Interesting site I found

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by macfanken

I could never understand how the Nazis gained power in Germany... now I see how it could happen. We're living in scary times.

The Nazi Party's advance to power in Germany under Socialism has little significant correlation to the present US political system. In a nutshell, the Nazis came into power because the treaty which ended WWI in June 1919, was devasting to Germany and is what brought the Nazis to power. Here is an excerpt:

The Versailles Treaty was an agreement at the end of WWI where the “Big Four” as they were called, America's Woodrow Wilson, Vittorio Orlando of Italy, Georges Clemenceau of France, and David Lloyd George of Great Britain, met to decide Germany’s consequences for WWI. The Germans believed that the treaty would be based on President Wilson’s Fourteen Points, which offered a framework for a just peace, and the hopes that any future international tension would be prevented. The Germans believed the Fourteen Points would have resulted in drastically less devastation to Germany if used in the treaty. But, the Big Four were determined to punish Germany for the war, and so they did.

This treaty held Germany solemnly responsible for WWI. They were forced to pay reparations totaling 132,000,000,000 in gold marks, they lost 1/8 of all its land, all of its colonies, all overseas financial assets, a new map of Europe was carved out of Germany, and the German military was basically non-existent. To the German people they were being ruthlessly punished for a war not only they were responsible for and fought.

The treaty devastated Germany politically and economically. As a result of the treaty many Germans were desperate to find a new leader to get them out of the Great Depression, which they blamed on the extravagant reparations they had to pay to the Allies. They found this leader in Adolf Hitler. Hitler believed Germany had given up to easily to the allies and still had a chance to win the war because there had been no fighting on German soil. He encouraged many German’s feelings of being betrayed by their own government and therefore thought they had no obligation to follow the treaty; this group became the Nazi’s. They still felt like they had more fighting to do and the Versailles Treaty fueled their anger. It created aggressive resentment and nationalism in Germany. There was a lot of increasing hostility towards the allied nations. Leaders like Hitler saw this treaty as something that weakened the great empire he was striving for. He didn’t sign it and he wasn’t about to follow it. But because of this treaty he was able to conquer and manipulate people by justifying his actions on the unfairness of the Versailles Treaty, and making stronger nations pity him.

Was Germany’s reaction to the Versailles Treaty really a shock or was it asking for disaster? The Versailles Treaty was the final straw that gave Germany and Hitler the excuse to take revenge on the nations that had previously hurt Germany.

http://www.pomperaug.com/socstud/stu...mrcidea6vt.htm

This site has a pretty good timeline with an explanation

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERnazi.htm

That factual scenario is not present in today's world

I get that Bush is a jerk and has been abominable to human rights as we acknowledge such today. We are not putting people in concentration camps solely because they are Jewish or gay. I get that we have the detainees Gitmo and are denying probably less than 100 other people,citizens rights to a lawyer, etc., but that is a far cry from putting people in a death camp for no reason and for the specific purpose of killing them. At least we do it under the guise of they are a threat to us, which many have turned out to be Before everyone jumps on me, let me emphasize that I am not in any way defending the use of these two things, I am just noting that while they are horrid and think we should not have them, they are far from what Hitler and he Nazi's did, which was to the tune of human skin lampshades, ovens to burn the thousands of corpses of the Jews and gays in the camps, vats of acid to do the same, biological testing on live humans which I will no go into detail about, etc. So, in the end, Bush and his cronies (which interestingly include most Democrats in the end - see the voting to the war in Iraq, DOMA, prior Iraq invasions, Oil for Food, etc. ) are really, really bad, but not letting gay people have the same rights automatically given to traditionally married people (which is a bad thing) - is hardly putting them in a camp and gassing them Thus, while it is somewhat darkly funny to call W "Hitler" sort of like one might refer to their severe teacher in college, the reasoning behind any tue comparison is specious and unsupported by the facts.

Again and in an effort to stave off any misconception, I think W is perhaps the worst President in the history of this country, and that is saying a lot. I cannot stand him or his policies. I think he is an abomination to human rights and, despite his hiding behind The Bible, the most anti-Christian, as that term was defined by Jesus, President we have ever had because of his lack of compassion for the poor and meek - these are the least of us that Chirst so loved. I am just noting that Hitler was far, far worse.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by amber

Fascism tends to rise during severe economic depression. That's one factor.

