DeMint Confuses Nazis and Social Democrats; Also Calls Obama a Nazi
I’d seen a bunch of blogs tough briefly on the fact that Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) compared Barack Obama to Adolf Hitler, but it’s only now that I’m actually reading the full statement:
Part of what we’re trying to do in ‘Saving Freedom’ is just show that where we are, we’re about where Germany was before World War II where they became a social democracy. You still had votes but the votes were just power grabs like you see in Iran, and other places in South America, like Chavez is running down in Venezuela. People become more dependent on the government so that they’re easy to manipulate. And they keep voting for more government because that’s where their security is. When our immigrants get here, they’re worried, because they see it happening here.
Look, comparing your domestic political rivals to Nazis is a time-honored tradition. But confusing the Nazis and Germany’s Social Democrats is a scandal. The Social Democrats were the main source of opposition to Hitler at a time when the Communists were bizarrely maintaining that there was no difference between the two and the mainstream parties of the center-right decided that it made sense to form a tactical alliance with Hitler. Social Democrats stand for a generous welfare state and active labor market policies. Nazis try to conquer the world and send people to the gas chamber. Jonah Goldberg aside, this is not a subtle distinction.
52 Responses to “DeMint Confuses Nazis and Social Democrats; Also Calls Obama a Nazi”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
July 9th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Even scarier, he seems to suggest that fear of immigrants is rational here today as well as in 1930s Germany. Am I reading that wrong?
July 9th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Lessee … today’s so-called conservatives blithely conflate Nazis and Social Democrats like the Commies used to do. We saw in the previous post so-called conservatives supposedly afraid of big-gummint supporting Chinese Communist crack-downs on restive populations.
Do we really need another public service announcement about the Communist roots of today’s neo-con based so-called conservative movement?
July 9th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Social Democrats stand for a generous welfare state and active labor market policies. Nazis try to conquer the world and send people to the gas chamber
The SPD were, in fact, the first people sent to the KZ-lägers, and they tended not to survive to 1936, let alone the end of the war. There was a lot of “suicide” and “shot while resisting arriest.”
Goldberg really is scum.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
You still had votes but the votes were just power grabs like you see in Iran
Admittedly, Bush v. Gore could support this contention pretty well, but somehow I doubt he intends to rely on it.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
The communists in Germany were under orders from Moscow to not cooperate with more moderate left-wingers. I guess this was to “heighten the contradictions”, making them analogous to the Naderites in 2000.
I think its a bit of an exaggeration to say that the Nazis try to conquer the world. They were merely trying to conquer their region of the world.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
You still had votes but the votes were just power grabs like you see in Iran, and other places in South America, like Chavez is running down in Venezuela.
This really is something a speaker ought to clarify.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
I think its a bit of an exaggeration to say that the Nazis try to conquer the world. They were merely trying to conquer their region of the world. – Jim W.
AFAIK, the Nazi policy was to identify a similarly minded totalitarian group in the regions of the world they personally didn’t care to conquer and call the nationality from which said group arose “the Aryans of [Region X]“.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
German history is all so confusing–maybe DeMint should just ask Dubya which side his ancestors were on and go with them.
I think its a bit of an exaggeration to say that the Nazis try to conquer the world. They were merely trying to conquer their region of the world.
Well, the Axis as a whole was pretty much taking a shot at it. And the Nazis considered all of Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and western Russia to be part of their “region”, which is at least pretty ambitious.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
The communists in Germany were under orders from Moscow to not cooperate with more moderate left-wingers. I guess this was to “heighten the contradictions”, making them analogous to the Naderites in 2000.
Of course, then the Sovs realized that the Nazis meant business after they essentially obliterated first the SPD and then the KPD in about two and a half years, and so they started pushing the Popular Front line, about allying with social democrats and socialists to present a united front against fascism.
This is part of the reason the Spanish Civil War happened, since the Republicans were an uneasy alliance of varying leftists, ethnic nationalists, and anarchists.
Then Koba decided in 37 and 38 to purge Comintern, fire Litvinov (ethnically Jewish) and put Molotov in a position to make a rapprochement. Little quirk of history is that Maxim’s grandson Pavel ended up as a dissident, and eventually, a highly regarded teacher at my prep school, who I had for nearly every math and physics class I took.
And then, in 41, Stalin called back Litvinov and sent him to the US to revive a kind of popular front with the Western allies.
