Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Ho Chi Minh

2007-06-28T19:36:26Z

Thjazi:

{{expand}}
'''Hồ Chí Minh''' was a [[Vietnam]]ese revolutionary
who liberated Việt Nam from French rule, but however then imposed one-party rule on Việt Nam, dashing any hopes of it becoming a democratic country.
He was Prime Minister of the so-called Democratic Republic of Vietnam from 1945 to 1955. He assumed the office of President in 1955 and remained there until his death on September 2, 1969. After the civil war ended in 1975, [[Saigon]] was renamed [[Ho Chi Minh City]].

==External link==
*[http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:45uLGC93fs0J:www.pipeline.com/~rgibson/HoChiMinh.htm+HO+CHI+MINH+an+appreciation+by+Wilfred+Burchett&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us HO CHI MINH an appreciation] by [[Guardian|Wilfred Burchett]]

[[Category:Heads of state]]
[[Category:Communists]]

Talk:Nazi Party

2007-06-28T19:31:46Z

Thjazi: /* Right Wing */

== NAZI ==

NAZI NAME- IMPORTANT
Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei is in fact National Socialist's broad German Labor Party, and not as it is said in the article.
Accurate information is a must on a credible pedia.

== Homosexuality of the Nazis ==

Which top Nazis were openly gay? That's the first time I've ever heard people claiming this, save for the Hitler-was-gay claims that always come up. But then again, so do Lincoln-was-gay claims. The point is is that none of this is verifiable despite one book claiming it is. I say remove it.

:Wow. Let's use Wikipedia as a source for this one; note [[Adolf Hitler]]'s [[tolerance]] for [[gay]]s:
::''Having been outed in 1925, however, [Ernst] Röhm made little attempt to hide his sexuality. Despite Hitler's pretense of shock upon discovering his deputy's sexual orientation, he had in fact long known that Röhm was homosexual....During Röhm's tenure at the head of the SA, it has been suggested that a number of homosexual men (notably Karl Ernst, a former bouncer at a gay nightclub, and Edmund Heines) were appointed to and promoted within the SA as a result of high-level liaisons with powerful SA figures.''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_R%C3%B6hm#R.C3.B6hm.27s_sexual_orientation]
:Amazing. Wikipedia almost got it half right on this one. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 13:28, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

:::That's one top Nazi that was openly gay, but the article claims "though many top Nazis were openly gay..." This statement implies a plurality of homosexuals and not just the leader of the SA, who was killed when the SA was purged. So does one equal many? Yes, in the citation above there are two more men who were in the SA reported to be homosexuals, but they were not "top Nazis." This distinction implies people like Hess, Himmler, Goebbles, Hitler, etc., people who commanded Germany. The introduction to ''The Pink Triangle'' addresses homosexuality in the top echelons, of which there was little. Also, just because Hitler tolerated one homosexual does not mean he tolerated them all. His tolerance for Röhm could have just been convenient, until say, he killed him.

::::There was Edmund Heines as well, and Karl Ernst. But even adding these two wouldn't substantiate the claim of "many top Nazis." The fact is that most of the leadership that leaned that way was in the SA and was eliminated in the Night of the Long Knives.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 22:32, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::And a further aside; we have already pointed out how in electing Hitler, a Catholic, Germany showed itself more socially progressive than the United States by several decades. Likewise we shall demonstrate the Nazi's were more socially enlighten regarding the issue of gays in the military.
:::::Coming soon: Affirmative Action and the Wehrmacht. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:49, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
::::::That post doesn't address the issue at hand. The article states that they were not tolerant for gays, but were gay themselves. I still reject the "top leadership" claim (other than Rohm). The fact that there were gays in the ranks (which there would be in any population if we assume gays live in any population) does not mean that "top Nazis" were practitioners of homosexual behavior.
::::::PS Where in the book is the youth groups claim cited, or could you provide the quote?

::::::Se also, ''The Damned'', starring Dirk Bogard [http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/cinema/features/damned.shtml], has a lengthy scene of a typical Nazi gay orgy with the Stormtroopers walking around wearing women's underwear, etc.

