National Socialism or Social Nationalism?

“Hitler was a socialist!”

How many times have you heard that. Honestly, if I had a dollar…

At ReclaimWhat, we’ve often been left wondering where the hell all of these ‘patriotic’ movements are headed. What is their goal?

Sure, we’ve speculated, and sadly, what we speculated has turned out to be true.

ReclaimWhat has many moles in many places, acting in reconnaissance. We’ve always speculated that the far right and ultra right we’re going to use these movements for their own agenda, and needless to say, they are.

Without divulging too much information – so not to give away our sources or expose our moles – ReclaimWhat has witnessed discussion amongst many of the leaders of the group’s we know today, and discussion of how to advance their image for their common goal. Nationalism. This nationalism isn’t your run of the mill nationalism though, no, it’s an ethnocentric nationalism, sympathetic to ‘National Socialism’, mentioning how National Socialism would be good for Australia.

There has even been discussion around how “Islam is not an issue, it’s become a distraction.” (See below)

  

The tactics they wish to employ will exploit the political ignorance of the masses through ‘clean images’ and ‘positive messages’. They wish their movements to be based upon European far right political parties such as Golden Dawn and Svoboda.

Which is why I think it’s time to break open that can of worms.

NSDAP, or Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (The National Socialist German Workers’ Party), or as you may know it, The Nazi Party, was a political party based in Germany that existed between 1920 until 1945. 

It was officially abolished on May 7th, 1945 – the day representatives of NSDAP signed the instrument of surrender in Reims, France. 

One of the key words that many on the far right do love to point out (even though a significant portion of them support ‘National Socialism’) is that the party was socialist. 

The NSDAP was no more socialist than I am a nationalist. See, the issue is, just because you use a word, or name something after a word, doesn’t make it any more like the thing you’re attempting to name it after. 

There is an old saying: “If it doesn’t walk like a duck, quack like a duck, fly like a duck, or swim like a duck, then calling it a duck doesn’t make it a duck.”

What I mean by this is that Hitler’s ‘National Socialist’ party is nothing like the socialism that you see nowadays. Socialism largely attempts to unite the working class to promote equality of that working class.

The only unity that Hitler promoted, and the only socialism, was a unity of the Germanic people – yes, it was racial. His unification based on the ‘Germanic race’ was to attempt to unite the working class, and upper classes, to one, whole socialised people – before mobilising them. 

If you need any further convincing how far Hitler was from socialism, there was no state ownership of production, much remained in private hands. Even the first inmates of Hitler’s first concentration camp were leaders of socialist parties that existed at the time. 

Hitler abhorred socialism and communism. He abhorred the Bolsheviks and the USSR. Keep in mind, it was the USSR, not the USCR. 

Hitler was not a ‘socialist’, he simply used the word to attract voters, and could justify using it with the defence that he had socialised the people, and united them. It just had nothing to do with class.

I digress. 

So, we have now witnessed clear discussion of the direction in which these people wish to take their movements. They are planning on slowly rolling out propaganda that is sympathetic toward nationalism, that is easy for people to understand – likely, this is too going to see a change of public image. Less violence, less bickering, less childish games. But this is more dangerous. Legitimacy is the last thing they need to progress.

They’re discussing how to mirror the image of Golden Dawn, the violent ultra right party on Greece that advocates racial cleansing, and violence against those of colour. The other groups they wish to mimick include many white nationalist and white supremacist movements that have been seen around Europe. 

This is why we need to stress this point to all Australians.

You do not have to side with them. Choosing not to side with them doesn’t illegitimise your concerns for your country, nor your ‘patriotism’ to your nation. 

Exercise your freedom to say NO!

ReclaimWhat

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “National Socialism or Social Nationalism?

  1. wahidazal66 says:

    As white privilege and Anglo-European hegemony is being increasingly challenged everywhere, outright Fascism is making its comeback all throughout the Anglo-European west. But like the neo-Nazis in South Africa, Australian neo-Nazis and white nationalists are at a distinct ideological disadvantage in that they are not indigenous to the land. Given this, it is that much easier to counter far-right, white supremacist propaganda in Australia than elsewhere, simply because of the fact that Anglo-Europeans have only be in Australia for a little over 200 years, and this in itself nullifies many of the ethno-nationalist arguments of these Nutzis.

    That aside, note that the white supremacist identitarian politics of the far-right has powerful global sponsors in some unlikely places. This has been the case in Greece as well as in Ukraine where they presently holding the levers of power. As such the money and underhanded sponsorship also needs to be addressed, with names named.

    Keeping fighting the good fight!

    Like

  2. Geoff says:

    With respect to your goals (which I support), I disagree with your argument. Hitler was a socialist, just not your type of socialist. The first definition that pops up on a Google search is:

    “An economic system in which the production and distribution of goods are controlled substantially by the government rather than by private enterprise, and in which cooperation rather than competition guides economic activity”

    Hitler was authoritarian, as was Stalin. Hence the frequent comparison between them. Hitler was not quite as far out on the central-planning spectrum as Soviet Russia.

    Like

    1. ReclaimWhat.net says:

      Perhaps, but the crux of Marxist socialism doesn’t involve race. Hitler’s ‘socialism’ was based on uniting all classes of his ideal race, which is in stark contrast to the idea of Marxist socialism, which is what bigots always try to say, “Hitler was a socialist”.
      Perhaps, in his own bent way.

      There was much private enterprise in Nazi Germany, too. It was poor implementation (if that was indeed ever his goal)

      Like

  3. Geoff says:

    They had a hybrid economic system going. Part free enterprise part central control, but all private enterprise was directed to the goals of the State.

    Just for my edification, what point are the racist-right making by identifying Hitler as a socialist?

    Like

      1. Geoff says:

        Late back to the conversation sorry.
        I do hear references still to Marxists and Trotskyists (but thankfully not many identify as Stalinist). If I am not being clichéd, the political discourse needs a thorough overhaul. The old dualities do not work anymore.
        Not to erase the distinction between full laissez faire free market and a more socialist economic structure; but between the brands dotted along the spectrum.
        I identify as left. I don’t identify with a working class, and in these latter decades I find it difficult to identify that working class in our society. Guy Debord’s Spectacle having the consumed whatever was left after Thatcher’s “no such thing as society” and Fukuyama’s “end of history”.
        A trite observation; but I despair at seeing the same old concepts trotted out. However, I try to avoid the left’s favourite pastime of attacking other parts of the left because, frankly the right present no intellectual challenge.
        So Hitler was towards the Socialist half of the spectrum. He was off the scale on the authoritarian end of another spectrum. Pointless comparison really. But that’s the problem with the right. So many absurd assertions to refute that eventually one just get tired and looks for another discussion to have. The Right then think they have won.
        Good luck with it all 🙂

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s