Griffin and BNP strategy

[TremulousTetra]

Not quite accurate, they equated them with fascists, hence "social fascists".



As did other small parties of the right and left, it should be said.



Many other factors helped Hitler too. The KPD aren't uniquely to blame, and nothing could really be said to have "eased" him into power. Power still, at the final analysis, had to be stolen by him, something that wouldn't have happened if von Paper, Schleicher and Hindenberg hadn't arrogantly assumed that they could act as puppet-masters to him, and garnered support for the Enabling Act.

So fucking what? However true what you're saying just comes across as pedantasism, unless there's a point.

Got a hold my hands up, some people may view my words as only bashing the KPD, okay. However, the words come to mind “one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind”. So whilst this ultraleftism at the time might have been a small mistake, in the context of history it was catastrophic. Not just in terms of the rise of fascism. The German revolutionaries were possibly uniquely placed in human history. It is arguable that if events had played out differently, another world may have been possible.
However, IMO without doubt, if the KPD had united with the SDP and obliterated the Nazis by the use of mass direct action, at the very least world history would have been rewritten. No? Can you not agree with this?

 

[Pickman's model]

So fucking what? However true what you're saying just comes across as pedantasism, unless there's a point.

Got a hold my hands up, some people may view my words as only bashing the KPD, okay. However, the words come to mind “one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind”. So whilst this ultraleftism at the time might have been a small mistake, in the context of history it was catastrophic. Not just in terms of the rise of fascism. The German revolutionaries were possibly uniquely placed in human history. It is arguable that if events had played out differently, another world may have been possible.
However, IMO without doubt, if the KPD had united with the SDP and obliterated the Nazis by the use of mass direct action, at the very least world history would have been rewritten. No? Can you not agree with this?

but it didn't happen. can you restrain yourself from these trips to fantasy island?

 

[TremulousTetra]

you don't like it up you, do you?

Nice one, that made me laugh.

Pickman>

How fucking apt is that.

 

[ViolentPanda]

A political comment, well done! Even if you did have to pinch them of somebody else.

A big ghetto, still remains a ghetto, if you purposefully ghettoise yourself from the majority.

People don't put themselves in a ghetto, others put them in it. The KPD very obviously were neither put in a ghetto or somehow managed to ghettoise themselves. Germany's population in 1932 was 66 million (according to Red Cross figures), 68%/44,800,000 (according to Bracher) of whom had the vote. In real terms that means that the KPD in 1932 took 11% of the available votes. If you allow for voter participation in the Weimar period averaging 70%, that gives you a participation electorate of around 31.5 million, which means that the KPD took just under 1 of ever 6 votes cast.

Ghettoised? Only in your politics, not in the real world.

The emancipation of the working class, even from fascism, has to be the act of the working class. And the majority of the working class in Germany were SDP politically. The KPD workers should have united with them to obliterate the Nazis while they were still small IMO. Agreed?

[/quote]

Where do you get the idea that "the majority of the working class in Germany were SDP [sic] politically"?
Furthermore, on what do you base your belief that a united front between the SPD and the KPD could have "obliterated" the Nazis?

 

[TremulousTetra]

but it didn't happen. can you restrain yourself from these trips to fantasy island?

OK mate. You u75 anarchist's Carry On Defending Stallinism.

 

[ViolentPanda]

For those interested, this is the result for the ward that Derek Beackon was standing in (Chadwell St Mary):

Anthony William Fish (Labour) - 1174 (53.27%)
Lee Dove (Conservative) - 523 (23.73%)
James Nicholas Baker (UKIP) - 262 (11.89%)
Derek William Beackon (BNP) - 165 (7.49%)
Natalie Butcher (Liberal Democrats) - 80 (3.63%)

Turnout - 2204 (31.01%)

In the 2010 election in this ward, Beackon scored 19.80%.

Looks like another illustration of people using their vote to punish the Lib-Dems for being such arrant wankers and Tory arse-lickers.

 

[audiotech]

Why? Why you appologise to these self appointed post police? Fuck him. If the words conveyed your opinions, they are yours.

I made the cardinal mistake of posting after I came back from the pub.

 

[ViolentPanda]

So fucking what? However true what you're saying just comes across as pedantasism, unless there's a point.

Of course there's a point. The point is that unless you understand history, and portray it accurately, you miss a shed-load of "little things" that make important differences.