Given that the whole homosexual-nazi's theme has been started by Scott Lively, I doubt it is at all credible. Lively is a hardly a respectable historian - he is, in fact, an anti-homosexual campaigner and nothing more than this. I see someone has gone to the trouble of preparing a page on him that makes it very clear - with quotes, even - that he cannot be considered a reliable source because he is a fanatical conspiricy-theorist who appears to believe that homosexuals are planning to take over the world (While at the same time denying that homosexuality even exists). Citing fake histories invented by political power-gamers desperate to rewrite the past to make it appear the nazi's were homosexual is very detrimental to the credability of this site. I thus suggest that all reference to Scott Lively's pet theory are removed. Once his nonsense is dismissed, we have credible-looking support for a ''single'' homosexual high-up in the Nazi party (Rohm). Just the one. Who kept it in the closet. Hardly the openly party-supported gay-orgies that some people are claiming, or Scott's ungrounded belief in a mostly-homosexual leadership. There are two potentials too, but no proof - working as a bouncer at a gay nightclub does not make someone gay - BornAgainBrit

:Oh, I deleted a coupe of comments to calm things down - but only comments that are fairly old, unsourced (Or use Scott as a source) and make highly unlikely claims.

== Right Wing ==

The Nazis were neither atheists nor socialists and the question of whether or not they or their earlier incarnations qualify as "right wing" was resolved decades ago. I'm sorry, but I see no reason to accept Robs' idiosyncratic definitions as if they were accepted fact. They are most definitely not. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 13:53, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

:Right. So as to whether a Socialist is a Socialist all depends on what the meaning of is is "is is" is. I understand fully. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 14:15, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

"We demand liberty for all religious denominations in the State, so far as they are not a danger to it and do not militate against the morality and moral sense of the German race. The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession. It combats the Jewish-materialist spirit within and without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health from within only on the principle: the common interest before self-interest." - Paragraph 24, Programme for the German Workers' Party (Pre-nazi). This is what happens when people blindly assume anyone who ''claims'' to be Christian is worth supporting. Hitler spoke publicly of his Christian faith constantly - that makes him a good politician, but not a real christian.

:''It [the party] combats the Jewish-materialist spirit within and without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health from within only on the principle: '''the common interest before self-interest.'''" ''
::'''the common interest before self-interest''', I would say this statement (a) lays to rest the idea the NSDAP is "conservative", and/or right-wing defined as a belief in rugged individualism; (b) pretty much clarifies the Social and Communal roots of Nazism. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 09:50, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:::No, whether a Socialist is a Socialist depends on whether or not the person or political party advocates collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of producton. The Nazis advocated some measure of government control in that realm, but not to the point where they qualified as "socialist," any more than 19th Century Prussia -- which advocated a similar kind of control -- qualified as "socialist."

:::Your claim that the Nazi party doesn't qualify as "right wing" is nothing more than blatant historical revisionism, an attempt to alter the definition of the term decades after the fact. The Nazis by and large considered themselves right wing, were referred to as right wing by contemporary opponents and sympathizers and by neutral observers (like travel guides to Germany at the time,) have been acknowledged as right wing by historians covering that era. What exactly do you expect to accomplish by altering common usage in this manner?
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 12:18, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:Meaning no disrespect, but it appears you too often speak first before looking at some of the issues. And while I can appreciate your once popular political prejudices, in retrospect we see denying facts and carrying on myths really serves no purpose anymore.

:Now, as to whether or not Socialists are indeed Socialists, lets begin with examing the "means of production", i.e. Volkswagen. [http://mondediplo.com/1998/01/11volkswag] So, we will be afforded the opportunity to examine the history of this Socialist enterprise to whatever extent they've made thier Archives available to the public.

:And finally the left/right spectrum theory is just that--only a theory. For weeks now I've been waiting to hear a definition from advocates of this theory what a "leftist" is. All I've seen so far is something like this:

*''a leftist is a liberal'' --->click here ''a liberal is a leftist'' --->click here ''leftists oppose oppression, hence Communists are leftists''

:that's the left side of this nonsense. Then we hear about how Socialists like Hitler actually were devout Christians like Rev. Falwell, who wants to exterminate gays, too.

:My appoligies, but this garbage is going absolutly nowhere. And if your serious in persuing this dead end thinking, my advice is to define "leftist", cause none, absolutley none of your so-called "leftist allies" have been able to do so up til now. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 12:53, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

::Garbage is definitely the operative term for this blatant revisionism of claiming that the Nazis were not "right wing" and were in fact "socialist." Using your definition of the term "socialist", Prussia and indeed much of 19th century Europe were "socialist." That is not how these countries were defined nor how they saw themselves, nor how they are defined today.

