I don’t think I’m the only one tired of these ridiculous argumentsabout who resembles the Nazis more so let’s not start that here. Thanks inadvance. If you think Obama or Bush resembled Nazis in any meaningful way you’reclueless. Now that that’s out of the way…
The social revolutionary character of Nazism seems to getlost in these stupid attempts at guilt by association. In fact, anyone familiarwith the history of the movement knows that a socialistic sentiment waswidespread among the rank and file as well as among influential figures, suchas the Strasser brothers, Rohm and others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism
Moreover, it was the fear of a general social revolution andthe potential chaos caused by such a revolution that led directly to the Nightof the Long Knives. The call for fundamental social change became so threateningthat Hitler had to act to consolidate his hold on the party. This was notbecause Hitler was doing the bidding of industrialists who mistakenly believedthey could control him. On the contrary, they were doing his. Nor was hemotivated by any rejection of social change per se. Nor was it a desire forpower for power’s sake. The immediate goals were 1) rearmament and 2) the colonizationof the east. Everything had to be subordinated to those goals. Social tumultand the consequent economic tumult simply would not do. Little if any of the above is in serious dispute today.
Anyone who truly wishes to understand a movement, aphilosophy, etc. must at some point learn to deal with it on its own terms. You can't ask a question like "what was Nazism" and remain in your own political world. This is especially true for Americans who have had no historical experience of fascism let alone Nazism or of the premodern traditions those philosophies tried to recall. Sadly,you have one group who remains wedded to the long out of date social science andhistory of the 1950s and 1960s and merely parrots it as if it were authoritative. They use terms like "revisionism" which reveals a grossly deficient philosophy of history. You have another group that is merely a response tothe first and their historical writing can’t be called obsolete onlybecause it was never of any use or interest in the first place. They use terms like "liberal fascism".