This is how tax cuts really work

Supracentral

Active Member
Mar 30, 2005
10,542
10
36
D34DC311 said:
People can be content with the system, yet be pissed at the people who point fingers saying "he gets taxed less". dont point fingers, you have money and you have the lobbiest, FIX IT, something must be working up there at the top, cause all those big CEO's that are making massive amounts of money havent really stepped foward and said "uhh, we dont like this system" cause it would have been changed by now.
Yes I read it, and I agree with it totally, but what I am saying right now applies to the current tax system we have, I think it sucks too, so its not just the rich who "lose" money. The is more middle men then there are rich and poor. We are paying too.

The fair tax cannot be passed by any one group alone. That's my entire point. Write your congressmen, let them know you want to see this legislation go through. Let's end this stupid class warfare bullshit that he D.C. elite thrive on.

D34DC311 said:
for some reason, i get the feeling you are falling in the catagroy of upper middle class.

Like I said, the government categorizes me as wealthy, I don't think I am. You might be suprised (and a little embarrased) when you find out what people the government (and the press) like to lump in to the evil group they call "rich".

D34DC311 said:
I hope i have explained my stance on this better, I agree with you on all of this, but saying "I get taxed more" and then pointing fingers at me, doesnt do jackshit. I'm not pointing fingers at you and saying HE MAKES MORE, im saying stop complaining about it, it sucks on both sides of the fence. even if it is only a 25% lose, it still hurts LIKE a 70 or 80% lose.

I guess my point is you are equally responsible to change this system that hurts all of us.

For example, if every single man, woman and child in the state of Georgia started on January 1st 2006 and worked 8 hour days, 5 days a week doing NOTHING but preparing the nations tax return forms, on December 31st at midnight they wouldn't be finished.

Isn't that insane? Can you imagine how much money it takes this country every year just to comply with this goofy tax code? A study by the Government Accountability Office estimated that the federal tax system imposed efficiency costs on the U.S. economy of two to five percent of GDP. Under the FairTax, within ten years average Americans will be at least 10 percent and probably 15 percent better off than they would be under the current system. That translates to an increase of $3,000 to $4,500 per household, per year. There's some direct help for your "middle guy".

http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/ <- go here

There's a lot on that site. It will let you know what you need to do to get this mess changed. It's going to take a lot of people making a lot of noise to get this legislation passed.
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
Sep 9, 2005
8,898
40
48
U.S.
www.ebay.com
POINT IS. the rich dont need to be fuckin complaining, you make money you still have a shit load left. yes you may have worked for it, but you still have to pay taxes on it, more money MORE TAXES.
understand?
If you were paying a million a year in taxes, regardless of how much you make, you would be complaining too.

But most "rich" don't complain. I do. I work for a "rich guy", not a "poor guy". The less he makes, the less he pays me. It is the most simple formula. AKA, supply side economics, Reagonmics, captilism, you can even call it "trickle down" to imply something else. When in fact, the left wants the true "trickle down". They want to collect all revenue and redistribute it as they see fit. That is called socialism.Socialism was finely honed by Karl Marx, Adolph Hitler, FDR, and Jimmy Carter. They can all burn in hell with al Zarqawi.

edit:
stupid class warfare bullshit that he D.C. elite thrive on.
Practiced by demoncrats and republicans. Vote conservative first. Those links provided usually tell you who in Congress votes for high taxes, and those that vote for low taxes.
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
Sep 9, 2005
8,898
40
48
U.S.
www.ebay.com
Which reminds me, incase the deomcrats on the board think Hitler is right wing....

Adolph Hitler said:
"Of what importance is all that, if I range men firmly within a discipline they cannot escape? Let them own land or factories as much as they please. The decisive factor is that the State, through the Party, is supreme over them regardless of whether they are owners or workers. All that is unessential; our socialism goes far deeper. It establishes a relationship of the individual to the State, the national community. Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings."
Quoted in Hermann Rauschning, Hitler Speaks, London, T. Butterworth, 1940

and...
Hitler said:
"There is more that binds us to Bolshevism than separates us from it. There is, above all, genuine, revolutionary feeling, which is alive everywhere in Russia except where there are Jewish Marxists. I have always made allowance for this circumstance, and given orders that former Communists are to be admitted to the party at once. The petit bourgeois Social-Democrat and the trade-union boss will never make a National Socialist, but the Communists always will."

and his party platform...

  1. All citizens of the State shall be equal as regards rights and duties.
  2. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. The activities of the individual may not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good.
  3. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.
  4. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in life and property, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as a crime against the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits whether in assets or material
  5. We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels.
  6. We demand that all the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.
  7. We demand extensive development of provision for old age.
  8. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle-class, the immediate communalization of department stores which will be rented cheaply to small businessmen, and that preference shall be given to small businessmen for provision of supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.
  9. We demand a land reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to confiscate from the owners without compensation any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

February 25th., 1920, Adolph Hitler, Democrat

High taxes and big socialist governement are unbiblical and wrong.
 

Greg55_99

New Member
Apr 2, 2005
55
0
0
MA
Nick M said:
[*]Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in life and property, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as a crime against the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits whether in assets or material

[*]We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels.

[*]We demand that all the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.

Uh huh....

Halliburton sees earnings doubling in coming years
Thu Jun 8, 2006 10:35am ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Energy services company Halliburton Co. (HAL.N: Quote, Profile, Research) expects net income and earnings per share to double over the next three to five years, Chief Financial Officer Cris Gaut said on Thursday.

In a presentation to investors, Gaut also forecast revenue growth for the energy services group of the company of 20 percent per year or more over the next three to five years.

Once it spins off an interest in its engineering and construction arm KBR, Halliburton will be more of a pure-play energy services company.

Gaut said the company would use the proceeds from the initial public offering of a KBR stake to help fund its acquisition strategy.

The company will spend $1 billion to $2 billion a year on deals, Gaut said, to add technology, expand its geographic reach and make better use of its distribution network.

"It's an additive strategy, not a transformative strategy," Gaut said at the investor and analyst day, monitored via Web cast.

Earlier in the day, Chairman and Chief Executive Dave Lesar said the company had completed a turnaround, after years of being battered by asbestos liabilities and other issues.

"We are leaner, meaner, tougher and more focused than we've ever been," said Lesar, who succeeded Vice President Dick Cheney as CEO. "We've got the best set of management we've ever had in this company."

Army has to turn over Halliburton docs
WASHINGTON, June 7 (UPI)
-- A U.S. district court judge has ordered the Army to release 14 documents, including six emails, dealing with the Halliburton oil contract in Iraq.