::A "leftist" is defined in the dictionary as "Those professing views usu. characterized by desire to reform or overthrow the establishe order esp. in poltics and usus. advocating chage in the name of the greater freedom or well-being of the common man. A "right winger" is defined as "individuals sometimes professing opposition to change in the established order and favoring traditional attitudes and practices." The Nazis attitudes towards women, minorities, the disabled, the arts, homosexuality, foriegn policy and a range of other areas put them squarely on the right side of the political spectrum. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 13:05, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:::ok, let's take that dictionary definition, "advocating chage in the name of the greater ... well-being of the common man", and "opposition to change in the established order and favoring traditional attitudes and practices". So which one of us is left and which one of us is right? I want change to stop these nonsensical definitions of left & right, you are resisting it and bring in more of this nonsense that does absolutly nothing to answer the question. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 13:12, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

::::Which of us is "left" and which of us is "right" depends on how traditional our attitudes are towards issues like women, labor, minorities, etc. The Nazis, while they wished to overthrow the current order of the Weimar Republic, wanted to do so in order to turn the clock back to the era before women were active in public life, before Jews had been emancipated, before the advent of the avant garde in art and film, etc. It was essentially a revulsion against much of the modern world and a wildly romanticized view of the past.

::::If the fact that terms like "right" and "left" can be imprecise and part of a "spectrum" renders them "nonsensical," then much of language is "nonsensical." Terms like "religion," "politics," "freedom," "morality," even "red," "blue," "wet," "dry," "hot," or "cold" are "nonsensical." You want to give up using those terms too? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 13:26, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::''"The Nazis, while they wished to overthrow the current order of the Weimar Republic...''
:::::hmmm...let's see....which country, the US or Germany, displayed it's social progressivity by electing a Catholic to it's highest office? Was it the US & JFK, or Wiemar Republic and Hitler? Then, which country introduced affirmative action into the military after the Treaty of Versailles which allowed poor common scum, like Rommel, to rise to the position of General based upon merit rather than Social class? Which country displayed its social progressivity by allowing gays in the military first, the US or Nazi Germany? [[User:RobS|RobS]] 14:11, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::: First of all, the Weimar Republic is not synonymous with Hitler. Quite the contrary, it was the liberalism of the Weimar Republic that that Hitler and the Nazis opposed, so trying to cram the term "affirmative action" into the context of the Weimar republic just bolsters my argument that the Nazis who reviled it were traditionalists and ergo "Right Wing." And the Nazis did not openly allow gays in the military, though I have no doubt that there were powerful gay men there who barely bothered to hide their homosexuality -- as has been true in many homophobic societies from time immemorial. The illusion of impunity many powerful gay Nazis felt coupled with official Nazi stance against homosexuality were frequently exploited by Himmler. One of his methods of controlling the people around him was by threatening to publicize an individuals homosexuality and thus exposing that individual to public disgrace and legal penalties.

::::::It was under Weimar, by the way, that German women gained the right to vote and began to appear more frequently in public life, that the avant garde arts flourished, that the last shreds of the legal restrictions on German Jews were dropped -- all of these were trends that the Nazis hated, and worked to elminate once they came into power. You don't do your case any good, Rob, by using Weimar policies to argue for the Nazis NOT being Right Wing. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 16:23, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::There is a large divergence between American historians and Germans in discussing Wiemar Germany. Germans regard what is called "Wiemar Germany", or "the Wiemar period" as extending from 1919 to 1939. Americans assume Wiemar Germany ended in 1933 with the rise of Hitler & Nazism. This is what I call "the Hollywood view" while popular and prevelent, nonetheless over fictionalized.

:::::::Talking about women gaining sufferage in Wiemar Germany almost brings tears to my eyes; I'm almost convinced to become a so-called "leftist", one who "advocates change in the name of the greater freedom or well-being of the common man". But then all my fellow leftists today say Iraqi women can rot in hell as far as thier concerned. So what would you beleive if you were in my shoes? [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:47, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::::RobS, if I were in your shoes I would certainly take an English class. [[User:Thjazi|Thjazi]] 15:31, 28 June 2007 (EDT)

Kindly provide a cite for this presumed "divergence." I have yet to see or hear ANY historian, American or German, claim that the Weimar Republic lasted until 1939, and I have spent many years not only reading about this subject, but listening to first-hand accounts from Germans who lived through that era. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 17:14, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:Here's one, Speer, Albert (1970). ''Inside the Third Reich''. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-684-82949-5. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 19:58, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

::And exactly where does Speer claim that the Weimar Republic ended in 1939? What chapter? What section? How does the passage read? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 10:53, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

The entry here on Conservapedia for the Weimar Republic has it ending in 1933. Are you planning to "correct" this article? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 17:34, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

Here is what Speer has to say about the Weimar Republic:

"...Hitler did not want to alter the proportion of sixty thousand voters for each deputy THAT HAD BEEN SET BY THE WEIMAR REPUBLIC (emphasis addded. Note past tense.) He never explained his reasons; but he was as firm on this matter as he was about nominal retention of the traditional electoral system with its fixed dates for elections, rule of franchise, ballot boxes, and secret ballot. On this matter he evidently wanted to preserve a tradition which had brought him to power, eventhough his introduction of the one-party system had made the whole thing pointless."

"The liberalism of the Weimar Republic seemed to us by comparison lax, dubious, and in no way desirable."

Please explain how this backs up your claim that Germans believe the Weimar Republic lasted until 1939. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 14:43, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

:The first reference makes EXACTLY the point; the second reference needs a timeframe, because if it occurs during a discussion of wartime German attitudes, it likewise makes the same point. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:13, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

:::It most certainly does NOT make your point. Speer refers to the Weimar Republic in the past tense, and the fact that this meaningless remnant of the Weimar system remained no more means the Weimar Republic itself remained than the fact that there were still some buildings put up during Weimar means the Weimar Republic itself remained. And are you going to put your money where your mouth is, change the Conservapedia Article on the Weimar Republic, "correct" it so that it no longer says it lasted only until 1933? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 15:17, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

::::OK, so when Speer says "Hitler did not want to alter", I guess actually means "did want to alter", much the same way a Socialist is not a Socialist.

::::Once again my friend you assign motives to me when all I did was point out disparties between American schools of historiagraphy and German. Here's another one you can look into,
:::::''"I was reading a wiki article the other day that made reference to "the Nazi seizure of power"; this article obviously was brought over from the German wiki, cause American sources always make light of the fact Hitler was democratically elected."''[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-March/064824.html]
::::And actually I counted some 200 articles in the English Wiki were this subversive poison made its way into the English language. Amazing, Wikipedia actually created the beast its intent upon destroying. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:33, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::When Speer says "Hitler did not want to alter" he is specifically referring to the number of voters assigned to each deputy and "nominal retention of the traditional electoral system," trappings that Speer himself observes were "pointless" because of Hitler's imposition of a single-party system. And I'm sorry, but the quotes observing that Hitler was democratically elected do nothing to bolster your bizarre claim that the Weimar Republic did not end until 1939.

:::::If you are that positive that the Weimar Republic did not end in 1933, please explain why the Conservapedia article on the subject states quite clearly: "The Weimar Republic is the republic which governed Germany from 1919 to 1933." --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 17:07, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::PF, it's not worth responding to cause you continue to ascribe to me a claim I have specifically stated did not originate with me. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:20, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

LOL! In other words, you are willing to posit this inanity about the Weimar Republic continuing to 1939 here on a talk page in an attempt to bolster a baseless point, but you aren't willing to "correct" an article so that it reads "The Weimar Republic is the Republic which governed Germany from 1919 to 1939." You know as well as I do that such an article posted here would become the subject of widespread and deserved ridicule.

Face it. The Nazis were a reaction AGAINST the LIBERALISM of the Weimar Republic. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 17:24, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

:''Gleichsaltung'' wasn't completed on the day after Hitler took office. And the undoing of Versailles, re-occupation of the Rhineland, Treaty of Munich, Anschluss, etc didn't occur til the 1935-39 period. Then of course we got the whole Molotov-Ribbentrop deal to look into, i.e. '''how the Soviet Union & Nazi's were indeed allies on 1 September 1939'''. So there actually is some basis for the traditional European view that the "Wiemar period" extended from 1919 to 1939. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:33, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

::Sorry Rob, but Conservapedia itself -- along with pretty much every written history of Germany -- puts the end of the Weimar Republic in 1933, and your attempt at twisting a quote from Speer doesn't change that. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 17:42, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Speer ain't the only one that says it, and Speer doesn't just make a quote here and there; it's is an attitude throughout both his books. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:55, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

::::Then who DOES claim that the Weimar Republic lasted until 1939? Quotes please. (As someone who has read his books, I know that Speer makes no such claim.) AND WHY HAVEN'T YOU "CORRECTED" THE WEIMAR REPUBLIC ARTICLE HERE SO THAT IT GIVES THE END OF THE WEIMAR REPUBLIC AS 1939 INSTEAD OF 1933? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 18:00, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::OK, that is a very good question. Now let's divide the response in two. There is domestic German politics, then there is upsetting the International order established at Versailles. Let's limit our discussion of the "Wiemar period" to the internetional borders established at Versailles. When Hitler re-occupied the Rhineland, though illegal, was internationally sanctioned. Then the Treaty of Munich, likewise took on legitimacy in the spirit of Versailles. The Anschluss, no international prohibitions were raised over this issue, not even in defense of the Austrian people, as best I recollect. Finally in 1939, we have joint Soviet-German military operations to dismember Poland. This is were the Peace of Versailles, or "Wiemar period", is regarded by many Europeans as finally, and officially coming to an end, after the governments of France and Great Britain finally ceased selling other people down the river to appease Nazi (and Soviet) aggression. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:09, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

