Monday, 9 May 2005

Neo-Nazi defeat in Berlin

Berlin Bear reports today that on the Sixtieth Anniversary of the end of WWII a counter-protest that led to the cancellation of a neo-Nazi show of force on the streets of Berlin demonstrates we may be able to lay to rest any fears we might still harbour about a neo-Nazi revival in Germany. Says BB:
As I see it, this is an important defeat for the neo-Nazis. It shows to the world that, although there is a tiny minority of fascist numbskulls who have learned nothing from the horrors of the Second World War and the Nazi regime and continue to spread their xenophobic hate-filled lies, they are vastly outnumbered by rational, right-thinking German citizens who are prepared to stand up to them and to say loud and clear, "Never again. Not here, not anywhere."

Or, in the words of the German Minister for the Environment, J├╝rgen Trittin:

'With peaceful means, the public showed these Nazis who were trying to glorify the greatest genocide in history will never again have any role in Germany.'
Let us hope so.


  1. Oh come on PC - what about this vile display of anti-semitism at the German Open:
    Not to mention the dhimmitude of the Dutch.
    Spare me.

  2. Yeah, I saw that too Ruth, and maybe should have mentioned it, but I thought the swift sackings seemed to show that the sentiments expressed were not widely held.

    I'm relying on BB's observation that Neo-Nazism is dead. As I say, he reports that the counter-protest and cancellation demonstrates this. I'll let BB argue it further as I was hoping he would, since I wasn't there.

  3. Nice blog. I'd like to invite you to join Top Blogs, a blog traffic exchange list.

    Basically you sign up and you get code for a button to put on your site the shows your rank. Whenever someone clicks on that button on your blog, you get a vote. The list of blogs is sorted by number of votes, so the blogs with the most votes are ranked higher. Even low ranking blogs get generally at least as much traffic back as they send.


  4. Neo-Nazism will never disappear. Time will only strengthen the mysticism that Hitler infused into his regime. A few other things wrong here. The Nazis were not facists, they were socialists. And they were not responsible for "the greatest genocide in history." Monsters like Stalin and Mao made Hitler look like a piker. The only difference between Nazis and Communists is that Nazis were national socialists and Communists are international socialists. Nazis committed genocide against races, while Communists commit genocide against classes. It is only that pesky mysticism that makes the Nazis stand out from the Communists.

  5. PC,
    I did not say that Neo-Nazism is dead. Neo-Nazism is not dead. Not here, not in New Zealand (National Front anyone?), not in the UK (BNP), etc.

    All I was doing was celebrating what I see as an important defeat for the neo-Nazis, not suggesting that they're a-goner. That, unfortunately, is not likely to happen.

    And WTF is the lone ranger talking about?

  6. OK, I was going to let the lone ranger's nonsenical blathering lie, but I cannot.

    LR, you claim that "the Nazis were not facists, they were socialists."
    While it is true that the Nazis did not *call themselves* fascists (note correct spelling), you would find if you looked into it that in fact their ideology embodied all of the principal tenets of fascism. The Nazis, therefore *were* fascists, they just didn't say so themselves. Your second point (though calling it a "point" flatters to deceive), that the Nazis were socialists is equally nonsense. The Nazis were about as socialist as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic. Just because the word is in the name, doesn't mean that it stands up to any scrutiny of the actual facts.

    I'm sure it is very convenient and comfortable for you (presumably somewhere to the right on the political spectrum) to pretend that Communism and Nazism are one and the same and are both evil left-wing conspiracies, but the fact is quite simply that that is not the case. The fact is that communism and nazism are *very* different and that *both*, independently of the other, led to human rights abuse and genocide on a grand and disgusting scale. There is nothing to be gained (except allowing a few uncomfortable righties to sleep easy at night "knowing" that Hitler was a socialist and therefore all socialists are evil) by fudging history as you aim to do and pretending that Nazism and Communism are ideologically aligned or different manifestations of the same thing. They are not, and anyone who claims that they are has either a) been gravely misled by someone into believing that they are, b) has no idea what he is talking about, or c) knows very well that he is wrong but wishes to deceive others into believing that they are to advance his own political agenda. (In my experience of this argument, it is generally proferred by right-wing Americans who are also under the illusion that American democrats are socialists, and who wish to pretend that the Nazis were socialists so that they can turn the (equally unfactual) accusations of being Nazi-like levelled at them by their political opponents around and use them in reverse. And looking just now at your blogger profile I see that that is indeed exactly the demographic you belong to? Surprise surprise.)