Soviet foreign policy was dysfunctional in a Michael Jackson-esque manner.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
I’m afraid that this is part of a concerted effort, similar to Francisco Franco’s, to paint liberal democrats, or even just democrats rather than autocrats and dictators, as ‘ruining the country.’ This constant stream of Obama=Hitler, one of the most absolutely absurd things anyone could ever dream of saying, is part of a drum beat to legitimize a coup d’état, perhaps. Look at the Republicans crowing over the illegal ouster of their left-leaning president. What’s it to them? Unless they were somehow implicated in behind the scenes acts. Remember Iran-Contra and the hideous underworld of ex military, right wing commandoes, etc. engaged in trying to thwart the will of the people everywhere–and working hand in glove with Iran to do so? I fear they have not gone away…
July 9th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
I’m not sure I understand what the exact nature of DeMint’s foolishness here is.
Is he confusing Nazis with Social Democrats?
Or when he talks about Germany becoming a social democracy is he talking about Weimar and saying that elections under the Weimar Republic were “just power grabs like you see in Iran, and other places in South America, like Chavez is running down in Venezuela?”
The former is insulting and asinine. The latter seems arguably even more ridiculous. Either way, it doesn’t make a lick of sense.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
The statement about immigrants makes a little more sense if you read the entire transcript. He prefaces his analogy by saying that he was talking to an Iranian immigrant to the country who’s spooked by the level of spending and deficits.
In other news, DeMint is a nut.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
jjm, you are aware the National Review was, is, and always will be an unreserved supported of General Franco?
Buckley was famous for his man-crush on Bahamonde.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
I meant left-leaning Honduras president…
July 9th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
I really hate Republicans. This is why.
July 9th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
DeMint, DeMent(ia) The guy is obviously nuts.
America barely escaped the turmoil of vote fraud which, in DeMint’s own words, reflects both Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004 where “the votes were just power grabs.” Q.E.D.
Hang your head in shame, DeMint. Then resign, or maybe lie down in front of an oncoming bus. Or train. Whichever. Do your country a favor. Oh, and take Karl Rove with you. I think he’s still ‘free’ (sadly).
July 9th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
The real focus should be on how incredibly stupid Jim DeMint is. When Obama burns down Congress, blames the Mexicans for it, passes an enabling act giving his administration powers to make laws without judicial review, suspends the constitution, bans the republican party, purges (i.e., kills) dissenters in the democratic party, changes the national flag, quadruples the army, renames himself adorable leader, encourages American women to become baby making machines, and finally invades Canada… then we would be (somewhat) like Germany was before WWII.
July 9th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
This is the thing: I read this blog, and it’s all about encouraging the government to regulate and coerce the smallest and most personal of individual decisions, and I recoil. But then I see that the other side are absolute lunatics, and idiots to boot. And of course, the libertarians are crazy. Their ideas may be good, but individual libertarians are, literally, crazy people. And so every four years, I write checks and campaign for a political party I both identify with and disagree with on many major points. Such is life in a two party system.
July 9th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
This has probably been mentioned before, but one of the reasons the Communists (KPD) weren’t too excited about the Social Democrats (SPD) was that just after WWI, when no one really knew who was running things, the SPD hired a paramilitary faction (which eventually turned Nazi) to gun down members of the KPD, including Rosa Luxembourg. It’s not really surprising that they’d have trouble seeing the distinctions.
Ideologically they might not have been far apart, but the Communists’ and Social Democrats’ mutual (I stress “mutual”, here) inability to tolerate each other led to their inability to form a coalition together in the early 1930s, which ultimately cinched the Nazi Party’s rise to power.
July 9th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Your last sentence contains a potentially offensive and therefore hilarious uncertain modifier.
July 9th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Rum raisin, I see you leave out the “kill two million Jews” part.
Of course, Obama’s current main foreign policy initiative is to cut off Israel from civilization and provide succor to nuclear Iranian fascists who gun down their own people, so perhaps that wouldn’t look too good for the Dumbocrat.
July 9th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
My hunch is, these guy knows about as much about German history as the blogger, but presented things wrong by intention to present the NSDAP as “left” evil so that those ridiculous Nazi assertions from the far right towards the center makes more sense.
July 9th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
If you follow the link, DeMint says we should listen to Iranian immigrants because “They understand socialism.” I’m sure many of them do, but they didn’t get that understanding from the government in Iran. Unless DeMint is using the Republican lexicon, in which “socialist” means “any government or policy I disagree with.”