U.S. District Court Judge Ricardo M. Urbina also ordered the Army to give to the court an additional six documents for the court to review to make a further determination.

At issue is a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch, an anti-corruption public interest group. Judicial Watch believes the award of a multi-billion contract to Halliburton subsidiary KBR for the restoration of Iraq's oil fields may have been unduly influenced by Vice President Dick Cheney, who headed Halliburton for five years prior to joining President George. W. Bush's campaign.

The documents amount to 100 pages, according to Judicial Watch.

Three years ago Judicial Watch obtained and released an e-mail between the Army Corps of Engineers and another party that referenced the fact that the deal -- awarded in secret, without any competition, two weeks before the invasion of Iraq -- had been coordinated with the vice president's office.

The Army fought Judicial Watch's FOIA lawsuit, but failed to provide enough information to the court for it to make its decision. Therefore, the judge had to review the documents in person to determine whether they were exempt from FOIA requirements. Urbina was not happy.

"The court undertook an onerous in camera review of the defendant's documents in large part because of the defendant's failure to provide an accurate Vaughn index" listing the contents and relevance of each document.

Um... Dick Cheney.... Republican...

Greg
 

Supracentral

Active Member
Mar 30, 2005
10,542
10
36
As I said in this post "Why vote for people who you know in your heart are dishonest and do not care what happens to you. You get the government you vote for. Why vote for one you know in your heart is going to screw you?"

A vote for a democrat or a republican is a vote against yourself.
 

Greg55_99

New Member
Apr 2, 2005
55
0
0
MA
And this is for those on this board (Nick) that somehow think the Nazi's were Left Wing Democratic Liberals:

From an interview by Gustave Gilbert with Hermann Goering, Nazi, 1946

Later in the conversation, Gilbert recorded Goering's observations that the common people can always be manipulated into supporting and fighting wars by their political leaders:

We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.

"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."


Greg
 

figgie

Supramania Contributor
Mar 30, 2005
5,225
16
38
50
Twin Cities, Minnesot-ah
D34DC311 said:
LOL, its still horseshit,
the poor dont pay
and the wealth dont pay,
who pays the middle man.
Its been proven time and time again, and example like this is basic math, but basic math isnt applied to lobbiest, and people who use food stamps, and get away with living with no job and being lazy.
point being, it looks good on paper, and makes since on paper, buts its not as true as you might think.
Liberial or not, republican or not, democrate or not, this is BS, nice example tho.

the rich don't pay

dude they are the reason we have a higly profitable IRS!!

By rich I am including coorporations as they are also classified as ENTITIES to the IRS. As that example showed. Juts because the bottom folks are getting a cut doesn't mean anything

do the math

38% of 1,000,000 = x

let take someone that makes 100,000,000 a year.

taxed at the highest tax bracket

that is

$100,000,000 x .38 = $3,800,000 of taxes that he is liable for. This of course go down with donations, tax breaks etc but shit. You could put 10000 middle income together and still not equal ONE of these rich folks tax.
 

Supracentral

Active Member
Mar 30, 2005
10,542
10
36
MDCmotorsports said:
Mike, correct me if Im wrong, but before WWII the IRS didn't exist.

If so, why can't we go back to the same system?

That's partially true. Prior to WWII taxes were paid annually in January each year. Withholding did not exist. Tax Withholding came about to solve the cash requirements of WWII. They couldn't afford to wait until the first of the year. The Federal government was so blown away by the amounts the pulled in via withholding that withholding continued after WWII.

Tax filing was moved to April 15th. Medicare and other withholding taxes were added later.

I doubt that most of you would accept your tax bill if you wrote a check once a year.

At one time all interest paid on those funds was deducted as an expense. As it should be, because one person's interest is another's income which is taxed.

Today, only mortgage interest is allowed as a deduction.Which in effect results in double taxation on any other interest not allowed as a deduction.

The current 17,000 plus pages of the Tax Code are filled with all sort of schemes designed to confuse the average citizen.

The old system was flawed, the new system is even more flawed. We need to rip this weed out by the roots and plant something new.

One of the beautiful things about a consumption tax is that it gets government 100% out of knowing how you make your money. This may sound like a trivial point, but it's a big step towards the return of true liberty. It also taxes those with illegal income. And guest workers. And illegal aliens. And thieves. When you spend money, it's taxed. Nobody needs to know where it came from.

Edit (Addded commentary): One of the things that disgusts and infuriates me is this. As people "Hey, how much did you pay in taxes this year?" Most of the time people will say "I didn't, I got money back!" - The look at the refund as a windfall, and don't realize that the "tax return" is paltry compared to the money that was already taken from thier pay. They may have gotten a $3000 return, but they paid out $25,000

So to answer your question, a return to the original system would cause a revolt. Something that nobody wants. The Fair Tax would allow for change and prevent the ugly things that would happen if we attempted to return to the old system.
 

figgie

Supramania Contributor
Mar 30, 2005
5,225
16
38
50
Twin Cities, Minnesot-ah
btw don't get me wrong I am all for flat tax or sales tax only but to think that the rich don't pay is absurd. What they do get is more breaks because they got the $ to go for it (chartiable controbutions which bring down your tax liability by a considerable amount.)
 

Supracentral

Active Member
Mar 30, 2005
10,542
10
36
figgie said:
btw don't get me wrong I am all for flat tax or sales tax only but to think that the rich don't pay is absurd. What they do get is more breaks because they got the $ to go for it (chartiable controbutions which bring down your tax liability by a considerable amount.)

Mortgage intrest deduction is usually the biggest one. However you shouldn't be paying tax on ANY interest (car loans, credit cards, personal loans, etc..) Someone else is paying tax on that already...

The entire system is "rigged" to tax the same money over and over again.

Government will always spend every dime you let them. The current system has allowed them to collect a lot of dimes. Since they don't have to ask you for the money, they don't worry much about how they spend it....
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
Sep 9, 2005
8,898
40
48
U.S.
www.ebay.com
And this is for those on this board (Nick) that somehow think the Nazi's were Left Wing Democratic Liberals

That is right, don't refute the information, but redirect and use non analogous refrencese to change the subject. I offer up a bunch of policy showing that national socialism isnt any different than socialism and you quote people talking about politicians. Nice. That proved a lot..:nono:

Governement policy determines your political position, not a dislike for an ethnic group. I don't hold mondern Democrats responsible for having slaves in the US either. Nice try though. Well not really.


A U.S. district court judge has ordered the Army to release 14 documents, including six emails, dealing with the Halliburton oil contract in Iraq.

U.S. District Court Judge Ricardo M. Urbina also ordered the Army to give to the court an additional six documents for the court to review to make a further determination.
A left wing judge trying to embarass the administration, what is your point? LBJ's wife's family getting a multi billion dollar contract to make sand bags in Viet Nam? Nothing really new under the sun there. Only problem is Cheney had to resign and can not recieve revenue from the LOGCAP contract. All bonuses were from previous years contracts awarded by Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton=Democrat. Nice try again. Well not really.
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
Sep 9, 2005
8,898
40
48
U.S.
www.ebay.com
Government will always spend every dime you let them.
Yes they will. Just like social security. FDR's plan and successful one at that to socialize a large chunk of the American economy.

Oh yeah, about every penny. Social security (FICA) on your check goes to the general fund. And it paid from the general fund. There is no "lock box", never was, and never was meant to be. Current payers are paying the benificiaries now.
 

tte

Breaking In - in progress
Mar 30, 2005
940
0
0
Northern California
I agree with Supra Central...Although I am not wealthy, I agree. I hear so many poor people complain about the rich. The rich have gotten there because of hard work and the right choices in life.
The rich esp those who have companies are able to make use of those tax breaks and so on. why?...They took the risk to start thier own business and worked hard to earn that money. So many people now do not want to work hard or have patience to be successful.They just complain and complain about rich people. They buy stuff they cannot afford and have alot of children and then complain.

I have a few wealthy friends who make millions/year and pay about 1 mil in taxes. They pay it..I admire them for working so hard
and being able to support thier families and have a good life and also pay taxes...nobody is stopping the poor from becoming successful.

Cheers,
Roy
 
Last edited:

Greg55_99

New Member
Apr 2, 2005
55
0
0
MA
Nick M said:
Which reminds me, incase the deomcrats on the board think Hitler is right wing....

Quoted in Hermann Rauschning, Hitler Speaks, London, T. Butterworth, 1940

and...


and his party platform...

  1. All citizens of the State shall be equal as regards rights and duties.
  2. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. The activities of the individual may not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good.
  3. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.
  4. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in life and property, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as a crime against the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits whether in assets or material
  5. We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels.
  6. We demand that all the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.
  7. We demand extensive development of provision for old age.
  8. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle-class, the immediate communalization of department stores which will be rented cheaply to small businessmen, and that preference shall be given to small businessmen for provision of supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.
  9. We demand a land reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to confiscate from the owners without compensation any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

February 25th., 1920, Adolph Hitler, Democrat

High taxes and big socialist governement are unbiblical and wrong.

This is an absolute example how one can cut and paste parts of text to try to prove a point while ignoring the larger context in what actually happened. Germany in 1920 was a defeated country with her citizens poor and unemployed. Inflation was so rampant the value of the Mark was nearly worthless. There is a famous photo of a person with a basket full of German paper currency trying to buy something menial. Germany also owed reparations to the nations she had been defeated by. Instead of me telling you the history of Germany, why don't you read it for yourself.

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/region/germany/turm2023.html

Nontheless, the platform that Adolf Hitler espoused in 1920 was a far cry from the butcher he had become by 1940.

Also, the party platform list you've posted is INNACURATE. Possibly on purpose to try to prove your point. The ACTUAL 1920 National Socialist German Workers Party party platform is here:

http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/appendix_a.htm

Quite a bit different isn't it?

Perhaps you should do more research before you try to link the Democratic politiacal party with Nazi's... "Cherry Picking" pieces of information while leaving out other parts to prove your point is quite.... "Bush-like"....

Greg
 
Last edited:

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
Sep 9, 2005
8,898
40
48
U.S.
www.ebay.com
Greg55_99 said:
This is an absolute example how one can cut and paste parts of text to try to prove a point while ignoring the larger context in what actually happened. Germany in 1920 was a defeated country with her citizens poor and unemployed. Inflation was so rampant the value of the Mark was nearly worthless. There is a famous photo of a person with a basket full of German paper currency trying to buy something menial. Germany also owed reparations to the nations she had been defeated by. Instead of me telling you the history of Germany, why don't you read it for yourself.
Read what? That Germany was economically in ruins? So was most of the world.

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/region/germany/turm2023.html

Nontheless, the platform that Adolf Hitler espoused in 1920 was a far cry from the butcher he had become by 1940.
Being a butcher has nothing to do with where you stand on the political spectrum. But it is the left that tries to do those things. And the left calls their champion right wing becuase of the autrocities he committed and are embarrassed. And if American Jews and minorities fall for it, then the left can get more votes.

Also, the party platform list you've posted is INNACURATE. Possibly on purpose to try to prove your point. The ACTUAL 1920 National Socialist German Workers Party party platform is here:
Thanks for putting the rest of the nails in the coffin. Those are mostly left wing ideas.

more from adolphs page that you linked said:
that all editors of newspapers and their assistants, employing the German language, must be members of the nation;
that special permission from the State shall be necessary before non-German newspapers may appear. These are not necessarily printed in the German language;
http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/appendix_a.htm


I provide a very brief and undeniable evidence of left wing ideoligies from Hitler, and you post up links. Nice.

Perhaps you should do more research before you try to link the Democratic politiacal party with Nazi's... "Cherry Picking" pieces of information while leaving out other parts to prove your point is quite.... "Bush-like"....

Greg
You can't have it both ways. The DNC constantly calls the right wing nazi's and specifically Bush, who is right wing but not a hard conservative. And when you get called on it, you cry foul.:3d_frown:

Karl Marx said:
"Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew -- not the Sabbath Jew, as Bauer does, but the everyday Jew. Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Jewry, would be the self-emancipation of our time.... We recognize in Jewry, therefore, a general present-time-oriented anti-social element, an element which through historical development -- to which in this harmful respect the Jews have zealously contributed -- has been brought to its present high level, at which it must necessarily dissolve itself. In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Jewry".
Sounds a bitl like Hitler doesn't it? It is his good budy and inspiration Karl Marx.

I can post links too.

http://www.mises.org/story/1484

The Socialist Calumny Against the Jews
by Ludwig von Mises
[Posted on Wednesday, March 31, 2004]
[Subscribe at email services and tell others]


[Written in 1944]

Nazism wants to combat the Jewish mind. But it has not suc*ceeded so far in defining its characteristic features. The Jewish mind is no less mythical than the Jewish race.

The earlier German nationalists tried to oppose to the Jewish mind the "Christian-Teutonic" world-view. The combination of Christian and Teutonic is, however, untenable. No exegetical tricks can justify a German claim to a preferred position within the realm of Christianity. The Gospels do not mention the Germans. They consider all men equal under God. He who is anxious to discrimi*nate not only against Jews but against the Christian descendants of Jews has no use for the Gospels. Consistent anti-Semites must reject Christianity.

We do not need to decide here whether or not Christianity itself can be called Jewish. At any rate Christianity developed out of the Jewish creed. It recognizes the Ten Commandments as eternal law and the Old Testament as Holy Writ. The Apostles and the members of the primitive community were Jews. It could be objected that Christ did not agree in his teachings with the rabbis. But the facts remain that God sent the Saviour to the Jews and not to the Vandals, and that the Holy Spirit inspired books in Hebrew and in Greek but not in German. If the Nazis were pre*pared to take their racial myths seriously and to see in them more than oratory for their party meetings, they would have to eradicate Christianity with the same brutality they use against liberalism and pacifism. They failed to embark upon such an enterprise, not because they regarded it as hopeless, but because their politics had nothing at all to do with racism.


Both Russia and Germany are right in calling their systems socialist.

It is strange indeed in a country in which the authorities officially outrage Jews and Judaism in filthy terms, which has outlawed the Jews on account of their Judaism, and in which mathematical theorems, physical hypotheses, and therapeutical procedures are boycotted, if their authors are suspected of being "non-Aryans," that priests continue in many thousands of churches of various creeds to praise the Ten Commandments, revealed to the Jew Moses, as the foundation of moral law. It is strange that in a country in which no word of a Jewish author must be printed or read, the Psalms and their German translations, adaptations, and imitations are sung. It is strange that the German armies, which exult in Eastern Europe in cowardly slaughtering thousands of defenseless Jewish women and children, are accompanied by army chaplains with Bibles in their hands. But the Third Reich is full of such con*tradictions.
Of course, the Nazis do not comply with the moral teachings of the Gospels. Neither do any other conquerors and warriors. Chris*tianity is no more allowed to become an obstacle in the way of Nazi politics than it was in the way of other aggressors.

Nazism not only fails explicitly to reject Christianity; it solemnly declares itself a Christian party. The twenty&#8209;fourth point of the "unalterable Party Program" proclaims that the party stands for positive Christianity, without linking itself with one of the various Christian churches and denominations. The term "positive" in this connection means neutrality in respect to the antagonisms between the various churches and sects.

Many Nazi writers, it is true, take pleasure in denouncing and deriding Christianity and in drafting plans for the establishment of a new German religion. The Nazi party as such, however, does not combat Christianity but the Christian churches as autonomous establishments and independent agencies. Its totalitarianism cannot tolerate the existence of any institution not completely subject to the Führer's sovereignty. No German is granted the privilege of defying an order issued by the state by referring to an inde*pendent authority. The separation of church and state is contrary to the principles of totalitarianism. Nazism must consequently aim at a return to the conditions prevailing in the German Lutheran churches and likewise in the Prussian Union Church before the Constitution of Weimar. Then the civil authority was supreme in the church too. The ruler of the country was the supreme bishop of the Lutheran Church of his territory. His was the jus circa sacra.

The conflict with the Catholic Church is of a similar character. The Nazis will not tolerate any link between German citizens and foreigners or foreign institutions. They dissolved even the German Rotary Clubs because they were tied up with the Rotary Inter*national, whose headquarters are located in Chicago. A German citizen owes allegiance to his Führer and nation only; any kind of internationalism is an evil. Hitler could tolerate Catholicism only if the Pope were a resident of Germany and a subordinate of the party machine.

Except for Christianity, the Nazis reject as Jewish everything which stems from Jewish authors. This condemnation includes the writings of those Jews who, like Stahl, Lassalle, Gumplowicz, and Rathenau, have contributed many essential ideas to the system of Nazism. But the Jewish mind is, as the Nazis say, not limited to the Jews and their offspring only. Many "Aryans" have been im*bued with Jewish mentality&#8212;for instance the poet, writer, and critic Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, the socialist Frederick Engels, the composer Johannes Brahms, the writer Thomas Mann, and the theologian Karl Barth. They too are damned. Then there are whole schools of thought, art, and literature rejected as Jewish. Inter*nationalism and pacifism are Jewish, but so is warmongering. So are liberalism and capitalism, as well as the "spurious" socialism of the Marxians and of the Bolsheviks. The epithets Jewish and West*ern are applied to the philosophies of Descartes and Hume, to positivism, materialism and empiro-criticism, to the economic the*ories both of the classics and of modern subjectivism. Atonal music, the Italian opera style, the operetta and the paintings of impres*sionism are also Jewish. In short, Jewish is what any Nazi dislikes. If one put together everything that various Nazis have stigmatized as Jewish, one would get the impression that our whole civilization has been the achievement only of Jews.


Hitler could tolerate Catholicism only if the Pope were a resident of Germany and a subordinate of the party machine.

On the other hand, many champions of German racism have tried to demonstrate that all the eminent men of non&#8209;German nations were Aryan Nordics of German extraction. The ex&#8209;Marxian Woltmann, for example, has discovered features of Germanism in Petrarch, Dante, Ariosto, Raphael, and Michelangelo, who have their genius as an inheritance from their Teutonic ancestors. Woltmann is fully convinced that he has proved that "the entire European civilization, even in the Slavonic and Latin countries, is an achieve*ment of the German race."

It would be a waste of time to dwell upon such statements. It is enough to remark that the various representatives of German racism contradict one another both in establishing the racial charac*teristics of the noble race and in the racial classification of the same individuals. Very often they contradict even what they themselves have said elsewhere. The myth of the master race has been elabo*rated carelessly indeed.

All Nazi champions insist again and again that Marxism and Bolshevism are the quintessence of the Jewish mind, and that it is the great historic mission of Nazism to root out this pest. It is true that this attitude did not prevent the German nationalists either from coöperating with the German communists in under*mining the Weimar Republic, or from training their black guards in Russian artillery and aviation camps in the years 1923&#8211;1933, or&#8212;in the period from August, 1939, until June, 1941&#8212;from entering into a close political and military complicity with Soviet Russia. Nevertheless, public opinion supports the view that Nazism and Bolshevism are philosophies&#8212;Weltanschauungen implacably opposed to each other. Actually there have been in these last years all over the world two main political parties: the anti-Fascists, i.e., the friends of Russia (communists, fellow travelers, self-styled liberals and progressives), and the anticommunists, i.e., the friends of Germany (parties of shirts of different colors, not very accurately called "Fascists" by their adversaries). There have been few genuine liberals and democrats in these years. Most of those who have called themselves such have been ready to support what are really totali*tarian measures, and many have enthusiastically praised the Russian methods of dictatorship.

The mere fact that these two groups are fighting each other does not necessarily prove that they differ in their philosophies and first principles. There have always been wars between people who adhered to the same creeds and philosophies. The parties of the Left and of the Right are in conflict because they both aim at supreme power. Charles V used to say: "I and my cousin, the King of France, are in perfect agreement; we are fighting each other because we both aim at the same end: Milan." Hitler and Stalin aim at the same end; they both want to rule in the Baltic States, in Poland, and in the Ukraine.

The Marxians are not prepared to admit that the Nazis are socialists too. In their eyes Nazism is the worst of all evils of capital*ism. On the other hand, the Nazis describe the Russian system as the meanest of all types of capitalist exploitation and as a devilish machination of World Jewry for the domination of the gentiles. Yet it is clear that both systems, the German and the Russian, must be considered from an economic point of view as socialist. And it is only the economic point of view that matters in debating whether or not a party or system is socialist. Socialism is and has always been considered a system of economic organization of society. It is the system under which the government has full control of production and distribution. As far as socialism existing merely within indi*vidual countries can be called genuine, both Russia and Germany are right in calling their systems socialist.


In a free market, the consumer is free to discriminate, provided that he is ready to pay the cost.

Whether the Nazis and the Bolsheviks are right in styling them*selves workers' parties is another question. The Communist Mani*festo says, "The proletarian movement is the self-conscious inde*pendent movement of the immense majority," and it is in this sense that old Marxians used to define a workers' party. The proletarians, they explained, are the immense majority of the nation; they themselves, not a benevolent government or a well-intentioned minority, seize power and establish socialism. But the Bolsheviks have abandoned this scheme. A small minority proclaims itself the vanguard of the proletariat, seizes the dictatorship, forcibly dissolves the Parliament elected by universal franchise, and rules by its own right and might. Of course, this ruling minority claims that what it does serves best the interests of the many and indeed of the whole of society, but this has always been the pretension of oligarchic rulers.
The Bolshevists set the precedent. The success of the Lenin clique encouraged the Mussolini gang and the Hitler troops. Both Italian Fascism and German Nazism adopted the political methods of Soviet Russia. The only difference between Nazism and Bolshevism is that the Nazis got a much bigger minority in the elections preceding their coup d'état than the Bolsheviks got in the Russian elections in the fall of 1917.

The Nazis have not only imitated the Bolshevist tactics of seizing power. They have copied much more. They have imported from Russia the one-party system and the privileged role of this party and its members in public life; the paramount position of the secret police; the organization of affiliated parties abroad which are employed in fighting their domestic governments and in sabotage and espionage, assisted by public funds and the protection of the diplomatic and consular service; the administrative execution and imprisonment of political adversaries; concentration camps; the punishment inflicted on the families of exiles; the methods of propaganda. They have borrowed from the Marxians even such absurdities as the mode of address, party comrade (Parteigenosse), derived from the Marxian comrade (Genosse), and the use of a military terminology for all items of civil and economic life. The question is not in which respects both systems are alike but in which they differ.

It has already been shown wherein the socialist patterns of Russia and Germany differ. These differences are not due to any disparity in basic philosophical views; they are the necessary con*sequence of the differences in the economic conditions of the two countries. The Russian pattern was inapplicable in Germany, whose population cannot live in a state of self-sufficiency. The German pattern seems very inefficient when compared with the incompa*rably more efficient capitalist system, but it is far more efficient than the Russian method. The Russians live at a very low economic level notwithstanding the inexhaustible richness of their natural resources.

There is inequality of incomes and of standards of living in both countries. It would be futile to try to determine whether the difference in the living standards of party comrade Goering and the average party comrade is greater or smaller than that in the standards of comrade Stalin and his comrades. The characteristic feature of socialism is not equality of income but the all&#8209;round control of business activities by the government, the government's exclusive power to use all means of production.

The Nazis do not reject Marxism because it aims at socialism but because, as they say, it advocates internationalism. Marx's internationalism was nothing but the acceptance of eighteenth-century ideas on the root causes of war: princes are eager to fight each other because they want aggrandizement through conquest, while free nations do not covet their neighbors' land. But it never occurred to Marx that this propensity to peace depends upon the existence of an unhampered market society. Neither Marx nor his school was ever able to grasp the meaning of international conflicts within a world of etatism and socialism. They contented themselves with the assertion that in the Promised Land of socialism there would no longer be any conflicts at all.


There are those who try to justify anti-Semitism by denouncing the Jews as capitalists and champions of laissez-faire.

We have already seen what a questionable role the problem of the maintenance of peace played in the Second International. For Soviet Russia the Third International has been merely a tool in its unflagging warfare against all foreign governments. The Soviets are as eager for conquest as any conqueror of the past. They did not yield an inch of the previous conquests of the Czars except where they were forced to do so. They have used every opportunity to expand their empire. Of course they no longer use the old Czarist pretexts for conquest; they have developed a new ter*minology for this purpose. But this does not render the lot of the subdued any easier.
What the Nazis really have in mind when indicting the Jewish mind for internationalism is the liberal theory of free trade and the mutual advantages of international division of labor. The Jews, they say, want to corrupt the innate Aryan spirit of heroism by the fallacious doctrines of the advantages of peace. One could hardly overrate in a more inaccurate way the contribution of Jews to modern civilization. Peaceful coöperation between nations is cer*tainly more than an outcome of Jewish machinations. Liberalism and democracy, capitalism and international trade are not Jewish inventions.


Finally, the Nazis call the business mentality Jewish. Tacitus informs us that the German tribes of his day considered it clumsy and shameful to acquire with sweat what could be won by blood*shed. This is also the first moral principle of the Nazis. They despise individuals and nations eager to profit by serving other people; in their eyes robbery is the noblest way to make a living. Werner Sombart has contrasted two specimens of human being: the peddlers (Händler) and heroes (Helden). The Britons are peddlers, the Germans heroes. But more often the appellation peddlers is as*signed to the Jews.
The Nazis simply call everything that is contrary to their own doctrines and tenets Jewish and communist. When executing hostages in the occupied countries they always declare that they have punished Jews and communists. They call the President of the United States a Jew and a communist. He who is not prepared to surrender to them is by that token unmistakably a Jew. In the Nazi dictionary the terms Jew and communist are synonymous with non-Nazi.

Interventionism and Legal Discrimination against Jews

In the days before the ascendancy of liberalism the individuals professing a certain religious creed formed an order, a caste, of their own. The creed determined the membership in a group which assigned to each member privileges and disqualifications (privilegia odiosa.) In only a few countries has liberalism abolished this state of affairs. In many European countries, in which in any other respect freedom of conscience and of the practice of religion and equality of all citizens under the law are granted, matrimonial law and the register of births, marriages, and deaths remain separate for each religious group. Membership within a church or religious com*munity preserves a peculiar legal character. Every citizen is bound to belong to one of the religious groups, and he bestows this quality upon his children. The membership and procedure to be observed in cases of change of religious allegiance are regulated by public law. Special provisions are made for people who do not want to belong to any religious community. This state of things makes it possible to establish the religious allegiance of a man and of his ancestors with legal precision in the same unquestionable way in which kinship can be ascertained in inheritance cases.


Whoever dislikes the Jews may in such a world avoid patronizing Jewish shopkeepers, doctors, and lawyers. On the other hand, in a world of interventionism only a miracle can in the long run hinder legal discrimination against Jews.

The bearing of this fact can be elucidated by contrasting it with conditions concerning attachment to a linguistic group. Member*ship within a linguistic group never had a caste quality. It was and is a matter of fact but not a legal status. It is as a rule impossible to establish the linguistic group to which a man's dead ancestors belonged. The only exceptions are those ancestors who were eminent personalities, writers, or political leaders of linguistic groups. It is further for the most part impossible to establish whether or not a man changed his linguistic allegiance at some time in his past. He who speaks German and declares himself to be a German need seldom fear that his statement could be disproved by documentary evidence that his parents or he himself in the past were not German. Even a foreign accent need not betray him. In countries with a linguistically mixed population the accent and inflection of each group influence the other. Among the leaders of German nationalism in the eastern parts of Germany, and in Austria, Czechoslovakia, and the other eastern countries there were numerous men who spoke German with a sharp Slavonic, Hun*garian, or Italian accent, whose names sounded foreign, or who had only a short time before substituted German-sounding names for their native ones. There were even Nazi Storm Troopers whose still living parents understood no German. It happened often that brothers and sisters belonged to different linguistic groups. One could not attempt to discriminate legally against such neophytes, because it was impossible to determine the facts in a legally un*questionable way.
In an unhampered market society there is no legal discrimination against anybody. Everyone has the right to obtain the place within the social system in which he can successfully work and make a living. The consumer is free to discriminate, provided that he is ready to pay the cost. A Czech or a Pole may prefer to buy at higher cost in a shop owned by a Slav instead of buying cheaper and better in a shop owned by a German. An anti-Semite may forego being cured of an ugly disease by the employment of the "Jewish" drug Salvarsan and have recourse to a less efficacious remedy. In this arbitrary power consists what economists call consumer's sover*eignty.

Interventionism means compulsory discrimination, which fur*thers the interests of a minority of citizens at the expense of the majority. Nevertheless discrimination can be applied in a demo*cratic community too. Various minority groups form an alliance and thereby a majority group in order to obtain privileges for each. For instance, a country's wheat producers, cattle breeders, and wine growers form a farmers' party; they succeed in obtaining discrimination against foreign competitors and thus privileges for each of the three groups. The costs of the privilege granted to the wine growers burden the rest of the community&#8212;including the cattle breeders and wheat producers&#8212;and so on for each of the others.

Whoever sees the facts from this angle&#8212;and logically they can*not be viewed from any other&#8212;realizes that the arguments brought forward in favor of this so-called producer's policy are untenable. One minority group alone could not obtain any such privilege because the majority would not tolerate it. But if all minority groups or enough of them obtain a privilege, every group that did not get a more valuable privilege than the rest suffers. The political ascendancy of interventionism is due to the failure to recognize this obvious truth. People favor discrimination and privileges because they do not realize that they themselves are consumers and as such must foot the bill. In the case of protectionism, for example, they believe that only the foreigners against whom the import duties discriminate are hurt. It is true the foreigners are hurt, but not they alone: the consumers who must pay higher prices suffer with them.

Now wherever there are Jewish minorities&#8212;and in every country the Jews are only a minority&#8212;it is as easy to discriminate against them legally as against foreigners, because the quality of being a Jew can be established in a legally valid way. Discrimination against this helpless minority can be made to seem very plausible; it seems to further the interests of all non-Jews. People do not realize that it is certain to hurt the interests of the non-Jews as well. If Jews are barred from access to a medical career, the interests of non-Jewish doctors are favored, but the interests of the sick are hurt. Their freedom to choose the doctor whom they trust is restricted. Those who did not want to consult a Jewish doctor do not gain anything but those who wanted to do so are injured.

In most European countries it is technically feasible to discriminate legally against Jews and the offspring of Jews. It is furthermore politically feasible, because Jews are usually insignificant minorities whose votes do not count much in elections. And finally, it is considered economically sound in an age in which government interference for the protection of the less efficient producer against more efficient and cheaper competitors is regarded as a beneficial policy. The non-Jewish grocer asks, Why not protect me too? You protect the manufacturer and the farmer against the foreigners producing better and at lower cost; you protect the worker against the competition of immigrant labor; you should protect me against the competition of my neighbor, the Jewish grocer.

Discrimination need have nothing to do with hatred or repug*nance toward those against whom it is applied. The Swiss and Italians do not hate the Americans or Swedes; nevertheless, they discriminate against American and Swedish products. People always dislike competitors. But for the consumer the foreigners who supply him with commodities are not competitors but purveyors. The non-Jewish doctor may hate his Jewish competitor. But he asks for the exclusion of Jews from the medical profession precisely because many non-Jewish patients not only do not hate Jewish doctors but prefer them to many non-Jewish doctors and patronize them. The fact that the Nazi racial laws impose heavy penalties for sexual intercourse between Jews and "Aryans" does not indicate the existence of hatred between these two groups. It would be needless to keep people who hate each other from sexual relations. However, in an investigation devoted to the political problems of nationalism and Nazism we need not deal with the issues of sex pathology in*volved. To study the inferiority complexes and sexual perversity responsible for the Nuremberg racial laws and for the sadistic bestialities exhibited in killing and torturing Jews is the task of psychiatry.


The parties of the Left and of the Right are in conflict because they both aim at supreme power.

In a world in which people have grasped the meaning of a market society, and therefore advocate a consumer's policy, there is no legal discrimination against Jews. Whoever dislikes the Jews may in such a world avoid patronizing Jewish shopkeepers, doctors, and lawyers. On the other hand, in a world of interventionism only a miracle can in the long run hinder legal discrimination against Jews. The policy of protecting the less efficient domestic producer against the more efficient foreign producer, the artisan against the manufacturer, and the small shop against the department store and the chain stores would be incomplete if it did not protect the "Aryan" against the Jew.
Many decades of intensive anti-Semitic propaganda did not succeed in preventing German "Aryans" from buying in shops owned by Jews, from consulting Jewish doctors and lawyers, and from reading books by Jewish authors. They did not patronize the Jews unawares&#8212;"Aryan" competitors were careful to tell them again and again that these people were Jews. Whoever wanted to get rid of his Jewish competitors could not rely on an alleged hatred of Jews; he was under the necessity of asking for legal discrimina*tion against them.

Such discrimination is not the result of nationalism or of racism. It is basically&#8212;like nationalism&#8212;a result of interventionism and the policy of favoring the less efficient producer to the disadvantage of the consumer.

Nearly all writers dealing with the problem of anti-Semitism have tried to demonstrate that the Jews have in some way or other, through their behavior or attitudes, excited anti-Semitism. Even Jewish authors and non-Jewish opponents of anti-Semitism share this opinion; they too search for Jewish faults driving non-Jews toward anti-Semitism. But if the cause of anti-Semitism were really to be found in distinctive features of the Jews, these properties would have to be extraordinary virtues and merits which would qualify the Jews as the elite of mankind. If the Jews themselves are to blame for the fact that those whose ideal is perpetual war and bloodshed, who worship violence and are eager to destroy freedom, consider them the most dangerous opponents of their endeavors, it must be because the Jews are foremost among the champions of freedom, justice, and peaceful coöperation among nations. If the Jews have incurred the Nazis' hatred through their own conduct, it is no doubt because what was great and noble in the German nation, all the immortal achievements of Germany's past, were either accomplished by the Jews or congenial to the Jewish mind. As the parties seeking to destroy modern civilization and return to barbarism have put anti&#8209;Semitism at the top of their programs, this civilization is apparently a creation of the Jews. Nothing more flattering could be said of an individual or of a group than that the deadly foes of civilization have well-founded reasons to persecute them.

The truth is that while the Jews are the objects of anti&#8209;Semitism, their conduct and qualities did not play a decisive role in inciting and spreading its modern version. That they form everywhere a mi*nority which can be legally defined in a precise way makes it tempting, in an age of interventionism, to discriminate against them. Jews have, of course, contributed to the rise of modern civilization; but this civilization is neither completely nor predominantly their achievement. Peace and freedom, democracy and justice, reason and thought are not specifically Jewish. Many things, good and bad, happen on the earth without the participation of Jews. The anti-Semites grossly exaggerate when they see in the Jews the fore*most representatives of modern culture and make them alone responsible for the fact that the world has changed since the centuries of the barbarian invasions.

In the dark ages heathens, Christians, and Moslems persecuted the Jews on account of their religion. This motive has lost much of its strength and is still valid only for a comparatively few Catholics and Fundamentalists who make the Jews responsible for the spread of free thinking. And this too is a mistaken idea. Neither Hume nor Kant, neither Laplace nor Darwin were Jews. Higher criticism of the Bible was developed by Protestant theologians.The Jewish rabbis opposed it bitterly for many years.

Neither were liberalism, capitalism, or a market economy Jewish achievements. There are those who try to justify anti-Semitism by denouncing the Jews as capitalists and champions of laissez faire. Other anti-Semites&#8212;and often the same ones&#8212;blame the Jews for being communists. These contradictory charges cancel each other. But it is a fact that anticapitalist propaganda has contributed a good deal to the popularity of anti&#8209;Semitism. Simple minds do not grasp the meaning of the abstract terms capital and exploitation, capitalists and exploiters; they substitute for them the terms Jewry and Jews. However, even if the Jews were more unpopular with some people than is really the case, there would be no discrimina*tion against them if they were not a minority clearly distinguishable legally from other people.
You try to call Hitler right wing and provide no proof, such as wanting to cut taxes and reduce government control of business and you will face an internet beat down.
 

Greg55_99

New Member
Apr 2, 2005
55
0
0
MA
Nick M said:
Read what? That Germany was economically in ruins? So was most of the world.

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/region/germany/turm2023.html

Being a butcher has nothing to do with where you stand on the political spectrum. But it is the left that tries to do those things. And the left calls their champion right wing becuase of the autrocities he committed and are embarrassed. And if American Jews and minorities fall for it, then the left can get more votes.


Thanks for putting the rest of the nails in the coffin. Those are mostly left wing ideas.


http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/appendix_a.htm


I provide a very brief and undeniable evidence of left wing ideoligies from Hitler, and you post up links. Nice.

You can't have it both ways. The DNC constantly calls the right wing nazi's and specifically Bush, who is right wing but not a hard conservative. And when you get called on it, you cry foul.:3d_frown:


Sounds a bitl like Hitler doesn't it? It is his good budy and inspiration Karl Marx.

I can post links too.

http://www.mises.org/story/1484


You try to call Hitler right wing and provide no proof, such as wanting to cut taxes and reduce government control of business and you will face an internet beat down.

Actually, I didn't call Hitler a right winger. I called him a butcher. I'm also calling him a racist, an anti-semite, murderer, pervert and archetect of the deaths of millions of people. And lastly, I'm thankful I'm calling him dead.

The fact that you obvously hadn't seen the entire platform from the 1920 Socialist Party shows me something. I theorize that you're regurgitating those original 9 points because somebody sent them to you. You thought it was clever so you're sending it around while ignoring the other 16 points. I'm surprised you're using this hate filled document as a source for linking the Democratic Party with Hitler. LOL, I thought I'd heard it all. So, no, you haven't proven anything because you've ignored the parts of the document you don't think advances your theory. The document must be taken in total. The fact that you posted 9 points and did not post the complete document is telling in itself.

Late entry: I see now where you've been getting all of this. It's the work (opinion) of Dr. John J. Ray. http://jonjayray.tripod.com/hitler.html

Can't you come up with anything on your own?

Well, I think I can tell you something about yourself. You've probably never met a Nazi, have you? I mean a real live, goose stepping, Sieg Hiel Nazi. I'm not talking about the soup Nazi or the American home grown versions of Nazi's. I'm talking about a no-sh*t Nazi. I can tell you something about myself. I HAVE met Nazi's. Ex-Nazi's by the time I met them and old men. I can tell you this about them. They were'nt left wing by anybody's measure.

So, I'll tell you. Your theory, to me, just doesn't hold any water. You haven't proven anything. So show me. Show me how Democrats are like Nazis. This is your thesis, so defend it. Right now, for every line you can pick out of a document to show me they're left wing, I can pick one out to show they're right wing. Don't give me other peoples opinions, give me FACTS. (I can't quite figure out what you're trying to prove with that opinion piece you've cut and pasted.) What's next? You gonna cut and paste ten lines from the Guttenberg Bible to prove Bill Clinton is the Anti-christ?

