• I Cast Fist@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, that’s literally their whole reasoning. I’ve had to deal with a number of those all the way back in 2014, “national sOcIaLiSm

    Of course, whenever I pointed to The Guardian’s interview with Hitler in 1923 (and republished in 1932), where he energetically complains about marxists (marxians, as he calls them) “stealing” the socialist term from “real germans” and actively calls for the end of bolshevism, I was completely ignored.

    “Why,” I asked Hitler, “do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?”

    “Socialism,” he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.

    • hare_ware@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wait, but what did he even mean by “socialism” here? I get call what was happening in Russia not socialism, but what was the un-Marxist form of socialism Hitler was talking about? Also, wasn’t Marx also German, did Hitler see him as not a “real german”?

      • maxcorbetti@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        He’s opportunistcally envokning it as socialism is popular, but cares for nothing other than the political clout the label may bring.

        Fascism exists to capture popular revolutionary sentiment, while preserving the old power structure.

      • reversebananimals@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        He didn’t mean anything at all. That was the brilliance of the Nazi propaganda machine. They stole words that referred to popular things and said them enough times in relation to themselves that they lost all meaning.

        Its exactly the same as how the modern day right wing say anything that supports them is “patriotic” and anything that doesn’t is “anti-[country]”. If they say the word “patriotic” enough times, it loses all meaning & makes it impossible for opponents to argue against, because you can’t have a rational debate when language is meaningless.