Yangi

Gitler mag'lubiyatini tan oldi

Gitler mag'lubiyatini tan oldi

1945 yil 22 aprelda Adolf Gitler o'z generallaridan birining aytishicha, Rossiyaning Eberswalde hujumiga hech qanday nemis mudofaasi taklif qilinmagan, u er osti bunkerida urush yo'qolganini va o'z joniga qasd qilishning yagona yo'li ekanini tan oladi.

Gitlerning bahosining tasdig'i sifatida, sovet mexanizatsiyalashgan korpusi Berlindan 40 mil janubi -g'arbda joylashgan Treuenbrietzen shahriga etib kelib, harbiy lagerni ozod qiladi va boshqalar qatorida Norvegiya bosh qo'mondoni Otto Rujni qo'yib yuboradi.


Angliyani SSSRga qarshi kurashga jalb qilishda omad bo'lmaganda, Gitler boshqa kuchsiz davlatlarni qidirishga majbur bo'ldi.

Italiya fashistlarga o'xshash mafkuraga ega bo'lgan tabiiy tanlov edi, lekin Ikkinchi Jahon urushi boshlanganda ularning harbiy texnikasi eskirgan edi.

Ruminiya va Vengriya kabi boshqa davlatlar ham Axisga jalb qilingan, biroq ularning hech biri yuqori sifatli harbiy yordam bera olmagan. Italiya misolida, Gitler bir nechta yomon hujumni boshlagan ittifoqchisini qutqarishi kerak edi.


Natsistlar tarixi: Gitlerning dunyoqarashi tarjimai holida qayta ko'rib chiqilgan

Tarixchi Brendan Simms "Gitler: Butunjahon biografiyasi" bilan diktatorning anglo-amerikalik kapitalizmga bo'lgan moyilligini uning vayronkor boshqaruviga turtki sifatida ta'kidlaydi.

Albatta, dunyoda Adolf Gitler haqida kitoblar etarli. Mashhur tarixchilar Gitler haqidagi ko'plab biografiyalarni nashr etishgan.

Yaqinda Kembrij universitetining xalqaro munosabatlar tarixi professori Brendan Simms ham bu mavzuga kirishdi. Qachon Gitler: global biografiya O'tgan yilning kuzida ingliz tilida nashr etilgan, qariyb 1000 sahifalik nemis tarjimasi 9 martda nashr etilgan.

Gitlerning yangi, yirik biografiyasini nashr etish har doim Germaniyada sodir bo'lgan voqea. Chiqarilishidan bir hafta oldin, nemis haftalik jurnali Der Spiegel Irlandiyalik yozuvchi va tarixchi bilan intervyuni nashr etdi, unda Brendan Simms o'zining asosiy tezisini umumlashtiradi: Gitlerning ichki va tashqi siyosatdagi harakatlantiruvchi kuchi "Angliya-Amerika" bilan bo'lgan sevgi-nafrat munosabatlaridan tug'ilgan. Uni urush va halokatga olib kelgan kommunizm va Sovet Ittifoqidan qo'rqish emas, balki Buyuk Britaniya va AQSh bilan kurash va xalqaro kapitalizm qo'rquvi edi.

Muallif va professor Brendan Simms

Gitlerning 1914-1918 yillardagi tajribalari bu jihatdan shakllantiruvchi edi: "Hayrat va hurmat uning urush tajribalaridan paydo bo'ldi. Gitler inglizlarning qattiqqo'lligini bir necha bor aytib o'tgan, chunki u frontda boshidan kechirgan".

Simmsning so'zlariga ko'ra, hatto Gitlerning antisemitizmi ham yahudiylarga bo'lgan qattiq nafratdan emas, balki ikkinchidan, yahudiylar hokimiyatda o'tirgan AQShda joylashgan "jahon kapitalizmi" bilan bo'lgan raqobatdan kelib chiqqan.

Nemis tarjimasi bugun, 9 -martda chiqadi

Gitlerning ko'plab tarjimai holi - juda ko'p turli jihatlar

So'nggi yillarda bir qancha yaxshi o'rganilgan Gitler tarjimai hollari boshqacha nuqtai nazarga ega.

Bitta asar mutlaq me'yor bo'lib qolmoqda: ingliz yozuvchisi Yan Kershou 1998 va 2000 yillarda nashr etilgan Gitlerning ikki jildli biografiyasi, unda tarixchi asosan Gitler va nemis xalqining o'zaro ta'siriga e'tibor qaratadi. Kershovning so'zlariga ko'ra, Gitler shunday yo'l tuta olgan, chunki nemislar o'z tashabbusi bilan milliy sotsialistik mafkuraga asos solgan.

Yan Kershou nashrlaridan oldin va keyin Germaniya va chet eldan kelgan boshqa biograflar tarixning ushbu bobining turli jihatlariga e'tibor qaratdilar.

1973 yilda nemis jurnalisti Yoaxim Fest Gitler mavzusiga murojaat qilib, 1000 sahifadan ortiq kitob yozib, bestsellerga aylandi va uzoq vaqtdan beri standart asar deb topildi. Keyinchalik ma'lum bo'lishicha, Fest o'z tadqiqotlarida jiddiy xatolarga yo'l qo'ygan, chunki qisman u Gitlerning bosh me'mori, qurollanish va urush ishlab chiqarish vaziri Albert Sperning so'zlariga tayangan. Xolokost masalasiga faqat Fest jilovlagan.

Shunga qaramay, jurnalist va tarixchi Sven Feliks Kellerxof o'tgan yili ham Festning kitobini "Gitlerning eng muhim yetti biografiyasi" qatoriga kiritgan. "Ba'zi badiiy bo'lmagan kitoblar mumtoz bo'lib qolishi mumkin-bu holda, ularning mazmuni eskirgan bo'lsa ham, ular o'qishga arziydi", dedi Kellerhof. Ko'plab tanqidchilar Festning kitobini katta adabiy qiymatga ega deb hisoblashgan.

Gitler va uning siyosatini qanday izohlash kerak, uzoq vaqtdan beri ikki tarixchi lagerlari o'rtasida tortishuvlar mavzusi bo'lib kelgan. "Xalqarochi" deb atalganlar Gitlerni 1933-1945 yillardagi voqealarga tafakkuri va mafkurasi hal qiluvchi ta'sir ko'rsatgan hal qiluvchi, kuchli rahbar sifatida qaraydilar. Boshqa tomondan, "strukturalistlar" deb nomlanganlar ko'proq qiziqishadi. Gitlerning siyosiy vaznidan ko'ra, fashistlar tizimidagi raqobatchi guruhlarning hamkorligi va qarshiligi.