    Your comment is also the first time I have *ever* seen someone seriously suggest that the holocaust is not the worst example of genocide that the modern world has ever seen. I wish you luck in backing that claim up. That said, surely genocide is genocide and is therefore appalling regardless of who is committing it against whom? Do we really need a league table of genocide? Does the "your genocide was worse than my genocide"-type thinking you espouse in your comment actually get us anywhere? The answer is no, it does not.

    Oh, and finally, I'm sure it will interest the homosexuals and jehovah's witnesses who were victims of Hitler's genocide to know that they were only victims based on race, as you claim.

    Get your facts straight Lone Ranger. As it stands, you appear to have no idea what you are actually talking about. You are simply pushing a political envelope based on lies, half-truths and convenient reinterpretations of history. Listeners of your radio shows may buy it. I do not.

  7. BB you said: "I did not say that Neo-Nazism is dead." And neither did I, I posted your own piece and based on that and your own comments suggested a Neo-Nazi revival might not be something about which to lie awake at night worrying about. As you say, these numbskulls are vastly outnumbered by the "rational, right-thinking German citizens" who still have a memory and some balls.

    So maybe we should read each other, or is it just that when everyone sees the word 'Nazi!' they lose their marbles - as I think you might have BB in your rant against the Lone Ranger.

    Were the Nazis Fascists or Socialists? Well, surely the important thing is to recognise that they were thuggish authoritarian arseholes, just as the Soviet Union was, as the People's Republic of China has been, as Pol Pot was, as Castro would like to be ... On the diamond-shaped Nolan Chart they're all down there in Authoritarian purdah. And in levels of hell no doubt they're all sharing the same fiery pit that Castro soon will be.

    There are slight differences between all these mega-murderers, such as Hitler's realisation that it was easier to nationalise people than it was to nationalise property, but the Soviet Gulag and Hitler's Holocaust had more similarities than they had differences. And if it's figures you want, then 'democide' researcher Prof RJ Rummell has them for you here.

  8. "I did not say that Neo-Nazism is dead," I said. But I did say it in my comment way above. Whoops. Shouldn't post quickly without re-reading the thread, as I did when I posted saying it was dead. Mea culpa.

  9. Pete,
    Yeah, it was comments thread that I was referring to, rather than the post itself, to which I did not object at all.

    Sticking with the comments thread, you suggest that I lost my marbles in my "rant", but then you go on to say pretty much exactly what I said. So, for example, you say that the most important thing is to recognise that the Nazis and various manifestations of Communists were "thuggish authoritarian arseholes", which seems to me to be exactly what I was saying with my "The fact is that communism and nazism are *very* different and that *both*, independently of the other, led to human rights abuse and genocide on a grand and disgusting scale."

    You then bring in the diamond-shaped chart, with the authoritarian-libertarian axis. I agree with you about the location on that chart of both the Nazis and the Communists, but that is not what the Lone Ranger was saying at all. LR was talking about a one-axis scale which locates both Communists and Nazis at the far left, which, as I said, is crap.

    And finally you wrote: "but the Soviet Gulag and Hitler's Holocaust had more similarities than they had differences." I agree with that, of course. What I *disagree* with is LR's assertion that one of said similarities was their underlying leftist ideology. That is patently false. It is a favourite right-wing American lie, and I will continue to say so every time I encounter it.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.