None of this answers my question. Why haven't you "corrected" the Weimar Republic article here so that it gives the end of the Weimar Republic as 1939 instead of 1933? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 18:12, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

:Let's work on the [[Molotov-Ribbentrop pact]] first. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:16, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

::That has absolutely nothing to do with this question, or with the fact that pretty much every historian puts the end of the Weimar Republic at 1933. You know this. Otherwise you would have posted some supporting cites from historians by now. Again. Why haven't you "corrected" the Weimar Republic article here so that it gives the end of the Weimar Republic as 1939 instead of 1933? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 18:18, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Well duh, let me restate for probably the third time now: the first international boundary to change was not unitl 1938, and was agreed to by the powers enforcing the Versailles treaty. Sept 1 1939, as best as I can determine, is when then Wiemar period, established at Versailles, came to end, and some members of the international community took steps to counter upsetting the established international order.

:::You know, for all the effort you put into arguing how Iraqi women were better off under fascism for 30 years, maybe you should reconsider if Chilean women may have been better off under Pinochet--at least to maintain internal logical consistancy of these positions you seem to instinctively commit yourself to before examining facts. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:27, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

::::So what's preventing you from "correcting" the Conservapedia entry on the Weimar Republic so that it puts the end of the Weimar Republic at 1939 instead of 1933? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 18:31, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

== Edits ==

I've done my best to clean up the sporadic nature of articles on "Nazi", "National Socialist German Workers' Party" and "Nazis" etc., combining some content and bolstering it with some additional work to prevent it from becoming a written vendetta against the Nazis (i.e. additional content is based on the principle that they did some terrible things, but what else did they do?). [[User:Karalius Nyder|Karalius Nyder]] 22:18, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

:RobS - any reasons for reverting my edits? Not great practice to revert without justification. Calling your revert a "minor edit" is probably inappropriate, as well. [[User:Karalius Nyder|Karalius Nyder]] 00:33, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

:'''I'll transplant part of the discussion from Rob's talk page to this discussion page.'''
::I think I counted one too many "conservatives" in there when there may actually be a question if any belong at all, and you didn't engage in talk or cite any source. This,
:''While not always recognised for it in popular accounts due to the weight of their other actions, the Nazis were responsible for removing the scourge of rational conservatism in the lead-up to World War II ''
::I read six times and concluded the author of it himself probably doesn't understand what it means. Then we have this, a disclaimer,
:''The Nazis are generally seen as fascists''
::Just who or what are you trying to debate here? [[User:RobS|RobS]] 00:44, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Perhaps scourge was the wrong word, but I think it's clear that if you hadn't lopped off the end of the first sentence that I wrote, you would have seen what I was pointing to the "scourge" as being:
::::''- disbanding the German branch of the left-wing communist movement spreading throughout Europe.''
:::It's clear that you've misinterpreted my edit. Either way, instead of reverting the whole thing back to the messy and uncategorised page that existed before, you should have removed only the offending sentences and asked for clarification on this discussion page. Your revert showed little consideration for what my edits were - I made an extensive edit that went far beyond what you cited in your justification, cleaning up the haphazard allocation of content that previously existed on several pages on Conservapedia, categorising it and adding new content: not all of which you appeared to object to. [[User:Karalius Nyder|Karalius Nyder]] 05:16, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
::::It's been summarized already. If you think this article will become a forum to postulate the Left/Right Poltical Specrtrum Theory of Max Weber as being a doctrinal substantiation that the NSDAP of Germany, and the Republican party of the United States, becuase both are characterized as "right-wing" and "conservative", that there are commonalities of views, beliefs, and objectives, I think you may be sorely mistaken in that premise. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:35, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::You still haven't justified the reverting of the entire page - as I already mentioned, I pooled together much of the content from '''other''' articles on Conservapedia that had sporadic amounts of information about the Nazis and their beliefs, none of which had been objected to. By reverting this page, you've removed more than just a couple of lines: you've removed content that, for the most part, previously existed uncontested on other pages.