Inglizcha asl nusxasi o'tgan yilning kuzida chiqdi

Tarixchilarning bir qancha guruhlari haligacha Gitler obrazi haqida bahslashmoqda

Gitler va uning hamkasblari davrida milliy sotsializm umuman qanday ishlashi mumkinligi, keyingi bahsli talqinlar mavzusi edi. Masalan, turli olimlar Gitlerning psixologik barqarorligini ko'rib chiqishgan.

Keyin Brendan Simmsning kitobi keldi Gitler: Global biografiya. Ingliz tilida nashr etilganidan so'ng, reaktsiyalar turlicha bo'ldi.

Guardian Gitler faqat Buyuk Britaniya va AQShga bo'lgan moyilligi tufayli harakat qilgani haqidagi asosiy tezisga haddan tashqari kuchli e'tiborni tanqid qildi.

Tarix yangiliklar tarmog'i irlandiyalik tarixchi Gitlerning "aqliy barqaror", "aqlli" shaxs sifatida harakat qilish haqidagi taxminini tanqid qildi: "Simms uni chuqur ishonchsiz, narsisistik sotsiopat sifatida emas, balki aniq belgilangan intellektual yuqori tuzilishga ega bo'lgan mafkura boshqargan shaxs sifatida qabul qiladi".

Milliy sharh biroz xushmuomalalik bilan yozgan edi, Simmsning Gitlerning AQShga bo'lgan qiziqishi haqida o'ylashi juda uzoqqa ketdi, lekin bu kitob o'zining barcha kamchiliklariga qaramay o'qishga arziydi. Unga ko'ra, bu Adolf Gitler obrazining yakuniy talqinidan ko'ra, munozaraga ko'proq hissa qo'shgan. Bu Simmsning o'zi tan olganidek, "butun Gitler" emas.

Tarixni qayta baholash mumkin

Darhaqiqat, Brendan Simms o'z ishining boshida "hozirgi kitob (.) Ko'p jihatdan o'z oldingilariga to'g'ri kelmaydi", deb yozadi. Bu "bu mavzu bo'yicha birinchi muhim ish emas va bu oxirgi ham bo'lmaydi". Bu kamtarona eshitiladi. Biroz vaqt o'tgach, muallif ishonch bilan yozadi: "Gitlerning tarjimai holi va umuman Uchinchi Reyxning tarixini tubdan qayta ko'rib chiqish kerak".

Gitlerning asosiy raqiblari - Simms nazarida: Franklin D. Ruzvelt va Uinston Cherchill

Simms qayta-qayta, deyarli diniy jihatdan, Gitlerning ingliz-sakson siyosati, jamiyati va madaniyatiga bo'lgan ishonchiga qaytadi, lekin uning tarix talqinida boshqa diqqatga sazovor jihatlari ham bor. Uning fikricha, Frantsiya, balki Sovet Ittifoqi ham o'sha davrning tarixiy rivojlanishida faqat bo'ysunuvchi rol o'ynaydi chunki Gitler bu xalqlarni raqib deb hisoblamagan. Tarixchining so'zlariga ko'ra, Gitler uzoq vaqt davomida Sovet Ittifoqini tahdid deb hisoblamagan.

Gitlerning nemislar haqidagi tasavvurini qayta talqin qilish

Simms yana bir nuqtani uyga suradi. Uning fikricha, Gitler 1933 yildan keyin ham o'z xalqi haqida juda salbiy fikrda edi: "U umuman nemis xalqi haqida ko'p o'ylamay qo'ydi. U ularning qashshoqligi va nodonligini alam bilan bilardi", deb yozadi tarixchi. Hatto urush boshlanishidan ikki yil oldin ham, Gitler Angliya-Amerika bilan raqobatni yo'qotdi-xalqlarning turmush darajasi bo'yicha. "1937 yil may oyida Gitler mag'lubiyatini tan oldi", deb yozadi Simms.

Ammo Gitlerning Angliya-Amerika olamiga bo'lgan munosabati ham juda ziddiyatli edi. Masalan, Simmsning yozishicha, avvalgi yillarda nemis siyosatchisi o'zini deyarli hasadgo'ylik bilan ifodalagan: "Uning asosiy qiziqtirgan mavzusi AQSh edi, u Britaniya imperiyasidan ham ko'proq namuna davlat sifatida qaray boshladi. "

Bu, birinchi navbatda, Gitlerning amerikaliklarning taxmin qilingan geografik afzalliklari haqidagi qarashlari bilan bog'liq edi. Shuningdek, mamlakat nemis muhojirlari bilan to'la xalq bo'lgani uchun. Shuning uchun, deb yozadi Simms, Gitler Evropa qit'asining sharqiy qismidagi nemislar uchun yangi "yashash maydoni" ni yaratmoqchi edi.

Uzoq vaqt davomida Gitler "faqat" Germaniyani Evropada yirik davlat sifatida o'rnatishni maqsad qilgan, ammo bundan boshqa, - dedi Simms. U jahon qudrati sifatida AQShga qarshi og'irlik yaratmoqchi edi. "Gitlerning maqsadi jahon hukmronligi emas, balki millatning omon qolishi edi".

Simms xulosa qiladi: "Gitlerning butun strategiyasi oxirigacha Germaniyaga, Evropaga va birinchi navbatda Angliya-Amerikaga siyosiy ta'sir ko'rsatish uchun bolshevizm tahdididan foydalanishdan iborat edi". Bu jasur tezis. Bu nafaqat Germaniyada, balki bundan buyon tarixchilar uchun qiziq bo'lishi mumkin.

DW tavsiya qiladi


Gitler mag'lubiyatni qachon anglagan/tan olgan

Muallif: Devid 1819 & raquo 21 avgust 2014, 16:52

Menimcha, Gitler mag'lubiyatni faqat Obergruppenführer Feliks Shtayner 1945 yilda Berlindagi Qizil Armiya qurshoviga qarshi hujum qila olmagach anglaganiga ishonishim qiyin, natijada Gitler 1945 yil 22 aprelda mag'lubiyatga uchraganidan 8 kun oldin tan oldi. o'z joniga qasd qilish.

Ko'plab hujjatli filmlar va boshqa asosiy axborot vositalari buni Gitler mag'lubiyatga uchragan payt deb tushuntiradi. Menimcha, bu masalaning buzilishi yoki soddalashtirilishi, chunki u og'zaki ravishda urush yo'qolganini tan olgani, bu uning miyasida mag'lubiyatni anglaganini anglatmaydi.

Men taxmin qilyapmanki, 1941 yil dekabrda, Sovet Ittifoqi hali ham buzilmaganligi aniq bo'lganda, Gitler mag'lubiyat ehtimoli borligini tushundi. 1943 yil Kurskdan keyin bu muqarrar edi.

Agar Gitler 1945 yil 22 aprelda mag'lubiyatga uchraganini anglaganida, u aql bovar qilmas edi, lekin avvaliga u yanada kuchliroq bo'la olmasdi.


