Dugong_Terbang wrote:could you give me the exact definition in terms of the NatSoc "National" and "Socialist" and the differences between the NatSoc "Socialism" with the Communist or Marxist "Socialism"
Maybe some quotes from Adolf Hitler are helpful here:
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Adolf_HitlerSocialist' I define from the word 'social; meaning in the main 'social equity'. A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency. Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true socialism is not. Marxism places no value on the individual, or individual effort, of efficiency; true Socialism values the individual and encourages him in individual efficiency, at the same time holding that his interests as an individual must be in consonance with those of the community. All great inventions, discoveries, achievements were first the product of an individual brain. It is charged against me that I am against property, that I am an atheist. Both charges are false.
(Speech given on December 28, 1938)
Socialism 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. Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic. We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one.
(Interview with George Sylvester Viereck, 1923)
In order to understand the ideological foundations of National Socialism, it is very instructive to study the writings of Gottfried Feder.
PDF:
https://archive.org/details/the-collect ... 1/mode/2upHe was the principal economic theoretician of the initial phase of National Socialism in Germany. His speech at a German Workers’ Party meeting at Munich in 1919 provided the immediate inspiration for Adolf Hitler’s entry into politics. Some quotes from "The German State on a National and Socialist Foundation":
A fundamental question which should be answered in this place once again with all clarity is the question how National Socialism basically stands in relation to property. From the fundamental observations of the first chapter and especially from the fundamental opposition described there to Marxist Socialism there results with natural consequence for National Socialism the fundamental acknowledgement of property. This acknowledgement of private property is too deeply anchored in Aryan life. The creative mind which recognizes the environment, which contemplates the environment in order to create and form therefrom its world, the creative man who wrests its fruits from the earth through hard work, who settles down, builds for himself homes and cities, who, having become settled and rooted in the circle of his kinsmen, his racial comrades, the man who then proceeds on such an infrastructure rooted in the soil to higher culture and creates for himself his – the – world in a higher intellectual
sense, in the fields of philosophy, poetry, music, art and sculpture – this man certainly cannot conceive of it differently than that the works of his hand, which have been born out of his own, are also his property. From this knowledge of the creative man arises directly the respect for the property of others, and law arises.
(p. 16)
Against this not a little frightening interest-capitalistic robber economy National Socialism sets the limitation of the right to property. The principle for this limitation lies in the sentence: "Public interest before self-interest". That this limit for property moreover can be raised very high emerges from the fact that National Socialism will not in any way reject even the largest industrial works, so long as they remain in the private possession of the creators (we think of Krupp, Mannesmann, Thyssen, etc.), as contradicting the interests of the whole, especially when the owners of these large works have a feel for and understanding of social questions and are able to find the right limits between appropriate self-gain from production, an adequate pricing for the sales and the fulfilment of demand of the national economy, and a corresponding and worthy form of participation of the workforce in the revenues of the works.
Here we come to brief fundamental observations on the external forms of production. The powerfully rising German economy before the war [WWI] was distinguished by a very fortunate mixture of big, medium and small businesses. Now, in general, in the tendency to big business there indeed lies a danger for the national economy insofar as the next step above the big business, that no longer serves the fulfilment of demand but the high capitalistic interests of the domination of the market and of the dictatorship of prices. Nevertheless, it is plainly conceded that certain industries can work only as big businesses. This applies to those industrial branches that we generally designate as heavy industries. Without wishing to go into details at this point it may be basically stated that the National Socialist state has no reason to strive for fundamental changes in these external forms of the economy. National Socialism rejects all sorts of "socialization or nationalization" in the Marxist sense. Our economic ideal demands as large a number of economically free existences precisely in the medium and small businesses. We know that only the free and independent men who can freely dispose of their work and their work income are filled with a serious feeling of responsibility with regard to their work, that only on this soil do powerful personalities arise and that only on the soil of freedom and responsibility prospers the sense of the community which unites those bound through common work to a community of life and destiny and therewith makes them a free, self-conscious nation. Only on such a soil can the welfare of the individual be united with the welfare of the whole.
p. 18
Our anti-Marxist battle is directed against the state-disintegrating doctrine of the
Jew Karl Marx, against the people-disintegrating doctrine of class-struggle, against
the economy-disintegrating doctrine of the denial of private property and against the
purely economic materialistic conception of history.
p. 47
Add 23 to the page number to get the corresponding page number of this PDF:
https://archive.org/details/GottfriedFe ... n/mode/1up