:::::And where did you get the idea that I was delving into the postulation of Weber's spectrum theories? Do you have an objection to the statement that the Nazis are seen as fascists? Do you have an objection to the statement that the Communists were left-wing? The problem is that you've taken facts and claimed that they are incorrect, when in reality, the only problem was in the wording. If Conservapedia is happy enough to have rubbish pages that are reverted at will because administrators can't be bothered picking only the contentious lines and deleting it, then so be it. Your encyclopaedia is a shambles and is not one that can be "trusted", and if you rigidly turn back the clock on any even slightly contentious comments, then even a conservative like me is willing to turn back to Wikipedia. [[User:Karalius Nyder|Karalius Nyder]] 01:27, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
::::::You still haven't answered any of the reservations about the material. You still haven't explained a totally nonsensical sentence. Max Weber's Theory is just that, a theory. A theory is by definition, not fact.
::::::So, find me the place where I mention Max Weber. And '''you''' equally haven't explained why Conservapedia endorses the lazy removal of non-contentious content for no reason. Sure, the two sentences that you cited may have been poorly written or worded, but it doesn't justify removing the entire page, and removing content that had previously been on other pages that had never been contested. In any case, no article about a movement as controversial as the National Socialists is even close to some sort of completion without an analysis of what they believed.[[User:Karalius Nyder|Karalius Nyder]] 22:08, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

==A few mistakes==

The acronym would be NSDAP, Nazi is just part of the first word of the party, "Nazionalsozialistiche".

Also, the swastika shouldn't be called "the Nazis' symbol", it's not ''their'' symbol. The swastika was used by Hindus, Buddhists, Greeks, Romans, and tons more people for thousands of years.

:You're on the right track, but the first word in the party name is really "Nationalsozialistische". The word "Nazi" just comes from how it is pronounced. As such, "acronym" in this case really is wrong. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 13:35, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

::Yeah, I realised that I had spelt it wrong after reading the article and then editing it again. -[[User:Thjazi|Thjazi]] 14:27, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

==Marxism and trade unions==

*Through much of its history, the socialist movement has ardently pursued the trade unions. Yet, despite much courting and wooing, this romance has been largely unsuccessful. [http://www.wsws.org/exhibits/unions/unions.htm]

A "Free Trade Union" is a Trade Union separate from an official or a government controlled Trade Union. The Word "free" is moderating the term "Trade Union," not merely the word "trade." --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 18:08, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

Hitler was NOT A MARXIST OR A COMMUNIST. Say what you want but some of the first prisoners sent to Dachau were communists. Hitler despised communists and marxists more than McCarthy. The only reason to compare Nazism and Hitler to a communist and or marxist is because it would be like calling Hitler a Jew

Yeah, Hitler hated the Communists and longed to crush Russia. Historian Albert Tonbee reported how Hitler, while giving a speech, would scream and gibber when discussing Russia. Of course, none of Hitler's anti-communist leanings are mentioned in the article. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 10:43, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

== "verifiability" ==

PF, even Wikipedia doesn't have "Verifiability" anymore) (Robs)

Since I don't use Wikipedia and cite William Shirer, what is this referring to?

Apparently the only way you can justify your silly objections to calling the Nazis "right wing" is by falsely claiming that the Weimar Republic ended in 1939 -- something you're unwilling to do publicly in an actual article. What is your stand on the Ninth Commandment? Do you feel it can be dispensed with if following it would require you to concede a point? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 20:16, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
:See under WP old WP:Verifiability clause, the rule was "verifiable, not truth", which meant give equal weight to the lie so long as it could be proven somebody said it somewhere sometime, nevermind the oxymoron since the latin root of "veri" means "truth". But in typical and classic Wikipedia fashion the rule was always undertood to mean "truth, not truth". And it was an open invitation to the intellectually dishonest to fill up whatever crap they please within all entries.

:But let's put the pure subject matter aside momentarilly; no one doubts the common jargon gets used, as there are thousands of popular misunderstandings and mispercpetions on countless subjects. But the first thing you must deal with here is literally a philosophical question: a theory is by definition not a fact. Now, is there anyway whatsoever that you can prove terms like "leftist" or "right-wing" are anything other than theoretical? And even the theories you produce I will document to be contradictory with themselves.

:Bottomline, this is a loosing issue. You cannot make a cat into a fish. They simply are two different things, and the spectrum theory is little more than that, a theory to simplify the prejudices of adults to third graders. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 20:47, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
::I think it should make some reference to the fact that the Nazi party was right-wing, because, well, they were (to the point of extremity). But they were definitely extreme-right, and that can't really be argued, unless you want to pull out some never-before-seen documents... --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 20:56, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Many books in English have made that claim for many years; and we have yet to seriously broach the subject of National Socialism. The real problem here is nobody can define "left-wing" or "right-wing", at least no editor in Conservapedia has made a serious effort to do so yet. That needs to be done first. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 20:58, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
::::I'm working off [http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2], which shows him on the right side. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 21:01, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
::::::Big problem: It is only a theory. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 21:02, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

I doubt that pretty much every historian, every contemporary observer, every diarist, writer, memorist, and journalist writing about the Nazi era was or is guilty of a "misperception" in calling the Nazis right wing. Not only do English books say, this, but German books say it, French books say it, Italian books say it, books in every language that discusses the Nazis say it, and if Conservapedia has a problem with defining the Nazis as "Right Wing" it's not one shared by most educated and knowledgable people. Who do you think you're kidding? And have you given up on your quixotic effort to convince everyone that the Weimar Republic went on until 1939? Did the other sysops not like the idea of you "correcting" the Weimar Republic entry to reflect that claim of yours? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 23:09, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

:Be my guest, please, please, then, and define the term. We are all waiting with baited breath. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:13, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

::As you know, I already defined both "left wing" and "right wing" on this very page. On April 6th I posted the following:

::"A 'leftist' is defined in the dictionary as 'Those professing views usu. characterized by desire to reform or overthrow the established order esp. in politics. Advocating change in the name of the greater freedom or well-being of the common man. A 'right winger' is defined as 'individuals sometimes professing opposition to change in the established order and favoring traditional attitudes and practices.' The Nazis attitudes towards women, minorities, the disabled, the arts, homosexuality, foriegn policy and a range of other areas put them squarely on the right side of the political spectrum."

::After that that you tried to invoke one of the more liberal policies of the Weimar Republic in order to claim that the Nazis were somehow "left wing." Faced with the fact (apparently new to you) that the Nazis were ANTAGONISTIC to the liberal Weimar Republic, you offered the truly ridiculous argument that the Weimar Republic lasted until 1939, and compounded the absurdity by misrpresenting a quote from Albert Speer's book. When THAT didn't work, you galloped off on a tangent about Saddam Hussein, without every explaining why, if the Weimar Republic ended in 1939, the Conservapedia article on it has it ending in 1933.

::Again, who do you think you're kidding? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 23:29, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

:::OK, so "leftists" are for the betterment of humanity, whereas "rightists" oppose the betterment of humanity. Pardon me, I have no personal axe to grind; I may be asked however in the capacity of a [[fiduciary]] to dispute this definition. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:32, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

::::The definition in its entirety reads "Advocating change IN THE NAME OF the greater freedom and well-being of the common man." The dictionary is question is saying that that is usually the reason given by leftists for promoting certain policies, just as a respect for tradition is the reason invoked by many right wingers for opposing certain policies. Is it your contention that dictionary writers are all a bunch of leftists out to write biased definitions? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 23:43, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::Whoopie doo! So "leftists", in thier view, got a monopoly on the betterment of humanity. I'm sure other so-called "leftists" agree with this trite reasoning. But this inbred family affair won't work. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:52, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

Is it your contention that dictionaries --Merriam Webster, the OED, etc -- are part of a dastardly conspiracy of leftists?

Yes, most leftists consider what they are doing to be for the greater freedom and well being of the common man, just as most right-wingers consider their respect for tradition more important and more likely to make a better world. So what? You demanded I repeat these definitions. I did. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 00:02, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 23:54, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

:Yep, and we all seen this old movie a thousand times, how the cake of custom conflicts with progress and the betterment of civilization. Say, you got some loaded dice? I love playing with loaded dice and getting all my money taken. I'm a real fool when it comes to that. Please, cheat me as you see fit. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 00:08, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

::I gather from this that you've run out of arguments and are reduced to just typing rants. Sorry, but it's not the fault of liberals, or leftists, or Wikipedia, or Hitler's architect, or Saddam Hussein, or dictionaries or "loaded dice" that you are doomed to lose any argument based on such booming absurdities as "The Nazis weren't right wing," or "The Weimar Republic didn't end until 1939." It's the fault of reality and common usage. Until you acknowledge these things, no honest or educated person is going to even pretend to take your arguments seriously. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 02:10, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:::OK, I'll say it one more time: the Political Spectrum Theory of Max Weber has no more weight than the Theory of Evolution of Charles Darwin. Now, if you can prove where either theory has any factual basis, please do so. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:27, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::You can say it as often as you want, Rob. That doesn't make it a valid argument. Comparing English common usage with Darwin's theory, as though assigning the term "right wing" to the Nazis were a theory that created as great a controvery and as much debate as evolution is nonsense. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 13:30, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

==Blaming the West==

Controversial cut:

:Most historians agree that the defeat of Germany in the First World War and anger over the [[Treaty of Versailles]], specifically those provisions that restored territory to [[France]], [[Belguim]], [[Denmark]], and [[Poland]], disarmed Germany, and required that it pay reparations for the First World War helped lay the groundwork for the rise of Nazism.