Got a hold my hands up, some people may view my words as only bashing the KPD, okay. However, the words come to mind “one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind”. So whilst this ultraleftism at the time might have been a small mistake, in the context of history it was catastrophic. Not just in terms of the rise of fascism. The German revolutionaries were possibly uniquely placed in human history. It is arguable that if events had played out differently, another world may have been possible.

Except that, if you have an inkling of the social, political and economic conditions at the individual and collective levels of the times, you'd realise that the KPD, even had they formed a united front with the SPD, wouldn't have been able to mobilise enough workers to stop the Nazis.

here's a few reasons why:

SPD membership and support was far more socially-diverse than that of the KPD. A large minority of SPD membership and support (around 40%) was based in the professions, whose members have been historically-unwilling (especially in Germany, look at any history of the Bismarckian state that preceded Weimar) to mobilise.

The KPD had it's own internal factions arguing over the party's policies and actions. To assume that the KPD would have mobilised en masse is naive.

Simplest of all, the Nazis (alongside the right and centre parties) had more divisions, and access to the military personnel and materiel in most of the federated states.

However, IMO without doubt, if the KPD had united with the SDP and obliterated the Nazis by the use of mass direct action, at the very least world history would have been rewritten. No? Can you not agree with this?

If you pre-suppose that a united front had obliterated the Nazis, then yes, history would have been different, but that supposition is based on pie-in-the-sky.

 

[TremulousTetra]

People don't put themselves in a ghetto, others put them in it. The KPD very obviously were neither put in a ghetto or somehow managed to ghettoise themselves. Germany's population in 1932 was 66 million (according to Red Cross figures), 68%/44,800,000 (according to Bracher) of whom had the vote. In real terms that means that the KPD in 1932 took 11% of the available votes. If you allow for voter participation in the Weimar period averaging 70%, that gives you a participation electorate of around 31.5 million, which means that the KPD took just under 1 of ever 6 votes cast.

Ghettoised? Only in your politics, not in the real world.

Where do you get the idea that "the majority of the working class in Germany were SDP [sic] politically"?
Furthermore, on what do you base your belief that a united front between the SPD and the KPD could have "obliterated" the Nazis?

So that is no isn't it? You are saying that the KPD workers should not have united with workers to the right of them to oppose fascism?

 

[Pickman's model]

rather than embarrass rmp3 any further about the weimar years in germany, perhaps we could return the discussion to the 21st century and the bnp and embarrass him about the present.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Of course there's a point. The point is that unless you understand history, and portray it accurately, you miss a shed-load of "little things" that make important differences.



Except that, if you have an inkling of the social, political and economic conditions at the individual and collective levels of the times, you'd realise that the KPD, even had they formed a united front with the SPD, wouldn't have been able to mobilise enough workers to stop the Nazis.

here's a few reasons why:

SPD membership and support was far more socially-diverse than that of the KPD. A large minority of SPD membership and support (around 40%) was based in the professions, whose members have been historically-unwilling (especially in Germany, look at any history of the Bismarckian state that preceded Weimar) to mobilise.

The KPD had it's own internal factions arguing over the party's policies and actions. To assume that the KPD would have mobilised en masse is naive.

Simplest of all, the Nazis (alongside the right and centre parties) had more divisions, and access to the military personnel and materiel in most of the federated states.



If you pre-suppose that a united front had obliterated the Nazis, then yes, history would have been different, but that supposition is based on pie-in-the-sky.

BUT given the benifit of hindsight, the lesson of history is,,,,,,,,,,,?

ETA

Except that, if you have an inkling of the social, political and economic conditions at the individual and collective levels of the times, you'd realise that the KPD, even had they formed a united front with the SPD, wouldn't have been able to mobilise enough workers to stop the Nazis.

Fair enough. That's your position. Don't agree one can be SO positive of that, but OK.

 

[Pickman's model]

I made the cardinal mistake of posting after I came back from the pub.

rmp3 simply made the cardinal mistake of posting.

 

[butchersapron]

This stuff from rmp3 is getting embarrassing. This stuff is on the level of oh so you think labour were wrong to the 1979 election do you?

 

[Pickman's model]

BUT given the benifit of hindsight, the lesson of history is,,,,,,,,,,,?

the lesson of history is you cannot rewrite the past

 

[Pickman's model]

rather than embarrass rmp3 any further about the weimar years in germany, perhaps we could return the discussion to the 21st century and the bnp and embarrass him about the present.

This is getting embarrassing. This stuff is on the level of oh so you think labour were wrong to the 1979 election do you?

