in mainstream media, no American political party can claim they have conquered racism nor accuse the other of harboring it. RW-2, LW-0

5. Those who are not citizens must live in Germany as foreigners and must be subject to the law of aliens.

 

           Allowing non-citizens to live within the political boundaries of a state is generally a left-wing position, as the seemingly popular opinion among the right is to deport all those who are in the country illegally. In regards to aliens with visas, neither spectrum in America holds any prominent posits on a different rule of law to which they must subject themselves. RW-2, LW-1

(more…)

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 
1 Comments
Leave A Response

The Sinfulness of Man and Capitalism

On November 13, 2008, In Uncategorized, By Andrew Schwartz

Do not be misled by the title. I do not believe that capitalism is sinful. I do believe that people are sinful, however.

Take a recent article by Reuters, which cites the exploitation of “Obama-mania” for example. Tickets for Obama’s inauguration ceremony are being sold for as high as $10,000, and people are buying them. Georgetown residents are renting their apartments out for as much as a $25,000 stay during the festivities, and people are renting them. There will certainly be vendors swarming the Capitol building selling Official Obama paraphernalia of all types at exorbitant prices, and people will assuredly buy them, even if it is an Official Obama 8-Track Player.

Anyone who has been involved with official government ceremonies knows that it is illegal to charge money to attend these events, but the average American does not know that. This situation has enabled profiteers and opportunists to exploit the ignorance of citizens and violate their altruistic expectations. I would hate to be the person who paid $10,000 for a non-existent ticket to a free ceremony. It would be enough to make me lose faith in humanity. While I know that this is not President-elect Obama’s fault, this is perfectly illustrative of an idealized society. A Utopia is a grand idea, but it would never work. The sinfulness of man will always find a way to exploit altruism in order to gain advantage. (Likewise, the sinfulness of man will always find a way to resist or defy rules in order to prevent a loss of liberty.)

The residents of Georgetown, on the other hand, are not violating any rules or laws and have every right to rent their private property to anyone who is willing to pay. While their preposterous prices are certainly exploitative, it is a different form of exploitation. Theirs is based on supply and demand, while the ticket sellers’ are based on emotional euphoria and a presumed general ignorance. Washington, D.C. hotels have largely sold out for the event and residents are merely providing an alternative. The ticket sellers do not advertise that these tickets can be obtained freely to those who are willing to wait. In other words, personal gain at the expense of another’s unneeded personal loss philosophically and morally defines a transgression.

As for the vendors, their example is a perfect illustration of the difference in individual conscience. One vendor may provide a variety of items that are of poor quality and intended to deceive the client of their value. Others may provide a charitable antithesis, items that provide a gain to the client at the loss of the vendor. (The vendor’s gain will be the assumed knowledge that he is furthering his cause.)

People should not be prohibited from taking advantage of gullibility in a capitalistic society. After all, that is how we acquired the territory in the Louisiana Purchase and the Alaska Purchase. However, since the fall of Adam and Eve, the desires and fears of Man have always been exploited for the purpose of another’s gain or prevention of loss. What differentiates Capitalism and Socialism (or Equalitarianism, to be politically correct)is this: Capitalism exploits desires in order to further the opportunity for gain at personal sacrifice sui juris; Socialism exploits desires in order to glorify personal sacrifice and limit the opportunity for gain.

Those who recognize the deficiencies of man have an obligation to exploit it in one way or another. Those who are exploiting expensive tickets to a free event are those who will benefit in a Utopian society at the exclusive disadvantage to others. Those who are exploiting their property to a willing, informed client are those who will benefit in a capitalistic society at a potential advantage to others. Again, I know President-elect Obama is not responsible for these ticket-sellers, but in order to promote a beneficial, opportunistic change for all, he must advocate Capitalism, not Utopianism.

Tagged with: • • • • • • •
 
0 Comments
Leave A Response
Go To Top »