The world’s most famous socialist


Students of history flinch when left-wingers refer to Hitler as being right-wing because anyone who knows their history knows that Hitler and his ?party were socialists. His party was called the?National Socialist German Workers’ Party. The parallels between his policies and the policies of modern-day left-wing parties are obvious. When lefties call conservatives fascists they conveniently overlook the fact that Hitler was a fascist and his brand of socialism was the nanny state on steroids. Hitler is a perfect example of what happens when a socialist leader becomes a dictator.

Screen Shot 2016-07-04 at 1.17.29 PM

Brief Historical Background on Hitler?

Germany lost World War I. As such, Germany was in a state of economic and national depression….the depression was a long, drawn out one (15 years) leaving the German people poor, hungry, desperate, lacking any confidence.

…Hitler was a powerful and spellbinding speaker who attracted a wide following of Germans desperate for change. He promised the disenchanted a better life and a new and glorious Germany. The Nazis appealed especially to the unemployed, young people, and members of the lower middle class (small store owners, office employees, craftsmen, and farmers).

…Employment for All

…Hitler made a huge promise to his people: employment for all. How did he do it? Roads and infrastructure:

As Fuhrer, Hitler?s first priority was jobs, or the lack of them. German unemployment had peaked at 6 million due to the Depression devastating the economy. With innovative public works schemes such as the building of autobahns, Hitler put every German back to work. He also advocated schemes such as KdF ? Strength Through Joy ? which gave workers increased benefits for increased levels of production. This policy was popular and increasingly with the proletariat who had seen their country decimated by the depression?

By putting people back to work and making huge public spending, inflation was bound to happen. However, Hitler kept this under control by not allowing wages to rise with prices. This may have been one unpopular aspect of Hitler?s economic policy but there were many that the people supported.

Socialists are big on creating government jobs. It is no coincidence that under Helen Clark the bureaucracy in Wellington ballooned.?Socialists like to blame rich people for all a country’s woes. Labour blamed people with Chinese-sounding names for rising house prices in Auckland. Hitler blamed the Jews for all Germany’s economic woes. Because many Jews were successful businessmen he tarred them as evil rich pricks (a common socialist propaganda technique).

Big education

If you haven?t seen it yet, watch?WW2 Surivor?s Account Draws Chilling Similarities between Nazism and Liberalism.

When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers. You could take your children ages 4 weeks to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, 7 days a week, under the total care of the government. The state raised a whole generation of children. There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology. By this time, no one talked about equal rights. We knew we had been had.

Hitler’s policies were pure socialism. He prized public education and made sure that everything was state-funded and state-sponsored, including the curriculum. From cradle to grave, he wanted his government to take care of the German people. The cost of all this was that parents were removed from their children’s lives. This is one of the reasons why the children in the Hitler Youth were indoctrinated so effectively.

Nationalised healthcare

Also from the WW2 survivor?s accounting of Nazism:

After Hitler?s health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything. When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full. If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries.

As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80% of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families. All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing.

Socialist governments always want the government to provide more things for free, but when you make things free you increase demand and then the long-suffering taxpayer has to pay for it.

Gun control

Yes, Germany had gun control. It started before Hitler with a national gun registry:

?in the 1920s in the chaos of Germany?s Weimar Republic, which opted for gun registration. Law-abiding persons complied with the law, but the Communists and Nazis committing acts of political violence did not.

Here?s what happened as a result:

In 1931, Weimar authorities discovered plans for a Nazi takeover in which Jews would be denied food and persons refusing to surrender their guns within 24 hours would be executed. They were written by Werner Best, a future Gestapo official. In reaction to such threats, the government authorized the registration of all firearms and the confiscation thereof, if required for ?public safety.? The interior minister warned that the records must not fall into the hands of any extremist group.

Finally, Hitler just took the guns from Jews. An armed citizenry is a dangerous one, after all. Hitler even said this about guns in the hands of the people: ?The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms.?

In Breslau in 1933, Jews were ordered to ?surrender [their] weapons forthwith to the police authorities? on the basis that ?Jewish citizens have allegedly used their weapons for unlawful attacks on members of the Nazi organization and the police.? This was a regular occurrence all over Germany until the?Waffengesetz?of 1938, which effectively banned Jewish firearm ownership in all of Germany (though this had been something of a reality for a while, as in 1935 the Gestapo had ordered no weapons permits to be issued to Jews without the approval of the Gestapo itself).