 

[ViolentPanda]

So that is no isn't it? You are saying that the KPD workers should not have united with workers to the right of them to oppose fascism?

Are you blind? I haven't said anything of the sort. I've made the point that the KPD weren't in a political ghetto, that they were, in fact, part of the political mainstream.

I did, however, ask you where you got your information from, which I see you've not answered.

 

[ViolentPanda]

BUT given the benifit of hindsight, the lesson of history is,,,,,,,,,,,?

That a form of National Socialism, outwith the DAP/NSDAP, already existed, and that Hitler brought the various threads together, that outwith the NSDAP a rightist "national socialist" party would probably still have manifested, and that while a united front between the SPD and KPD might have been able to counter--balance a non-Hitlerite National Socialism, in the case of what actually occurred, the most likely result of active warfare (rather than the sporadic street-fighting that took place) between a united front and the Nazis would have meant the decimation (or worse) of the working class, especially given that the German Catholic church pushed it's adherents towards a right-political posture.

ETA
Fair enough. That's your position. Don't agree one can be SO positive of that, but OK.

I'm not "positive", I'm stating that, with what we know from analysis of historical records/data, testimony etc, the probable outcome would be what I said, that even a united front couldn't have pulled together enough workers into participation in an active fight against Nazism.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Are you blind? I haven't said anything of the sort.

Already covered this.

Except that, if you have an inkling of the social, political and economic conditions at the individual and collective levels of the times, you'd realise that the KPD, even had they formed a united front with the SPD, wouldn't have been able to mobilise enough workers to stop the Nazis.

Fair enough. That's your position. Don't agree one can be SO positive of that, but OK.

 

[TremulousTetra]

That a form of National Socialism, outwith the DAP/NSDAP, already existed, and that Hitler brought the various threads together, that outwith the NSDAP a rightist "national socialist" party would probably still have manifested, and that while a united front between the SPD and KPD might have been able to counter--balance a non-Hitlerite National Socialism, in the case of what actually occurred, the most likely result of active warfare (rather than the sporadic street-fighting that took place) between a united front and the Nazis would have meant the decimation (or worse) of the working class, especially given that the German Catholic church pushed it's adherents towards a right-political posture.



I'm not "positive", I'm stating that, with what we know from analysis of historical records/data, testimony etc, the probable outcome would be what I said.

OK. "wouldn't have been able to mobilise enough workers to stop the Nazis"

 

[Pickman's model]

Already covered this.

link or stfu

 

[TremulousTetra]

I made the cardinal mistake of posting after I came back from the pub.

No worries. At least I have another way to wind up BA now. BTW, on that topic, have I told you about my website http://www.resistancemp3.org.uk/

 

[Pickman's model]

No worries. At least I have another way to wind up BA now. BTW, on that topic, have I told you about my website http://www.resistancemp3.org.uk/

no speeches from 2010 i see

 

[ViolentPanda]

Already covered this.

And the context of the rest of the post that came after the bit you quoted, hmm? Where I give reasons why a untied front would likely not have mobilised all SPD and KPD support?

You've covered nothing, except your fondness for selectively quoting.

 

[ViolentPanda]

link or stfu

He's attempting to claim that I stated an absolute, rather than me having given fairly plain and easily discernable (if you've bothered to scratch the surface of the history of Weimar Germany) reasons why what he proposes would have been unlikely to work.

 

[TremulousTetra]

He's attempting to claim that I stated an absolute, rather than me having given fairly plain and easily discernable (if you've bothered to scratch the surface of the history of Weimar Germany) reasons why what he proposes would have been unlikely to work.

lol
you did say "wouldn't have been able to mobilise enough workers to stop the Nazis", but if your saying you mean't probably that's fine, I accept that.

 

[TremulousTetra]

And the context of the rest of the post that came after the bit you quoted, hmm? Where I give reasons why a untied front would likely not have mobilised all SPD and KPD support?

You've covered nothing, except your fondness for selectively quoting.

fine, if that is your position fine. I don't agree, but fine.

your post makes your position [and possibly BA's] sense, at last. only been waiting 7 years. but hey ho.

 

[TremulousTetra]

no speeches from 2010 i see

don't worry. I'll make thread to announce when they're ready.

 

[FreddyB]

don't worry. I'll make thread to announce when they're ready.

I suspect that he isn't worried at all.

 

[TremulousTetra]

I suspect that he isn't worried at all.

lol

 

[dennisr]

It is exactly the same as what the SWP says.

But it is the exact opposite of what the SWP does.