Gitler Xitoy va Yaponiyani Germaniyaga teng ko'rdi va hatto hayrat bilan yozdi: "Men ularning tarixi biznikidan ustun ekanligini erkin tan olaman"

Natsistlar hokimiyat tepasiga kelgandan so'ng, Adolf Gitler Versal bitimini Germaniyaga nisbatan adolatsiz deb hisoblaganini va uni qayta ko'rib chiqish kerakligini aniq ko'rsatdi.

1919 yil 28 -iyunda imzolangan Versal shartnomasida beshta asosiy band bor edi:

  • Urush boshlangani uchun Germaniya aybini tan olishi kerak edi.
  • Nemis armiyasi 100 ming kishidan iborat edi va ularga suv osti kemalari yoki havo kuchlariga ruxsat berilmagan.
  • Germaniya etkazilgan zarar uchun tovon to'lashi kerak edi.
  • Germaniya o'z hududlarining 13 foizini yo'qotdi va uning mustamlakalari Frantsiya yoki Britaniyaga berildi.
  • Germaniyaga Millatlar Ligasiga kirishga ruxsat berilmadi.

Reyxstag oldida Shartnomaga qarshi namoyishlar

Birinchi jahon urushi davridagi amerikaliklarning kompensatsiyalari haqidagi Amerika qarashlari. Siyosiy multfilm, 1921 yil

Gitler Shartnomani adolatsiz deb hisobladi va ko'p nemislar o'z fikrlarini bildirishdi, shuning uchun uning asosiy maqsadi uni yo'q qilish va Germaniyani Evropada yana gegemon kuchga aylantirish edi. Uning so'zlariga ko'ra, nemis millatiga ko'proq narsa kerak Lebensraum (‘ yashash maydoni ’) va uni ta'minlashning yagona yo'li Polsha, Avstriya, Chexoslovakiyaga qarab kengayish edi.

Shartnoma tuzilgandan so'ng, ko'plab nemislar xorijiy mamlakatlarda istiqomat qilishgan, shuning uchun u barcha nemis tilida so'zlashadigan odamlarni bir mamlakatda birlashtirishga qaror qilgan. U, shuningdek, Birinchi jahon urushida Germaniyaning mag'lubiyatida kommunizmni aybladi, shuning uchun uning rejasida Sovet Ittifoqini mag'lub etish va kommunizmni yo'q qilish bor edi.

Natsistlarning Germaniya Lebensraum tashkil etishi polyaklarni Polshadan quvib chiqarishni talab qildi, masalan, 1939 yilda Reyxsgau Warthelanddan chiqarib yuborish.

Lebensraum siyosati bilan amalga oshiriladigan Buyuk Germaniya Reyxi Generalplan Ost, shtat ma'muriyati va Schutzstaffel (SS) foto -kredit rejalaridan kelib chiqqan chegaralarga ega edi.

Gitler Germaniyaning tashqi siyosatini ehtiyotkorlik bilan qurolsizlanish konferentsiyasi va Millatlar Ligasidan chiqib ketdi. Uning ta'kidlashicha, Germaniya faqat tinchlikni xohlaydi va agar boshqa davlatlar ham xuddi shunday qilishga rozi bo'lsa, qurolsizlanadilar.

1934 yilda Polsha bilan o'n yillik tajovuz qilmaslik to'g'risidagi shartnoma imzolanishi, Germaniyaning yangi hukumati va uning siyosatidan xavotirda bo'lgan boshqa Evropa mamlakatlari oldida zararsiz ko'rinishga olib keldi. O'sha yili avstriyalik va nemis natsistlari birgalikda davlat to'ntarishiga urinishdi, lekin nemislarni ogohlantirgan Mussolini tufayli muvaffaqiyatsiz bo'lishdi.

Urushdan keyin Reyn orolining bosib olinishi, nuqta chiziq demilitarizatsiya qilingan hududni ko'rsatadi.

Uning tashqi siyosati uni nemis xalqi orasida mashhurlikka olib keldi, shuning uchun Gitler muvaffaqiyat qozondi va Reynlandiyaning qurolsizlangan hududiga qo'shin yuborib, qimor o'ynashga qaror qildi. 30,000 engil qurollangan nemis askarlari Reynlandiyani egallab olishdi va hech kim ularni to'xtatishga jur'at eta olmadi.

Gitler 30 ming askarini Reynlandiyaga yuborib, hamma narsani xavf ostiga qo'yishini bilar edi va u shunday dedi: “ Reynlandiyaga yurishdan keyin qirq sakkiz soat o'tgach, bu mening hayotimdagi eng asabiy voqealar edi. Agar frantsuzlar Reyn oroliga bostirib kirganlarida, biz dumimizni oyoqlarimiz orasiga tortib olishimiz kerak edi, chunki qo'limizdagi harbiy resurslar, hatto mo''tadil qarshilik ko'rsatish uchun ham etarli emas edi. ”

Gebbels, Gitler va von Blomberg foto krediti

1936 yilda Mussolini va Gitler tomonidan imzolangan "Rim-Berlin o'qi" deb nomlanuvchi ittifoq Germaniyaning pozitsiyasini mustahkamladi. 1937 yilda Germaniya va Italiya Yaponiyada Anti-Komintern paktini imzolagach, fashistlar Germaniyasining tashqi siyosati yana bir qadam oldinga siljidi va Gitler o'z pozitsiyasini yanada mustahkamladi.

Gitler "irqiy poklik, tarix" bilan ovora edi va hatto nemis tashqi siyosatini natsist irqiy mafkurasi bilan shakllantirdi.

U nemis va oryanlar irqiga tuban irqlar tahdid soladi, deb ishongan: yahudiylar, rimliklar, afrikaliklar va slavyanlar.

Germaniya va Fyurer Adolf Gitler (o'ngda) Italiya yonida va Duce Benito Mussolini (chapda) fotosurati

Germaniya tashqi siyosatining eng qiziq tomonlaridan biri Xitoy va Yaponiya bilan iqtisodiy va harbiy munosabatlar edi. Gitler Xitoy va Yaponiyani Germaniyaga teng ko'rdi va bu davlatlar bilan, xususan, Xitoy bilan mustahkam iqtisodiy aloqalar o'rnatdi. Xitoy va yaponlarni “ sharafli oriylar ” va Adolf Gitlerning siyosiy vasiyatnomasi, deb yozgan edi:

H. H. Kung va Adolf Gitler Berlinda

“Bir poygada g'ururlanish - bu boshqa irqlarga nisbatan hurmatsizlikni anglatmaydi - bu ham normal va sog'lom tuyg'u. Men hech qachon xitoylarni yoki yaponlarni o'zimizdan kam deb hisoblamaganman. Ular qadimgi tsivilizatsiyalarga tegishli va men ularning tarixi biznikidan ustun ekanligini erkin tan olaman.

Ular o'z o'tmishidan faxrlanish huquqiga ega, xuddi biz tegishli bo'lgan tsivilizatsiya bilan faxrlanishga haqlimiz. Haqiqatan ham, men ishonamanki, xitoylar va yaponlar o'z irqi g'ururida qanchalik qat'iyatli bo'lishsa, ular bilan muloqot qilish osonroq bo'ladi. ”

Gitlerjugend delegatsiyasi 1938 yilda bir necha oylik do'stlik safari davomida Tokiodagi Meiji ziyoratgohiga tashrif buyurdi.

“Uch mamlakatdagi yaxshi do'stlar ”: 1938 yildagi Yaponiya, Germaniya va Italiya o'rtasidagi hamkorlikni targ'ib qiluvchi yapon propagandasi.

Oxir -oqibat, Gitlerning Uzoq Sharqdagi ikkita sevimli sherigi alohida yo'l bilan ketishga majbur bo'ldi va Fyurer o'z tarafini tanlashga majbur bo'ldi.

Germaniya Xitoy bilan chuqur iqtisodiy va harbiy aloqaga ega bo'lganidan beri bu qiyin qaror bo'lishi kerak edi, lekin boshqa tomondan, yaponlar harbiy jihatdan ustun edi. U qaror qabul qilib, Yaponiyani tanladi.

Yaponiyaning Berlindagi elchixonasi, 1940 yil sentyabr oyida Uch tomonlama paktga imzo chekkanlarning bannerlarida.

Ammo uning hozirgi kungacha eng katta siyosiy va harbiy yutug'i 1938 yildagi Avstriya bilan Anschluss edi. Bu voqea shunchaki tomoshabin bo'lgan Britaniya va Frantsiyaning zaifligini ko'rsatdi va norozilikdan boshqa narsani qilmadi.

“ Avstriyada 1938 ” Gitler 1938 yil mart oyida Avstriya chegarasini kesib o'tdi

Gitler Anschlussni Heldenplatzda e'lon qiladi, Vena, 1938 yil 15 mart

Avstriyadagi muvaffaqiyatidan ruhlanib, Gitler nemis tilida so'zlashadigan Sudetenlandga e'tibor qaratdi va 1938 yilda Myunxen shartnomasini imzoladi va Sudetenland Uchinchi Reyxning bir qismi bo'ldi.

U 1939 yilda shartnomani buzdi va Chexoslovakiyaning qolgan qismini bosib oldi.

Sammitdan so'ng, Britaniya bosh vaziri Chemberlen Buyuk Britaniyaga qaytib keldi va u erda Myunxen kelishuvi "bizning davrimiz uchun tinchlik" degan ma'noni anglatishini e'lon qildi.

Uning tashqi siyosat sohasidagi eng katta yutuqlaridan biri 1939 yilda imzolangan SSSR bilan hujum qilmaslik paktidir.

Ular bir -biriga hujum qilmaslikka, boshqasiga qarshi hech qanday ittifoq tuzmaslikka kelishib oldilar. Agressiya qilmaslik shartnomasini imzolagandan so'ng, Gitler Polshaga hujum qilishga yanada kuchliroq bo'ldi va 1939 yil 1 sentyabrda nemis qo'shinlari Polshaga kirdi. Ikki kundan keyin Ikkinchi jahon urushi boshlandi.


Adolf Gitler va uning dramatik qulashi haqida 40 ta fakt

1945 yilda Adolf Gitler va o'z joniga qasd qilish Ikkinchi jahon urushining tugashiga olib keldi, bu dunyodagi eng qonli to'qnashuv bo'lib, 60 millionga yaqin odamning o'limiga olib keldi. O'qishni davom ettirib, hayoti insoniyat tarixidagi eng katta alangaga sabab bo'lgan va o'limi uni tugatishga yordam bergan odam haqida ko'proq bilib oling.

Adolf Gitler go'dak sifatida 1889 va ndash 1890. Jozef Frants Klinger/Germaniya federal arxivi/Wikimedia Commons.

40. Adolf Gitler 1889 yil 20 aprelda tug'ilgan

Uning ota -onasi Alois va Klara edi, Adolf esa oltita bolaning to'rtinchisi edi. U o'sha paytda Yuqori Avstriyaning poytaxti bo'lgan Linz shahrida o'sgan. U aslida Germaniyada emas, Avstriyada o'sgan va faqat Birinchi jahon urushi boshlanganidan keyin Germaniyaga ko'chib o'tgan.


Stalingrad

Uning harbiy rahbar sifatida qobiliyatsizligi Stalingradni qamal qilishni buyurganida yana bir bor isbotlandi. Bu shahar Germaniya uchun haqiqiy logistika ahamiyatiga ega emas edi, aksincha, Gitler Sovet Ittifoqi ustidan Germaniya hukmronligining ifodasi sifatida Stalin nomini olgan shaharni egallab olmoqchi edi. Ushbu ramziy missiya 1942 yil 23 -noyabrda AQSh ittifoqchilar tarafida urushga kirganidan o'n bir oy o'tgach boshlandi. Ruzveltning odamlari ittifoqchi qo'shinlar sonini ko'paytirdilar va bundan ham muhimi, Qo'shma Shtatlar ittifoqchilarning urush harakatlariga katta miqdorda oziq -ovqat, asbob -uskunalar va o'q -dorilar etkazib berdi. Bundan tashqari, sovet sanoat korxonalari juda ko'p miqdorda ishlab chiqarishdi va o'tgan yilgi bosqindan keyin harbiy xizmatga chaqirilish natijasida Sovet armiyasi endi kuchliroq va yangi edi.

Jang og'ir kurash, ko'chadan ko'chaga, hatto xonadan xonaga, janjal edi. Sovet snayperlari shahar kanalizatsiyasidan foydalanishdi va nemis qo'shinlariga katta talafot etkazish uchun binolarni buzishdi. General Paulus boshchiligidagi oltinchi nemis armiyasi Sovet armiyasi tomonidan qurshab olindi. Von Bok singari, Paulus ham jangovar kuchini saqlab qolish uchun shaharni tark etishga ruxsat so'radi. Shunga qaramay, Gitler bu talabni rad etdi va o'z generallariga chekinish yoki taslim bo'lishning iloji yo'qligini aytdi. Luftvaffe Paulus va uning odamlarini ta'minlashga urinib ko'rdi. Tibbiy asbob -uskunalar va oziq -ovqat 6 -chi armiya tomonidan tugagan edi va general Paulus sog'lom askarlarini boqish uchun yarador askarlardan oziq -ovqat olishga kirishdi. [10]

12 -dekabrda dala -marshal Menshteyn Stalingrad ichidagi Paulus garnizoni bilan aloqa o'rnatishga urindi, ammo 6 -armiyaga shaharni evakuatsiya qilishga ruxsat berilmaguncha, buni uddalay olmadi. Bu orada, Sovet Italiyaning 8 -armiyasi Germaniya ittifoqchilarini qo'llab -quvvatlash uchun joylashtirilgan shaharning shimolida yana bir hujum boshladi. Sovet Italiya chizig'ini kesib o'tdi va janubga qarab Paulusni to'liq qurshab olishga harakat qildi. Bu vaqtda Germaniyaning 6 -chi armiyasi shaharda butunlay izolyatsiya qilingan va 1943 yil 2 -fevralda Paulus taslim bo'lgan. Jangda Germaniya armiyasi 200 ming askarini yo'qotdi, ulardan 90 ming nafari asirga olindi. [11] Agar Gitler Paulusga Stalingraddan chekinishga ruxsat berganida, 6 -armiya Menshteyn qo'shinlari bilan qo'shila olardi. Ular qayta tashkil etilishi, oziq -ovqat va o'q -dorilar olishlari va ko'p sonli askarlarni saqlab qolishlari mumkin edi. Gitler Paulusni shahar qurshovida qolishga majbur qilib, ishchi kuchi va malakali rahbarni yo'qotishiga sabab bo'ldi.

Germaniyaning yakuniy jiddiy xatosi 1944 yil 6 -iyunda Ittifoqchilarning Normandiya operatsiyasining Overlord operatsiyasiga bostirib kirishi paytida yuz berdi. Gitler ittifoqchilarning bosqini Normandiyaga kelishi kerak deb ishongan edi, von Rundstedt va Rommel, boshqalar qatori, La -Mansh bo'ylab bosqinchilik porti Kale shahriga keladi, deb aldanganlar. General Jorj Pattonning 3 -chi armiyasi Angliyaning janubida joylashgan edi, bu Kalega bostirib kirishni boshlashning strategik mantiqiy nuqtasi edi. Bundan tashqari, Ittifoq qo'mondonlari nemis josuslik tarmog'i tomonidan ushlanishini bilganlari haqida yolg'on razvedka xabarlarini tarqatishdi. Va nihoyat, Normandiya port shahar emas edi va shuning uchun bosqinchilik joyi sifatida ko'rinmas edi. Bu tanlov ittifoqchilar uchun katta miqdordagi qo'shimcha ish va qiyinchiliklarni keltirib chiqardi, ammo aldash muvaffaqiyatli bo'ldi. [12]

Bosqinchilar Angliyani tark etgach, Gitler o'z fikrini o'zgartirdi va von Rundstedtning fikricha, bosqin Kalega keladi. Rommel kuchlar Normandiyani nishonga olganini ko'rganida, Gitler bu ittifoqchilar tomonidan dastlab joylashtirilgan qo'shinlar sonining kamligi tufayli bu hiyla ekanligiga ishongan. 101 va 82 -desant bo'linmalarining desantchilari nemis chizig'idan chiqib ketganda, bosqin davom etar edi va general Rommel Gitler va fon Rundstedtni Germaniyaning barcha kuchlarini Normandiyaga joylashtirishga qattiq chaqirdi. Gitler rad etdi va 1944 yil 5 -iyunga o'tar kechasi yotog'iga yotdi.

Fon Rundstedt, Rommelning fikriga qo'shildi, lekin Fyurerning ruxsatisiz harakat qilishdan bosh tortdi. D-Day bosqini paytida Gitler uxlab yotgan edi va unga bo'ysunuvchilarning hech biri avtonom tarzda harakat qilmas va uni uyg'otmas edi. Natijada, nemis armiyasi bosqinchilik boshlanganidan keyin o'n ikki soat davomida odam va texnikani joylashtirmadi. Ularning Normandiyada joylashgan oltmish bo'linmasi bor edi, ammo bu bo'linmalarning o'ttiztasi jangovar tajribaga ega bo'lmagan zaxira qo'shinlari edi. [13]

Gitler muvaffaqiyatli harbiy kampaniya o'tkaza olmasligi natijasida ittifoqchilar bir kunda 150 ming askarini qo'ndira oldilar. "Overlord" operatsiyasining muvaffaqiyati bilan ittifoqchi qo'shinlar nemislar kurashishga majbur bo'ladigan dahshatli ikkinchi jabhani yaratdilar va shu tariqa Sovet armiyasining g'arbga yurishini osonlashtirdilar. Bosqin tugagach, Ittifoqchi kuchlar tomonidan 2.876.000 kishi, 11000 samolyot va 5000 kema ishlatilgan. 13 -iyunga kelib ittifoqchilar oltmish millik plyajni egallashdi. Cherbourg port shahri 27 -iyunda ta'minlangan, Sent -Lo temir yo'li 8 -iyulda, Kan 18 -iyulda olingan va 26 -avgustda Parij nihoyat ozod qilingan. Ittifoqchilarning Normandiyadagi muvaffaqiyati Gitlerning, ehtimol, uning eng buyuk generalining maslahatiga quloq solmasligidan kelib chiqqan. [14]


Tarkibi

Katta yolg'on texnikasining manbai Jeyms Merfi tarjimasining 10 -bobidan olingan bu parcha Meni Kampf (iqtibos Merfi tarjimasida va nemis asl nusxasida bitta paragraf):

Ammo yahudiylar, yolg'onni bilish qobiliyatiga ega bo'lmagan holda, jangchi o'rtoqlari, marksistlar, halokatning oldini olish uchun faqat g'ayritabiiy iroda va kuch ko'rsatgan odamga javobgarlikni yuklashdi. millatni butunlay ag'darish va sharmandalikdan qutqarishni oldindan bilgan edi. Jahon urushidagi mag'lubiyat uchun javobgarlikni Ludendorfning zimmasiga yuklab, ular Vatan xoinlarini adolatga etkazish uchun etarlicha xavfli bo'lgan yagona raqibdan ma'naviy huquq qurolini olib qo'yishdi.

Bularning barchasi o'z -o'zidan to'g'ri bo'lgan printsipdan ilhomlangan - katta yolg'onda har doim ma'lum ishonch kuchi bo'ladi, chunki millatning keng qatlamlari har doim ongli ravishda emas, balki hissiy tabiatning chuqur qatlamlarida osonroq buziladi. O'z xohish-irodasi bilan va shuning uchun ular oddiy yolg'onga qaraganda, kichik yolg'ondan ko'ra, katta yolg'on qurboniga aylanishadi, chunki ular ko'pincha kichik masalalarda yolg'on gapirishadi, lekin uyatchan bo'lishadi.

Yalang'och yolg'onlarni uydirish hech qachon ularning boshiga tushmaydi va ular boshqalarning haqiqatni shafqatsiz tarzda buzib ko'rsatishi mumkinligiga ishonishmaydi. Buni isbotlovchi dalillar ularning ongiga aniq keltirilsa ham, ular baribir shubhalanadilar va ikkilanadilar va boshqa tushuntirish bo'lishi mumkin deb o'ylashda davom etadilar. Qo'rqinchli yolg'on har doim o'z izini qoldiradi, hatto uni mixlab qo'yganidan keyin ham, bu haqiqat bu dunyodagi barcha yolg'onchi yolg'onchilarga va yolg'onchilikda birgalikda fitna uyushtirganlarga ma'lum.

Sovuq urush tarixchisi Zaxariy Jonatan Jeykobson undan foydalanishni ta'riflaydi: [10]

Adolf Gitler birinchi marta "Katta yolg'on" ni Vena yahudiylari tomonidan Birinchi jahon urushida nemislarning deportatsiyasini obro'sizlantirish uchun ishlatilgan deviant vosita deb ta'riflagan. Shunga qaramay, fojiali tarzda, Gitler va uning fashistlar rejimi ayanchli strategiyani qo'llaydilar. Tarixni qayta yozish va Evropadagi yahudiylarni Germaniyani Birinchi jahon urushida mag'lubiyatda ayblash maqsadida Gitler va uning targ'ibot vaziri ularni urushdan foyda ko'rishda, xorijiy davlatlar bilan aloqa qilishda va "urushdan qochish" da (harbiy xizmatdan qochish) aybladi. Gitlerning ta'kidlashicha, yahudiylar Veymer shtatining zaif ichki qismi bo'lib, u sodiq va haqiqiy nemis aholisini halokatli qulashga duchor qilgan. Bu hikoyani sotish uchun, Jozef Gebbels "barcha samarali targ'ibot juda oz sonlar bilan chegaralanishi va ularni jamoatchilikning oxirgi a'zosi tushunmaguncha, shiorlarda aytishi kerak", deb turib oldi.

Qisqasi, fashist fashizmi bitta sodda va keng tarqalgan yolg'onni yaratishga tayangan. Natsistlar Germaniya Birinchi Jahon Urushidagi mag'lubiyatini nemis aholisini mas'ul bo'lganlardan: yahudiylardan tozalash orqali qasos olish (va qaytarish) mumkin degan tasavvurga asoslangan mafkurani qurdilar.

"Katta yolg'on" iborasi urush paytida Amerika Qo'shma Shtatlarining Strategik Xizmatlar Ofisi tomonidan tayyorlangan hisobotda Gitlerning psixologik profilini tasvirlashda ham ishlatilgan: [11]

Uning asosiy qoidalari quyidagicha edi: hech qachon jamoatchilikning sovishiga yo'l qo'ymang, hech qachon aybini tan olmasin yoki xato qilmasin, hech qachon dushmaningda yaxshilik bo'lishi mumkinligini tan olmasin, muqobillarga joy qoldirmasin, aybni bir vaqtning o'zida bitta dushmanga yuklamasin va hamma narsa uchun uni ayblasin. xato qilsa, odamlar katta yolg'onga kichkinagidan ko'ra tezroq ishonishadi va agar siz uni tez -tez takrorlasangiz, ertami kechmi ko'p odamlar ishonishadi. (Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi) [12]

Hisobotda yuqoridagi iqtibos keltirilgan. Adolf Gitlerning psixologik tahlili: uning hayoti va afsonasi, Walter C. Langer tomonidan, [12] [13] AQSh Milliy Arxivida mavjud. [14] Shunga o'xshash iqtibos paydo bo'ladi Adolf Gitlerning shaxsiyatini tahlil qilish: uning kelajakdagi xatti -harakatlarini bashorat qilish va u bilan hozir va Germaniya taslim bo'lganidan keyin qanday munosabatda bo'lish takliflari bilan., Genri A. Myurrey tomonidan, 1943 yil oktyabr: [15]

Hech qachon aybni tan olmaslik yoki aybni tan olmaslik, bir vaqtning o'zida bitta dushmanga e'tibor qarating, chunki noto'g'ri bo'lgan hamma narsada dushman siyosiy bo'ronni ko'tarish uchun barcha imkoniyatlardan foydalanadi.

Jozef Gebbels "katta yolg'on" iborasi bilan ko'proq bog'liq bo'lgan nazariyani ilgari surdi. Gebbels quyidagi xatboshini Gitler bu iborani birinchi marta ishlatganidan o'n olti yil o'tib 1941 yil 12 yanvarda yozgan maqolasida yozgan. "Aus Cherchillz Lügenfabrik" (inglizcha: "Cherchill yolg'on fabrikasidan") sarlavhali maqola nashr etilgan. Die Zeit ohne Beispiel.

Ingliz etakchiligining asosiy siri maxsus ma'lumotlarga bog'liq emas. Aksincha, bu juda ahmoqona qalin boshliga bog'liq. Inglizlar yolg'on gapirganda, yolg'on gapirish kerak, degan tamoyilga amal qilishadi. Ular yolg'onlarini davom ettirishadi, hatto kulgili ko'rinish xavfi ostida ham. [16]

Jozef Gebbelsning quyidagi taxminlari ko'plab kitoblar va maqolalarda va minglab veb -sahifalarda takrorlangan, ammo ularning hech biri asosiy manbani keltirmagan. Randall Bytverkning tadqiqotlari va mulohazalariga ko'ra, Gebbelsning aytganlari dargumon: [17]

Agar siz yolg'onni etarlicha katta gapirsangiz va uni takrorlasangiz, odamlar oxir -oqibat bunga ishonishadi. Yolg'onni faqat shunday saqlash mumkinki, davlat odamlarni yolg'onning siyosiy, iqtisodiy va/yoki harbiy oqibatlaridan himoya qila oladi. Shunday qilib, davlat o'z ixtiloflarini bostirish uchun barcha kuchlaridan foydalanishi o'ta muhim bo'ladi, chunki haqiqat yolg'onning o'lik dushmani, shuning uchun haqiqat - davlatning eng katta dushmani.