As a student of history I have always been a big supporter of the Second Amendment ?because I understand what happens when you disarm your citizens. When Islamic terrorism finally comes to New Zealand (and it will) ?our police will need to be armed.


Conservatives tend to be pro-life while liberals tend to be pro-choice. Not surprisingly Hitler was pro-choice.

Dr. Tessa Chelouche goes on to quote Hitler?s 1942 policy statement on the application of abortion to Slavic people, which is chillingly similar to modern Planned Parenthood propaganda:

?In view of the large families of the Slav native population, it could only suit us if girls and women there had as many abortions as possible. We are not interested in seeing the non-German population multiply?We must use every means to instill in the population the idea that it is harmful to have several children, the expenses that they cause and the dangerous effect on woman?s health? It will be necessary to open special institutions for abortions and doctors must be able to help out there in case there is any question of this being a breach of their professional ethics.?

Hitler’s desire to use abortion to get rid of the non-German population is identical to the ?intentions of America’s Margaret Sanger who established organisations that evolved into Planned Parenthood. Sanger supported negative eugenics?and wanted to use abortion as a way of decimating the Negro gene pool.


Blaming the One Percent Jews

Hitler used the Jews as a scapegoat, blaming them for everything, including economic hardship, even though the Jewish population in Germany was less than one percent?

Jews in Germany made up less than one percent of the German population. But held According to the census of June 1933, the Jewish population of Germany consisted of about 500,000 people. Jews represented less than one percent of the total German population of about 67 million people.

Despite that, Hitler insisted on taking their money?

Nearly 120 billion Reichsmarks ? over ?12 billion at the time ? was plundered from German Jews by laws and looting.

The official study commissioned by the ministry examined the years from 1933 to 1945. Hans-Peter Ullmann, a Cologne history professor, said the tax authorities under the Nazis actively worked to ?destroy Jews financially? and to loot wealth in the nations the Germans occupied.

Even Jews who managed to escape from Germany before the Holocaust had to leave part of their wealth behind in the form of an ?exit tax?. Tax laws discriminated against Jews from 1934 onwards.

Boycotts of Jewish businesses were used to hurt Jews in Hitler’s Germany just as the BDS movement has been used by lefties to hurt Israeli businesses financially. Boycotts have always been a popular stick of the left.

At 10:00 a.m., members of the Storm Troopers (SA) and SS (the elite guard of the Nazi state) stand in front of Jewish-owned businesses throughout Germany to inform the public that the proprietors of these establishments are Jewish. The word ?Jude,? German for ?Jew,? is often smeared on store display windows, with a Star of David painted in yellow and black across the doors. Anti-Jewish signs accompany these slogans. In some towns, the SA march through the streets singing anti-Jewish slogans and party songs…

The Police State

If you dared oppose the Nazis or Hitler politically, especially with your words, you better watch out. The Gestapo was on the hunt for political dissidents, many of whom would simply vanish.

SS chief Heinrich Himmler also turned the regular (nonparty) police forces into an instrument of terror. He helped forge the powerful Secret State Police (Geheime Staatspolizei), or Gestapo; these non-uniformed police used ruthless and cruel methods throughout Germany to identify and arrest political opponents and others who refused to obey laws and policies of the Nazi regime.


Ask yourself which side of the political spectrum attacks on free speech are coming from today? In the West, the people being dragged into court for their views on climate change, Islam and political correctness, are almost exclusively from the right side of the political divide and their accusers are from the left.

Hitler ?was a socialist through and through. There was nothing conservative about any of his policies. He controlled the population through big government and big education. He did not tolerate political dissidents because he did not believe in free speech and, like all dictators, he feared his citizens being armed. Next time someone on the left refers to Hitler as being right-wing give them a history lesson. Hitler was an authoritarian socialist and his policies were pure socialism in action.

Socialists, strangely enough, are not at all keen to claim Hitler as one of them and go out of their way to deny the socialism of his policies. Their key argument is this:

Nazism, confused as it was, was fundamentally an ideology built around race, while socialism was entirely different: built around class. Hitler aimed to unite the right and left, including workers and their bosses, into a new German nation based on the racial identity of those in it.

To me, this is splitting hairs. It doesn’t matter whether he used race or class to divide people. Like all socialists,?he made one group more important than another group?and used socialist policies to benefit that group.

Hitler’s party was called the?National Socialist German Workers’ Party but lefties would have us believe that he was not a socialist. This is just like ISIS who call themselves Islamic State but who are not Islamic according to lefties. Apparently, we are meant to believe that neither organisation actually understood their ideology.