July 9th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
The KPD’s position about the SPD was not bizarre (KPD – German Communist Party, SPD – Social Democrats). It was wrong, but not bizarre.
1. The SPD had, repeatedly, relied on the far right wing to suppress left-wing opposition to the SPD’s own rule. The KPD was right in pointing out that ultimately the SPD was actually empowering the very people who most opposed the SPD. This, in fact, was true: the vast majority of the Nazi leadership were heavily involved in Freikorp activity. Some Nazi leaders were vaulted to national prominence only because of their being Freikorp heroes, bizarrely fighting at the behest of the SPD.
2. The question is ultimately whether the Weimar Republic was salvagable. There’s a very good argument that it would not have survived even if there were no Commies in Germany at all (it might have just devolved into a right-wing dictatorship earlier). And, in turn, if it’s correct that the Weimar Republic was soon to end, then what replaces it is probably not going to be determined by votes, but rather by military force. If that argument is true, the KPD was correct in arguing that, by a certain point, it’s useless to participate in the Weimar Republic – what’s going to be useful is organizing your military forces, not organizing your votes.
July 9th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
“Rum raisin, I see you leave out the “kill two million Jews” part.”
You, uh, cut the number by two-thirds. Are you a partial Holocaust denier? A Holocaust mitigator?
July 9th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Anonymous, in what world do you live in? Obama’s foreign policy in this one bears absolutely no resemblance that bizarre description you just gave.
July 9th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Rum raisin, I see you leave out the “kill two million Jews” part.
Two million? Anyway, he was responding to DeMint’s comparison to Germany *before* WWII, not during.
July 9th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Uh, you both missed the part about, “like Germany was before WWII,” in Rum Raisin’s comment. The killings on the scale of millions didn’t really get underway until the war started.
July 9th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Rum Raisin’s comment is full of win. Anonymous’s reply is full of “THE STUPID! IT BURNS USSSS!”
July 9th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Besides, AfPak is Obama’s main foreign policy initiative right now. Providing succor to Iranian fascists is way down the list.
July 9th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Indeed, humorously enough, Ahmadinejad is anti-union and has worked vigorously to privatize government services. He engages in aggressive and racist rhetoric, makes a big deal of what a devoutly religious person he is, and hates women’s rights and homosexuals. According to Senator DeMint, all this apparently corresponds to “socialism.” Well, if he says so…
July 9th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
The killings on the scale of millions didn’t really get underway until the war started.
In that case the 2m figure is way too high if Anon meant to refer to the pre-war period, as his defenders are claiming.
So either Anon is a denier, or is just deeply ignorant of basic historical events. I’ll charitably guess the latter.
July 9th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
I’m not even sure if he is comparing the Nazi’s and Social Democrats, Matt. I’ve read the quote three times now and its so convoluted I have absolutely no idea what he’s talking about. It’s most likely more non-sense from the Republicans where they try to fit talking-points about dictatorship, Nazis and socialism as many times as possible into the same sentence.
July 9th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Not to change the subject, but was Chavez’s electoral loss of a year ago all a clever ploy?
Or I guess we’ve just forgotten about it.
And when people say “Zelaya wants to change the constitution like Chavez did” they must be referring to the desire, rather than the actual amendment of a constitution. Because Chavez failed to do that. In the (ahem) fake election.
July 9th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
The most charitable interpretation would be that DeMint is referring to the chancellorship of Heinrich Brüning who to a large part ruled by decree (Notverordnungen) from 1930-32. The problem with that is: he wasn’t a Social Democrat.
As for the Social Democrats, I won’t excuse their alliance with the far-right paramilitaries (Freikorps), but one has to keep in mind that the communists meant business and were a real threat to the Republic. It is reasonable to argue that the Republic might not have survived for very long either way. This was also due to a majority of the population not having embraced democratic values and being stuck in the autoritarian mindset of the Kaiserreich. But a gradual shift towards democracy might also have been feasible and the communists were a major factor in the weakening this possibility.
July 9th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
I’m just curious as to whether this Iranian immigrant’s concern trolling about the dangers of deficits and spending was manifest during the Bush years or if this was something new that only happened after Jan 20, ‘09
I also wonder whether this Iranian immigrant had universal health care while in Iran.
I also wonder why, after free election in which a clear majority of the vote went to a specific party who pledged specific policies and now that party attempting to carry out those policies is now compared to one of the worst totalitarian dictatorships of the 20th century.
July 9th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Indeed, humorously enough, Ahmadinejad is anti-union and has worked vigorously to privatize government services. He engages in aggressive and racist rhetoric, makes a big deal of what a devoutly religious person he is, and hates women’s rights and homosexuals.
I don’t see what’s so humorous about this. It’s standard-issue fascism.
July 9th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
I’m inclined to agree with David @ 33. It’s just a glitch in their brainwash matrix that causes them to, when startled or confused, just start throwing out references to things most Americans either hate or fear.
Those things all come from a list that is labeled “evil” in their brains–as opposed to the list that is labeled “good”, which includes things like freedom, democracy, business, money, strength, morals, god, jesus, etc., etc.
If two things are on the same list, they can be reasonably compared, hence why somewhere between the bible and republican doctrine, Jesus became a huge fan of endowing fabulous wealth on his followers. Both on the same list…
July 9th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Ok, so where do the Bocialists fit in?
July 9th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
“But a gradual shift towards democracy might also have been feasible and the communists were a major factor in the weakening this possibility.”
However, the additional complication is that, by the time the KPD became a really major force in the Weimar Republic (after 1929), the Republic was already defacto no longer in existance – basically being run by emergency decrees by Hindenburg’s hand-picked cronies. At that point, it was unclear what the SPD was actually supporting. It can easily be argued that the KPD’s opposition to the remnants of the republic was the correct position.
July 9th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
The fascists want back in power.
July 9th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
The fascists are in power LOL.
July 9th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
The communists in Germany were under orders from Moscow to not cooperate with more moderate left-wingers.
July 9th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
Yeah well you just called Jim DeMint a communist
“DeMint … confusing the Nazis and Germany’s Social Democrats is a scandal … Communists … maintaining that there was no difference between the two” Look I don’t like him much either but I totally disagree with your assertion that he is a communist.
If I were a communist and aimed to destroy the Republican party I would not act like Senator DeMint at all … uh wellllll hummmmm
OK OK I admit it. You’re right, he must be a communist. No one could do so much to discredit conservatism by accident.
July 10th, 2009 at 3:19 am
Where are all the people who were “shocked and scandalized” when George W. Bush was compared to Hitler?
July 10th, 2009 at 9:45 am
AFAIK, the Nazi policy was to identify a similarly minded totalitarian group in the regions of the world they personally didn’t care to conquer and call the nationality from which said group arose “the Aryans of [Region X]“.
This is ridiculous.
July 10th, 2009 at 9:47 am
The communists in Germany were under orders from Moscow to not cooperate with more moderate left-wingers.
Unbelieveably ignorant. The European communist parties followed Moscow’s line precisely.
July 10th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Re: Rofl, as if Moscow would have been able to control the German communists.
There were plenty independent minded communists throughout Europe, most famously the Trotskyists but not limited to them. But they were repressed and, when necessary, exterminated by the pro-Stalin faction. The official Communist Parties throughout most of Europe and Latin America (though certainly not every individual communist) toed the Moscow line with despicable slavishness right up till the end of the war. Marshal Tito was probably the first major communist figure to stand up to Stalin and survive.
July 10th, 2009 at 10:48 am
It is ridiculous, but the Nazis did a lot of ridiculous things.
After the Japanese sent him a samurai sword, Heinrich Himmler decided that they must be “the Aryans of the Far East,” and directed some of his quack archaeologists to prove it.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
It should be noted though, that during the presidential election campaign of 1925, the Comintern (controlled by Moscow) urged the KPD to drop its own candidate, Ernst Thälmann, and to support the candidate of the democratic parties, Wilhelm Marx, against Paul von Hindenburg. The KPD refused, and Hindenburg won. Maybe history would have developed differently if the KPD had obeyed Moscow’s orders.
July 10th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
DeMint’s remarks are just more evidence that the Nazis’ Big Lie is still working — Nazi is short for Nazional Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (National Socialist German Workers’ Party), a name invented to inspire just the sort of confusion that DeMint is spreading (although the Nazis’ purposes in doing so were different from DeMint’s).
July 10th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Now you lost it entirely. At least Moscow had some influence on the German communists, especially later on. The French on the other hand were always very independend minded.
We are talking about the Weimar time here, not about the post WWII communist block. Should also be noted that the Räte movement against which the SPD cooperated with the far right military was far more moderate than the later communists. Point is, with what we know today, the SPD made a huge mistake. Albeit an understandable one with the informations at that time point.