Uning AQShda 2020 yilgi prezidentlik saylovini bekor qilish urinishlarini qo'llab -quvvatlash uchun, prezident Donald Tramp va uning ittifoqchilari bir necha marotaba va yolg'on so'zlar bilan aytganda, saylovda katta qalloblik bo'lgan va Tramp saylovda g'olib bo'lgan. [6] [7] AQSh senatorlari Josh Xouli va Ted Kruz keyinchalik Senatdagi saylov natijalariga qarshi chiqishdi. [19] Ularning urinishi o'sha paytdagi saylangan prezident Jo Bayden tomonidan "katta yolg'on" deb ta'riflangan: "Menimcha, Amerika jamoatchiligi ularning kimligini yaxshi biladi", dedi Bayden Kapitoliyga hujum qilinganidan ikki kun o'tib. "Ular katta yolg'onning, katta yolg'onning bir qismi." [20] Respublikachilar senatorlari Mitt Romni va Pat Toomey, fashizm olimlari Timoti Snayder va Rut Ben-G'iyat, rossiya ishlari bo'yicha ekspert Fiona Xill va boshqalar Donald Trampning saylovlarning katta soxtalashtirilishi haqidagi yolg'on da'volariga ishora qilishdi. [21] 2021 yil may oyiga kelib, Respublikachilar partiyasi soxta hikoyani qabul qilib, uni o'z foydasiga ovoz berishning yangi cheklovlarini joriy etish uchun asos sifatida ishlatishdi. [22]

2020 yilgi saylovda ko'plab yurisdiksiyalarga ovoz berish mashinalarini taqdim etgan Dominion Voting Systems, Trumpning advokati Rudi Giulianidan 1,3 milliard dollar miqdorida zarar undirmoqchi. Da'vo arizasida Dominion "u va uning ittifoqchilari" Katta yolg'on "ni ishlab chiqargan va tarqatgan, bu oldindan ma'lum bo'lgan virusga aylangan va millionlab odamlarni Dominion o'z ovozlarini o'g'irlab, saylovni belgilab qo'ygan deb ishonib aldagan", deb da'vo qilmoqda. [23]

2021 yil boshida, The New York Times Trumpning 2020 yilgi saylovlarni bekor qilish uchun siyosiy maqsadlar uchun "katta yolg'on" ni ilgari surishini tekshirdi va yolg'on 2021 yilda AQShning Kapitoliydagi hujumini rag'batlantirdi degan xulosaga keldi. [8] [24]

Donald Trumpning ikkinchi impichmenti bo'yicha sud jarayonida, menejerlar Jeymi Raskin, Jo Neguse, Xoakin Kastro, Steysi Plaskett va Madlen Din "katta yolg'on" iborasini qayta -qayta ishlatib, saylov o'g'irlangan degan tushunchaga murojaat qilishdi. faqat birinchi taqdimotda 16 ta eslatma. "Katta yolg'on", saylov davriga qadar, shu jumladan, argumentning "provokatsion" qismining birinchi qismini tashkil etdi. [25] [26]

2021 yil boshida bir nechta taniqli respublikachilar "katta yolg'on" atamasini boshqa masalalarga tegishli deb da'vo qilishga urinishdi. [27] Trump, bu atama "2020 yilgi soxta prezidentlik saylovlari" ga tegishli ekanligini aytdi. [28] Mitch McConnell and Newt Gingrich said that "the big lie" is opposition to restrictive new voter ID requirements. [27] [29]


Were the Nazis Socialists?

The full name of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party, the political movement that brought him to power and supplied the infrastructure of the fascist dictatorship over which he would preside, was Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. According to historians, the complicated moniker reveals more about the image the party wanted to project and the constituency it aimed to build than it did about the Nazis’ true political goals, which were building a state based on racial superiority and brute-force governance.

Given that Nazism is traditionally held to be an extreme right-wing ideology, the party’s conspicuous use of the term “socialist” — which refers to a political system normally plotted on the far-left end of the ideological spectrum — has long been a source of confusion, not to mention heated debate among partisans seeking to distance themselves from the genocidal taint of Nazi Germany.

The debate has heated up to the point of critical mass in recent years, thanks to the rise of nationalist political movements reacting in part to stagnant economic conditions and the perceived threat of globalism, and also in part to a flood of immigrants and foreign refugees pouring into Europe and the United States because of war and economic crises abroad.

A subset of these groups, identified as ethno-nationalists, hold racially-tinged views ranging from nativism (the belief that the interests of native-born people must be defended against encroachment by immigrants) to full-on, hate-mongering white supremacy. Some of the latter openly align themselves with historical Nazism, to the point of waving swastikas, spouting anti-Semitic rhetoric, and imitating the tactics of Adolf Hitler.

Add to this mix the ascendancy of President Donald Trump, who won the 2016 election in part by courting a nativist, anti-immigrant constituency, and whose reticent condemnation of white nationalist protesters who held a rally in Charlottesville, Virginia that erupted in fatal violence in August 2017 drew howls of criticism from all but his most loyal supporters, and the urgency of sorting out these political associations begins to make sense.

The Nazi Problem

Nobody, least of all the millions of rank-and-file right-leaning Americans who voted for Donald Trump, wants to be lumped in with Nazis. It’s a fact, however, that Nazi-friendly organizations, Nazi symbols, and Nazi gestures were in evidence at the disastrous Charlottesville event, whose unfortunate title was not “Unite the Left,” but “Unite the Right.”

Although the terms “left” and “right” as used in American politics can be somewhat less than perspicuous, they are helpful in delineating the basic ideological divide between liberalism/progressivism (as embodied mainly by the Democratic Party) on one side (“the left”), and conservatism/traditionalism (as embodied mainly by the Republican Party) on the other (“the right”). Seen as a spectrum or continuum of ideologies, socialism/communism traditionally falls on the far left end of this scale, nationalism/fascism on the far right.

The Nazi problem comes down to this: As an ultra-nationalist, socially conservative, anti-egalitarian and fascist ideology, Nazism naturally falls on the extreme far-right end of the political spectrum but if it can be successfully argued that it’s really a form of socialism, it would make more sense to place it on the far left. That being the case, it’s becoming more and more common to encounter insistent polemics like this one published on the right-wing blog UFP News:

The Nazis were left-wing socialists. Yes, the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, otherwise known as the Nazi Party, was indeed socialist and it had a lot in common with the modern left. Hitler preached class warfare, agitating the working class to resist “exploitation” by capitalists , particularly Jewish capitalists, of course. Their programs called for the nationalization of education, health care, transportation, and other major industries. They instituted and vigorously enforced a strict gun control regimen. They encouraged pornography, illegitimacy, and abortion, and they denounced Christians as right-wing fanatics. Yet a popular myth persists that the Nazis themselves were right-wing extremists. This insidious lie biases the entire political landscape today.

A similar argument is propounded in the 2017 book The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left by Dinesh D’Souza, who maintains that Adolf Hitler himself was a “dedicated socialist”:

In statement after statement, Hitler could not be clearer about his socialist commitments. He said, for example, in a 1927 speech, “We are socialists. We are the enemies of today’s capitalist system of exploitation … and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”

However, the assumption that because the word “socialist” appeared in the party’s name and socialist words and ideas popped up in the writings and speeches of top Nazis then the Nazis must have been actual socialists is naive and ahistorical. What the evidence shows, on the contrary, is that Nazi Party leaders paid mere lip service to socialist ideals on the way to achieving their one true goal: raw, totalitarian power.