Well, in Germany, it rose under the guise of Socialism and their economy (due to the end of WWI) was far far worse than the US economy. I am not saying the US economy did not stall in the last five or so years, I am just noting that it hardly rose to the level of post WWI Germany, to wit:

The Treaty of Versailles blamed Germany for the First World War. As a result of this Germany was also held accountable for the cost of the war and the Treaty dictated that compensation would have to be paid to the Allies. These payments, called reparations, would be paid monthly and would total some £6,600 million (This figure was agreed by the Allies in 1921). It is important not to take this figure in isolation though. remember that the economic might of Germany had been stretched to the limits during the war, and she would have to reconstruct her own economy at the same time as paying Reparations. In addition, Germany had lost some of her most precious sources of Raw materials as her colonies, and some of the areas ceded to other countries, were rich sources of income. These factors would make it harder for the German economy to cope. Further to this it is important to note the casualties suffered during the war. Germany lost some 1.7 million men during the war, and a further 4.2 million are listed as being wounded.

http://www.schoolshistory.org.uk/ASL...versailles.htm

another site:

http://www.schoolshistory.org.uk/ASL...icrecovery.htm

Anyway - food for thought

[GateandGarden]

I'm with you, Jason. It's awful but it's not nearly as awful as that situation was, and even by saying that I'm making a grand understatement. I do think there are parallels, though. I think that fear and the need for direction guided many people in our last election here as it did in Germany (though there was no free election when Hitler came to power). In the case of Germany, they were in need of someone to help their economic situation and they feared that their country was going to stay in its unfavorable and hated position without a leader like Hitler guiding them. There were many more complicated issues with Germany and the time period, I believe, but I think that fear and need for a clear direction came into play in this past election. We wanted someone who promised to prevent terrorism (however ridiculously ambitious that is) and we needed to feel safe, like the country could be like it was before 9/11. I imagine that came into play with voters, though I know well that it was a false sense of security.

[Sapphire Girl]

Originally Posted by dissention

I know, it's hard to fathom that we may have actually had a president with a measurable IQ.

George W. Bush has enough intelligence not to be a liberal Socialist. How about you? Do you have enough intelligence not to be a liberal Socialist? Yes or no?

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by Sapphire Girl

George W. Bush has enough intelligence not to be a liberal Socialist. How about you? Do you have enough intelligence not to be a liberal Socialist? Yes or no?

I really don't think that what political affiliation one chooses is a measure of intelligence at all.

[ShangriLaTroubl]

Originally Posted by GateandGarden

I really don't think that what political affiliation one chooses is a measure of intelligence at all.

I don't either...but we all know George W. Bush is not the brightest crayon in the box, right?

Chris

[Sapphire Girl]

Originally Posted by macfanken

I could never understand how the Nazis gained power in Germany... now I see how it could happen. We're living in scary times.

Interesting how people always bring up the Nazis but always ignore the Communist regimes. Why is that when over 20 million people died under Stalin?

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Sapphire Girl

George W. Bush has enough intelligence not to be a liberal Socialist. How about you? Do you have enough intelligence not to be a liberal Socialist? Yes or no?

Obviously not, since I am a "liberal Socialist."

A big one.

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by ShangriLaTroubl

I don't either...but we all know George W. Bush is not the brightest crayon in the box, right?

Chris

Well, I can't argue with that. But I certainly don't think that's becuase he's a Republican. I'm sure he was born stupid.

[ShangriLaTroubl]

Originally Posted by GateandGarden

Well, I can't argue with that. But I certainly don't think that's becuase he's a Republican. I'm sure he was born stupid.

Yes I'm sure he got his stupidity from Daddy...anyway

While I dont consider myself a socialist on most fronts..I think Bushie could benefit atleast some if he gained some intelligent from a smart liberal socialist like Dissention!

Chris

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by Sapphire Girl

Interesting how people always bring up the Nazis but always ignore the Communist regimes. Why is that when over 20 million people died under Stalin?

People don't "always" ignore them. They are equally evil and destructive, IMO. Some people always ignore them. But then you're probably referring to a couple of people on this message board, which is hardly a measure of anything.


Trujillo and Castro were/are equally damaging in my opinion.

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by Lux

It would have come as a shock to the Germans and it will come as a shock to many Americans but there's no doubt that it's not a conspiracy, in the future the world will know and learn about the current America in very damning light.

You think our country is currently involved in something equally as shameful as Nazi-Germany was?

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by Lux

Peope don't bring up Stalin?? Where have you been? Until terrorism took the throne all we heard about was those bastard commies.

That's a good point. I'm not arguing with the assertion that Communism is a destructive form of government but we did spend years and years obsessing over it and calling anyone who we deemed strange in any way a Communist. That's pretty hard to forget, I'm thinking.

[sparky]

Read the Kitty Kelley book, The Family. The way they have married to attain political power, and allied themselves with wealth to finance campaigns..it is compelling information. It's been genius, actually. They got what they wanted. I think the ultimate outcome is wretched for the country, but it is a hell of a story.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by ShangriLaTroubl

Yes I'm sure he got his stupidity from Daddy...anyway

Nah, his daddy is a smart man. A total tool, but a smart cookie. He, after all, isn't the one who proclaimed kethup a vegetable, nor did he say that trees are pollution. Shrub Jr. was just deprived of oxygen when he passed through that holy place Mama Babs calls her birth canal and it has affected him ever since.

"Is our children learning?"

Originally Posted by ShangriLaTroubl

While I dont consider myself a socialist on most fronts..I think Bushie could benefit atleast some if he gained some intelligent from a smart liberal socialist like Dissention!

Aww, thank you. But Bush trying to develop intelligence is akin to a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest.