Skeptic Project

Hello,
There is essentially very little difference in what what Marx, Engels, Morris, Luxembourg and others wrote about the abolition of private property society and it's replacement with Communism. Contrary to popular belief they also referred to such a future society as "Socialism" and they used both terms interchangeably to refer to the same thing i.e a society based on...

1. Democratic control by and in the interests of humanity

2. Production for use and not profit

3. Common ownership of the world's resources

4. Free access to the means of living

Basically this is what Socialism/Communism means. A global moneyless, stateless society. It's just a tragedy that the original meaning has been perverted by the atrocities of the left wing fascist regimes run by gangsters like Stalin, Lenin, Guevarra, Castro, Mao, Pol Pot...and Hitler who also called himself a Socialist! None of this horror had anything to do with real Socialism.

Maybe it's time to give up this outdated terminology but it is still fascinating to note that the bluprint of RBE and the Venus Project is basically Communism/Socialism in it's purest form with some technological aspects added.

The only organisation left on earth which still promotes this original version of Socialism is the World Socialist Movement which has existed for 107 years with the express purpose of trying to speed up the process of enlightening workers about their true position in society. The following websites are well worth a look...

http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=99999&func=view&catid=231&id=311671#311679

No real difference per se, as it can be understood as a version of communism that not label itself as such because of it wishes to avoid misconceptions and association with unrelated ideas and practises.

After all, communism refers to many different, often diametrically opposing ideas or practises when it comes to social organisation. Lets just say that TZM/RBE has never associated itself with what often is referred to as "communist moments or tradition" or referred to its literature and/or social theories.

http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=99999&func=view&catid=231&id=311671#311680

Kaiser Falkner said:

Hitler who also called himself a Socialist!

History fail. The National Socialist Party in Austrian in the 1920's was not really built upon socialist ideals along the lines of Marxist doctrine, but was instead a party set to revitalize and rebuild German society (which they saw as extending beyond just the German state itself). Communists and Marxists were actively seen as enemies of the Reich and were in fact political prisoners and victims of some extermination programs.

Well, the only problem being that Hitler said 'the whole of National Socialism is based upon it' in referring to the teachings of Marx, meaning doctrinally based.

"I have learned a great deal from Marxism, as I do not hesitate to admit. The difference between them and myself is that I have really put into practice what these peddlers and pen-pushers have timidly begun... National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd and artificial ties with a democratic order."

So you're telling me that the above quote is fake? I've seen academics in documentaries reference that.

The quote isn't fake but Hitler did not expressly base Nazism on Marxism, which was what you asserted.

Turns out, it's just another ISM after all. Who would've thought.

Communists and Marxists were thrown in the camps just like the Jews and 'mos.

Yes you're right. My contention is more that in the early days Hitler and the Nazis publicly stressed their resemblance to Communists (look at their early propaganda & campaign material), but as it didn't go down well with voters they quickly changed tactics. In other words I'm saying that Hitler was obviously strongly basing Nazism on many Communist ideas, but it was easier for himself and his party to come popular by outwardly distancing themselves from Communists.

And then you have Hitler's minister of propaganda being mentioned in the NYT saying that 'Hitler and Lenin can be compared', Dr Goebbels.

You're conflating soviet totalitarianism with socialist government. What the Nazi regime attempted to do was integrate national myth and social well being with a central, single party government- Stalin did essentially the same thing, but did not organize the economy in the same way that the Nazi's had. This does not mean he based the party on communist ideals and then publicly distanced himself because 1)after he had attained full control he clearly would have not interest in duping voters as they would not exist and 2)he actually actively and continuously identified communists as enemies of the German nation and promoted outright animosity towards soviet government even before the Iron Pact was broken. You can't just say that any centralized economy is socialism, and you certainly cannot equate Nazism as it was practiced with any of the views that were originally planned out in Vienna in the early days. Again, in the deeds of the regime, it is remarkably difficult to draw any such comparison and its rather difficult to reconcile such a position with the open doctrine of German ideological conflict with foreign nations.

Also, recall that among the central values of a socialist (or marxist) system is classless society. This was certainly never a consideration for the Nazi's, who actually stratified society with Untermenschen (Jews, Gypsies, mentally handicapped, etc) at the very bottom followed by political enemies, German workers, and military elites. Indeed, if you read "Stigma of Violence" by Michael Geyer, you will see how the very forging of Germany up to WWII was built around the military remaining a state within a state. This would later become an elite class in German society. There were no delusions about an egalitarian society with each receiving what he needs. Germans were valued over Untermenschen, and the warrior class was valued over Germans. This is a remarkably fundamental difference between Socialism and Nationalsozialismus.

Americans mix in socialism with federally funded highway systems, police, public education, etc that doesn't mean that Nazis and Americans have a lot in common. Glenn Beck uses similar logic with social democratic governments all over the world: "Nazis had public health service therefore countries that do are like Nazis or Nazis are like them."

National Socialism had pretty much nothing to do with socialism at all. Socialism was just a popular term in Germany at the time, and Hitler wanted to capitalize on that. If he was even remotely socialist in reality, the aristocracy and old conservatives wouldn't have settled for him over the real socialists and communists.

Nazis and Soviets had also totally different reasons for their persecutions of others, that doesn't mean they have anything in common. Americans persecuted black people up until the 1970s, and the Australian prime minister as recently as 2007 talked about banning the sale of alcohol and pornography to aboriginals, which is racist as all hell (not sure if they did it) again any connection there? Not really. Just because two groups persecute other groups doesn't mean there's a connection between them, in fact it doesn't mean jack shit.

Nazis are Nazis, they're an almost absolutely unique political and social, and somewhat religious, phenomenon in Europe in the early 20th century. Even their closest relatives the Italian Fascists were almost nothing like them.

To me you can trace almost all genocidal governments in recent times to the far-left and to socialism because Marx was the first person in modern Europe to advocate political genocide. Granted, the advocacy of it has broadened much further now and Marx cannot be solely blamed, though he can be seen as a source.

Please don't use the word wingnut. People will think you are being racist. At least in my part of the world, it's a word that people apply to Chinese people that struggle to speak English.

Wingnut isn't a racist term. What the heck are you talking about.

Yea Wingnut isn't racist in the UK either.

Brenton, its a valid term in most places I would assume:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingnut_%28politics%29

No mention of it being racist.

"At least in my part of the world, it's a word that people apply to Chinese people that struggle to speak English."

No one cares about New Zealand though.

Or Australia.

Yes. It's a terrible world where I'm coming from and I don't like seeing it used.

Well we already know Matt hates Asian people... all those pictures of Spock and not a single one of Sulu.

Can't be coincidence.