Richard J. Evans: ‘It Would Be Wrong to See Nazism as a Form of, or an Outgrowth From, Socialism’

Despite having declared, at various times, “I am a socialist,” “We are socialists,” and similar avowals, on a personal level Hitler displayed little regard for the actual tenets of socialism, or, for that matter, socialists themselves. This excerpt from a speech Hitler gave in 1922 (quoted in William L. Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, published in 1960) is indicative:

Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of the nation whoever has understood our great national anthem, “Deutschland ueber Alles,” to mean that nothing in the wide world surpasses in his eyes this Germany, people and land — that man is a Socialist.

And this is what came out of Adolf Hitler’s mouth on another occasion when a comrade riled him by harping on socialism (as reported by Henry A. Turner, author of German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler, published in 1985):

Socialism! What does socialism really mean? If people have something to eat and their pleasures, then they have their socialism.

In his 2010 book Hitler: A Biography, British historian Ian Kershaw wrote that despite putting the interests of the state above those of capitalism, he did so for reasons of nationalism and was never a true socialist by any common definition of the term:

[Hitler] was wholly ignorant of any formal understanding of the principles of economics. For him, as he stated to the industrialists, economics was of secondary importance, entirely subordinated to politics. His crude social-Darwinism dictated his approach to the economy, as it did his entire political “world-view.” Since struggle among nations would be decisive for future survival, Germany’s economy had to be subordinated to the preparation, then carrying out, of this struggle. This meant that liberal ideas of economic competition had to be replaced by the subjection of the economy to the dictates of the national interest. Similarly, any “socialist” ideas in the Nazi programme had to follow the same dictates. Hitler was never a socialist. But although he upheld private property, individual entrepreneurship, and economic competition, and disapproved of trade unions and workers’ interference in the freedom of owners and managers to run their concerns, the state, not the market, would determine the shape of economic development. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place. But in operation it was turned into an adjunct of the state.

For members of the Nazi Party, in fact, defending socialism on its own terms was a risky activity which could result in ejection from the party, or worse. Of party leader and dissenter Otto Strasser (whose similarly-minded brother, Gregor, would ultimately be assassinated by the Nazis), William Shirer writes:

Unfortunately for him, he had taken seriously not only the word “socialist” but the word “workers” in the party’s official name of National Socialist German Workers’ Party. He had supported certain strikes of the socialist trade unions and demanded that the party come out for nationalization of industry. This of course was heresy to Hitler, who accused Otto Strasser of professing the cardinal sins of “democracy and liberalism.” On May 21 and 22, 1930, the Fuehrer had a showdown with his rebellious subordinate and demanded complete submission. When Otto refused, he was booted out of the party.

The plain truth, writes Historian Richard J. Evans in The Coming of the Third Reich, was that Hitler and his party saw socialism, communism, and leftism generally as inimical to everything they hoped to achieve:

In the climate of postwar counter-revolution, national brooding on the “stab-in-the-back,” and obsession with war profiteers and merchants of the rapidly mushrooming hyperinflation, Hitler concentrated especially on rabble-rousing attacks on “Jewish” merchants who were supposedly pushing up the price of goods: they should all, he said, to shouts of approval from his audiences, be strung up. Perhaps to emphasize this anti-capitalist focus, and to align itself with similar groups in Austria and Czechoslovakia, the party changed its name in February 1920 to the National Socialist German Workers’ Party…. Despite the change of name, however, it would be wrong to see Nazism as a form of, or an outgrowth from, socialism. True, as some have pointed out, its rhetoric was frequently egalitarian, it stressed the need to put common needs above the needs of the individual, and it often declared itself opposed to big business and international finance capital. Famously, too, anti-Semitism was once declared to be “the socialism of fools.” But from the very beginning, Hitler declared himself implacably opposed to Social Democracy and, initially to a much smaller extent, Communism: after all, the “November traitors” who had signed the Armistice and later the Treaty of Versailles were not Communists at all, but the Social Democrats.

What Nazism Stood For

The National Socialists completely ignored socialism’s primary aim (replacing the existing class-based society with an egalitarian one in which workers owned the means of production) and substituted their own topsy-turvy agenda, Evans writes, “replacing class with race, and the dictatorship of the proletariat with the dictatorship of the leader”:

The “National Socialists” wanted to unite the two political camps of left and right into which, they argued, the Jews had manipulated the German nation. The basis for this was to be the idea of race. This was light years removed from the class-based ideology of socialism. Nazism was in some ways an extreme counter-ideology to socialism, borrowing much of its rhetoric in the process, from its self-image as a movement rather than a party, to its much-vaunted contempt for bourgeois convention and conservative timidity.

German historian and National Socialism expert Joachim Fest characterizes this repurposing of socialist rhetoric as an act of “prestidigitation”:

This ideology took a leftist label chiefly for tactical reasons. It demanded, within the party and within the state, a powerful system of rule that would exercise unchallenged leadership over the “great mass of the anonymous.” And whatever premises the party may have started with, by 1930 Hitler’s party was “socialist” only to take advantage of the emotional value of the word, and a “workers’ party” in order to lure the most energetic social force. As with Hitler’s protestations of belief in tradition, in conservative values, or in Christianity, the socialist slogans were merely movable ideological props to serve as camouflage and confuse the enemy.

The proof was in the pudding. Not long after acquiring the reins of power, the Nazis banned the Social Democratic Party and sent its leaders and other leftists identified as threats to the National Socialist program to concentration camps. According to the Holocaust Encyclopedia:

In the months after Hitler took power, SA and Gestapo agents went from door to door looking for Hitler’s enemies. They arrested Socialists, Communists, trade union leaders, and others who had spoken out against the Nazi party some were murdered. By the summer of 1933, the Nazi party was the only legal political party in Germany. Nearly all organized opposition to the regime had been eliminated. Democracy was dead in Germany.

Despite continuing certain Weimar-era social welfare programs, the Nazis proceeded to restrict their availability to “racially worthy” (non-Jewish) beneficiaries. In terms of labor, worker strikes were outlawed. Trade unions were replaced by the party-controlled German Labor Front, primarily tasked with increasing productivity, not protecting workers. In lieu of the socialist ideal of an egalitarian, worker-run state, the National Socialists erected a party-run police state whose governing structure was anti-democratic, rigidly hierarchical, and militaristic in nature. As to the redistribution of wealth, the socialist ideal “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” was rejected in favor of a credo more on the order of “Take everything that belongs to non-Aryans and keep it for the master race.”

Above all, the Nazis were German white nationalists. What they stood for was the ascendancy of the “Aryan” race and the German nation, by any means necessary. Despite co-opting the name, some of the rhetoric, and even some of the precepts of socialism, Hitler and party did so with utter cynicism, and with vastly different goals. The claim that the Nazis actually were leftists or socialists in any generally accepted sense of those terms flies in the face of historical reality.


Video, Sitemap-Video, Sitemap-Videos