Hitler was a Socialist. Orwell was a Communist and I don't know shit about history (pt2). His emails

[Nanjing to Seoul]

Earlier, I posted This about a freeper smackdown in my international school between me (the history and geography teacher) and this Canadian Freeper from Alberta (Canada's Fresno), one of the English teachers. Please understand that most of the teachers in this school are either center-left or left wing, so this douche is alone.

Now, I want you to see into the mind of madness. Here are his emails. I ended this by saying if he can convince the PhD that runs the humanities department (and I am now the assistant head of the department) that the crap the English teacher says it true, I will incorporate it into my classes. Have fun ripping this apart. Here are all of this clown's emails.

After I said that I agreed Germany had socialized, universal coverage under the Nazis, I explained. It was started in 1871 by that great Nazi thinker Otto Von Bismarck, a full 18 years before Hitler was born in Austria and a full 49 years before the NSDAP was established.

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#F4E0E0; border:1px solid #E8C0C0; box-shadow:-1px -1px 3px #C66666 inset; border-radius:0.6em; margin:0.5385em 0em 0em 0.5385em;"]History was one of my best subjects in school. I also took a whole course on ideologies and wrote papers on Nazi ideology. That said, I do not touch on history in my classes. I have touched upon Greco-Roman Mythology though. However, I do teach critical thinking. That includes detecting bias and where hiding or ignoring evidence which proves otherwise. I found that the more I learned about the subject, the more I found bias there.

The quotes from Hitler cannot be any more clear. However, he did not represent the views of all in the party. That is why I am trying to say. I have no issue with the photos you provided. The sources I quoted to you say the very same thing. The Nazi party banned all that was not in full alignment with themselves. They merely replaced the trade unions with a Nazi union. This was more superficial than anything. They were still unions and unions are socialist in nature. It more of a shift of allegiance. It is like changing names in a bank or changing from Pepsi to Coke.

Homosexuals did well in Nazi Germany until they posed a threat to Hitler's power. His best friend and right hand man, Ernst Rohm was openly homosexual. There are books full of homoerotic art used a Nazi propaganda. Hitler supported it for years and tolerated it until he thought Rohm was conspiring against him. It is unfortunate that they only focus on the short period after when Hitler turned on them. Gays see themselves as victims of the Nazi party when half the party (SA) was openly gay. The same goes with socialism. Socialists want to distance themselves from the Nazi party because of the negative image Hitler carries. The revisionism of history is clear here. I am not trying to revise it. I am only bringing up what has been omitted/ignored because it does not fit the ideology of the those with a bias view of history who twist it to their favor.

Yes, healthcare was in place before the Nazi party even existed. The anti-antisemitism was in Germany long before Hitler was born, too. But of course he was not responsible for them. Nor did he stop either of them. Why? They both fit into his ideology.

I used Canada as an example of all the things you said happened to those who disagreed with the Nazi party. They all applied to me living in what you would call a welfare state.

I know you like to discuss history. I do, too. It is a hobby of mine. We can agree the scholarly thing to do is to look at the facts in entirety and realize there are interpretations of it. It seems the truth is conveniently ignored by those who see that it does not fit their ideological bias. Feminists and Marxists are famous for this style of revisionism.

Again, I am not trying to undermine what is being taught in your classes. However, would you agree the hallmarks of a socialist welfare state are public healthcare, unions, public education, and state-owned enterprises? Nazi Germany had them all. It is clear it was not universal in that beneficiaries were those who were considered good Aryan stock. How they got funds to have their welfare state is not really the issue.

I don't know where to begin with the stupid. He undermines his own argument four times. I sort of resent that a man who claims history was his best subject things he can dress down a PhD and a PhD Candidate.

After I told him to convince the department to revise history and its teaching, he took umbrage.

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#F4E0E0; border:1px solid #E8C0C0; box-shadow:-1px -1px 3px #C66666 inset; border-radius:0.6em; margin:0.5385em 0em 0em 0.5385em;"]welfare state
noun

: a social system in which a government is responsible for the economic and social welfare of its citizens and has policies to provide free health care, money for people without jobs, etc.; also : a country that has such a system

Meriam Webster

Britanica says pretty much the same thing.

Wikipedia says of the Welfare State in Germany:
Historian Robert Paxton argues that the welfare state was created primarily by conservatives, and usually opposed by socialists and labor unions because they thought it would distract from their mission. He cites the German welfare state set up by Chancellor Bismarck in the 1880s, and the similar version set up by Count Eduard von Taaffe in the Austro-Hungarian Empire a few years later. The British welfare state originated with the Liberal party of David Lloyd-George around 1910. Though it was true that the French welfare state originated primarily during a period of socialist political ascendency, with the Matignon Accords and the reforms of the Popular Front, it did also arise to some extent, as Paxton claims, with the Vichy regime in the 1940s.[16] Paxton goes on to argue: "All the modern twentieth-century European dictatorships of the right, both fascist and authoritarian, were welfare states…. They all provided medical care, pensions, affordable housing, and mass transport as a matter of course, in order to maintain productivity, national unity, and social peace."[17]

Is Paxton a revisionist?

Again, I ask you to read the first post on this. He quoted Goet Aly first about Nazi Welfare State. . .and when I told him the "welfare state" was not born on taxation, but one confiscation of the Jewish land, money, property and assets and redistributed to the poor of Germany. . .he comes back with the email above.