Greg

PS, Let me post the ORIGINAL document so there won't be any confusion about this. This is the basis of your "undeniable" evidence....

Program of the National
Socialist German Workers Party


Note: This program is important because it demonstrates that the nature of Naziism was known publicly as early as 1920.


THE PROGRAM

The program of the German Workers' Party is limited as to period. The leaders have no intention, once the aims announced in it have been achieved, of setting up fresh ones, merely in order to increase the discontent of the masses artificially, and so ensure the continued existence of the Party.

1. We demand the union of all Germans to form a Great Germany on the basis of the right of the self-determination enjoyed by nations.

2. We demand equality of rights for the German People in its dealings with other nations, and abolition of the Peace Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain.

3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the nourishment of our people and for settling our superfluous population.

4. None but members of the nation may be citizens of the State. None but those of German blood, whatever their creed, may be members of the nation. No Jew, therefore, may be a member of the nation.

5. Any one who is not a citizen of the State may live in Germany only as a guest and must be regarded as being subject to foreign laws.

6. The right of voting on the State's government and legislation is to be enjoyed by the citizen of the State alone. We demand therefore that all official appointments, of whatever kind, whether in the Reich, in the country, or in the smaller localities, shall be granted to citizens of the State alone.

We oppose the corrupting custom of Parliament of filling posts merely with a view to party considerations, and without reference to character or capability.

7. We demand that the State shall make it its first duty to promote the industry and livelihood of citizens of the State. If it is not possible to nourish the entire population of the State, foreign nationals (non-citizens of the State) must be excluded from the Reich.

8. All non-German immigration must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans, who entered Germany subsequent to August 2nd, 1914, shall be required forthwith to depart from the Reich.

9. All citizens of the State shall be equal as regards rights and duties.

10. It must be the first duty of each citizen of the State to work with his mind or with his body. The activities of the individual may not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good.

We demand therefore:

11, Abolition of incomes unearned by work.


ABOLITION OF THE THRALDOM OF INTEREST

12. In view of the enormous sacrifice of life and property demanded of a nation by every war, personal enrichment due to a war must be regarded as a crime against the nation. We demand therefore ruthless confiscation of all war gains,

13. We demand nationalisation of all businesses which have been up to the present formed into companies (Trusts).

14. We demand that the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.

15. We demand extensive development of provision for old age.

16. We demand creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, immediate communalisation of wholesale business premises, and their lease at a cheap rate to small traders, and that extreme consideration shall be shown to all small purveyors to the State, district authorities and smaller localities.

17. We demand land-reform suitable to our national requirements, passing of a law for confiscation without compensation of land for communal purposes; abolition of interest on land loans, and prevention of all speculation in land.

18. We demand ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Sordid criminals against the nation, usurers, profiteers, etc. must be punished with death, whatever their creed or race.

19. We demand that the Roman Law, which serves the materialistic world order, shall be replaced by a legal system for all Germany.

20. With the aim of opening to every capable and industrious German the possibility of higher education and of thus obtaining advancement, the State must consider a thorough re-construction of our national system of education. The curriculum of all educational establishments must be brought into line with the requirements of practical life. Comprehension of the State idea (State sociology) must be the school objective, beginning with the first dawn of intelligence in the pupil. We demand development of the gifted children of poor parents, whatever their class or occupation, at the expense of the State.

21. The State must see to raising the standard of health in the nation by protecting mothers and infants, prohibiting child labour, increasing bodily efficiency by obligatory gymnastics and sports laid down by law, and by extensive support of clubs engaged in the bodily development of the young.

22. We demand abolition of a paid army and formation of a national army.

23. We demand legal warfare against conscious political lying and its dissemination in the Press. In order to facilitate creation of a German national Press we demand:

(a) that all editors of newspapers and their assistants, employing the German language, must be members of the nation;

(b) that special permission from the State shall be necessary before non-German newspapers may appear. These are not necessarily printed in the German language;

(c) that non-Germans shall be prohibited by law from participating financially in or influencing German newspapers, and that the penalty for contravention of the law shall be suppression of any such newspaper, and immediate deportation of the non-German concerned in it.

It must be forbidden to publish papers which do not conduce to the national welfare. We demand legal prosecution of all tendencies in art and literature of a kind likely to disintegrate our life as a nation, and the suppression of institutions which militate against the requirements above-mentioned.

24. We demand liberty for all religious denominations in the State, so far as they are not a danger to it and do not militate against the moral feelings of the German race.

The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession. It combats the Jewish-materialist spirit within us and without us, and is convinced that our nation can only achieve permanent health from within on the principle:


THE COMMON INTEREST BEFORE SELF

25. That all the foregoing may be realised we demand the creation of a strong central power of the State. Unquestioned authority of the politically centralised Parliament over the entire Reich and its organisation; and formation of Chambers for classes and occupations for the purpose of carrying out the general laws promulgated by the Reich in the various States of the confederation.

The leaders of the Party swear to go straight forward &#8212; if necessary to sacrifice their lives &#8212; in securing fulfillment of the foregoing Points.

Munich, February 24th, 1920

You've got to be sh*tting me....
 
Last edited:

mkiiSupraMan18

Needs a new username...
Apr 1, 2005
2,161
0
0
United States
Holy crapp.... talk about some long ass posts.... *phew*

I just think it's shitty that immigrants (legal or not) and the poor don't have to pay anything. give 'ema year, MAYBE two, then cut 'em off. If they don't make it, o-well, they obviously aren't going to be helping society. :icon_conf

I've been through 4 jobs in the past 3 years, I don't think anyone can honestly tell me that people can't get jobs. Hell if I could sit at home all day and have it just as good as my dad (who has worked his ass of at a factory for 40+ years) I'd be all over that. Because lets face it, we didn't have it THAT bad, sure we couldn't get everything that we wanted, but damn... I wouldn't have to do anything for it. THAT, in my opinion, is what pisses the middle class off. Sure it sucks we don't have the money of the rich, but atleast make the bottom feeders work for what they get... put their asses to work doing whatever it was the people in GA couldn't do, not like they have anything else to do while they're out... doing whatever they do
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
Sep 9, 2005
8,898
40
48
U.S.
www.ebay.com
Any way you spin it, Hitler is left wing. Left wing doesn't mean you are anti-semitic. It just so happened that the psycho was.

Calling him right wing has been the biggest "liberal bias" event of the 20th century, to try and get people to vote for Democrats. Not to mention one of the biggest hoaxes, right up there with UFO's, bigfoot, Loch Ness monster, etc.