He has contradicted himself three times in this email.

After I sent him an email with all my sources contradicting him, he sends this last one.

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#F4E0E0; border:1px solid #E8C0C0; box-shadow:-1px -1px 3px #C66666 inset; border-radius:0.6em; margin:0.5385em 0em 0em 0.5385em;"]Naturally, as a Canadian who keeps getting called a Nazi for not accepting the welfare state and socialist policies of Canada, I would surely like to find out if such a label is justified. Being wrong is part of learning and I still consider myself a student of history. I would be grateful to see this evidence in light of the many quotes I have provided from various sources. I would like to know how me all so the sources I have used are wrong. I like I said, they all addressed the same facts you forwarded to me. The point of view that you are coming from is the same I received from my history teachers and the public school curriculum as provided by the Canadian Ministry of Education. Naturally, I am skeptical of government sources. State education is a means of propping up the state to ensure it maintains its power over the people.

I responded with the following:

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#F4E0E0; border:1px solid #E8C0C0; box-shadow:-1px -1px 3px #C66666 inset; border-radius:0.6em; margin:0.5385em 0em 0em 0.5385em;"]Primary sources are not government sources. . .and government sources come from private historians.

I will disagree with everything. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, but I do not feel it is useful in my class at the present time.

The problem with arguing with a Freeper, teabagger or dittohead is it's similar to arguing with a howler monkey. All the monkey will do is scream, scream louder and throw shit at you, until you get tired and walk away. And then they will stand and act triumphant.

Sometimes, there is small satisfaction to handing a conservaturd his ass on a platter.

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#F4E0E0; border:1px solid #E8C0C0; box-shadow:-1px -1px 3px #C66666 inset; border-radius:0.6em; margin:0.5385em 0em 0em 0.5385em;"]

[NYC_SKP]

1. I live your skilled use of html stylings, if that's what you call it.

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#F4E0E0; border:1px solid #E8C0C0; box-shadow:-1px -1px 3px #C66666 inset; border-radius:0.6em; margin:0.5385em 0em 0em 0.5385em;"]Recommended!

[FuzzyRabbit]

2. The problem with arguing with Freepers

is that it is like wrestling with pigs.

George Bernard Shaw wrote — 'Never wrestle with pigs. You both get dirty and the pig likes it.'

[Live and Learn]

6. I recall an earlier similar saying.

Although, naming the author might get me in trouble on DU, I don't think many would argue the advice: , "Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they turn and trample you." (Or something similar, depending upon your Bible interpretation. Mathew 7:6.)

I never really understood that passage until the Faux News and the Tea Party came into being but I sure the heck get it now.

[Ken Burch]

3. Did anyonen else read that thread title and think "Orwell sent emails?"? n/t.

[Ken Burch]

4. He thinks Canada uses Nazi-style repression on those who oppose social welfare programs?

And he thinks he's been the victim of such repression?

Send an actual death camp survivor over to this clown's house. Tell her or him to ask to see this guy's camp number tattoo.

(on edit) just read the "part 1" thread to this, which included the guy's backstory. I can't believe this idiot actually thinks losing a child custody case is comparable to being a victim of Naziism.

[Nevernose]

5. Orwell really was a communist

I had to find your first part for that argument, but Il Douchebag is correct: Orwell was a commie. He made it very clear that Animal Farm and 1984 weren't anti-communist books, but anti-totalitarian books. He thought communism was dandy, but hated Stalin with a passion, and saw very little difference between Stalin and Hitler. Perhaps in the way that I strongly believe in Socialist values, yet believe that Russia got them horribly, tragically wrong.

I read Animal Farm when I took a course in Russian history. It's not "an allegory," it's a shockingly detailed history book that features animals. And as important and profound as 1984 is, the horrifying parts are not the socialistic parts, it's the totalitarian parts.

It was pleasant to read your bio, FTR. My Master's is also in Ed Leadership, I'm working on a Ph.D in Ed Psych, and we're going to live in China for at least the summer (so my wife can study International and Asian Law). So your bio seemed a little familiar

[Live and Learn]

7. +1 nt

[painesghost]

9. Orwell was a commie, but the Spanish Civil War...

Soured him on most forms of communism going on in the world. At least in my reading, he seemed to greatly sympathize with the Anarchists even though he though many of their schemes utopian.

[Nanjing to Seoul]

10. Something I said about 1984 too. Big Brother could be both Stalin or Hitler

I tell my students that Stalin and Hitler were pretty much the same. . .even down to the antisemitism. What makes them different is pure economic philosophy.

Hitler was a free market fascist that hated communism. Stalin was a communistic fascist that used whatever system was in place to advance himself, hold power and expand it.

Both had:
Gulags/Concentration
Censorship
Second class people idea
Purges
Domestic terrorism
Secret Police
Elaborate Cults of Personality
Propaganda machines
Doublespeak
Group think
Militarism
Totality in leadership

Hitler and Stalin were of the same blood politically. Economically is where the trouble came.

[painesghost]

11. I agree power was the defining goal in their world views

[Spitfire of ATJ]

8. Obviously a graduate of Beck U....

All he needs is a blackboard and some crying jags.