:::Excuse me, but this happens to be true. Whether you agree with it or not, most historians tie the defeat of Germany in WWI and anger over those provisions of the Versailles Treaty to the rise of the Nazi party. How does this qualify as "blaming the West" (especially since Germany is a Western European country?) --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 13:13, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

::::PF Fox sums it up pretty good in these lines of text. I'll endorse reinclusion. Incidentally, welcome back. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:22, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

Western European Countries are countries such as England and France, germany is of central europe.
Simply because it is as much on western europe as it is on eastern. Britts and frenchies are to be blamed by germany's humiliation. West is too broad, west european determines the greedy guys that took the spoils of war from germany.

==unlock request==
I'd like to categorize it under European History, thanks. --[[User:Colest|Colest]] 17:14, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

Cote d'Ivoire

2007-06-28T19:12:28Z

Thjazi:

Cote d'Ivoire

2007-06-28T19:12:02Z

Thjazi:

Talk:Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

2007-06-28T19:09:35Z

Thjazi: /* Socialist State */

Why do we have 2 pages for the Soviet Union?--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 16:58, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

==Successor State(s)==
[[User talk:Thjazi|Thjazi]] and I have differing opinions on which nation(s) should be viewed as successor states to the USSR. Would it just be Russia, or all 14-odd nations in the CIS? [[User:GodlessLiberal|GodlessLiberal]] 20:46, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

==Socialist State==

Communist state is an oxymoron, and even the formal name is "Union of Soviet ''Socialist'' Republics". Stop changing this back. [[User:Thjazi|Thjazi]] 22:31, 19 April 2007 (EDT)
:I would think the Soviet Union was a communist state. The fact that it was called socialist is irrelevant to the discussion, otherwise all states with the epithet 'democratic' should be considered to be democratic, which is of course a rather ludicrous statement. [[User:Arctic Nation|Arctic Nation]] 12:19, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

:I am in complete agreement with Arctic Nation. What's in a name anyway? Truth of the matter is, the USSR was much, much more extreme than all of the nations in existence that are closer to real Socialism (like most of Scandanavia), so to say it was simply socialism is a bit naive and academically irresponsible. [[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 01:04, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

One must make the distinction between social democracy and pure socialism. Countries like Sweden are social democracies, employing elements of socialism but not all of them. It's a contradiction to call the Soviet Union a 'communist state' since communism can only exist worldwide. Calling the Soviet Union 'communist' goes strictly against the way the word 'communism' is defined. Just because a country is ruled by a Communist Party does not make the country communist. Communist Parties work towards communism. Never do they themselves claim their countries to be 'communist countries' or 'communist states'. [[User:Thjazi|Thjazi]] 15:09, 28 June 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

2007-06-28T19:09:19Z

Thjazi: /* Socialist State */

Napoleon Bonaparte

2007-04-28T20:03:44Z

Thjazi:

[[Image:Y8r587ig.jpg|right|thumb|230px]]
'''Napoléon Bonaparte''' was a famous [[France|French]] general and a military mastermind. He was the emperor of France from 1802-1814, and famously short, rising to power from the chaos of the French Revolution.

He is most famous for his campaigns in Europe. His innovative victories achieved control over modern-day Spain, Italy, Germany, Poland, Croatia, and Benelux before finally failing in Russia, due to the bitter winter weather. In 1814 he was removed from power, but was able to return the next year and overthrow the restored monarchy. His subsequent effort to retake Brussels was defeated by an [[United Kingdom|Anglo]]-[[Prussia]]n army at the [[Battle of Waterloo]].

Napoleon's ambition and drive inspired the term "[[Napoleonic Complex]]", which is used to describe a power hungry person who wants to "conquer" everything in sight.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Bonaparte, Napoleon}}
[[Category:Military Commanders]]
[[Category:Napoleonic Wars]]
[[Category:French people]]

Talk:Cote d'Ivoire

2007-04-28T19:55:10Z

Thjazi:

Someone please rename this page to "Côte d'Ivoire". - [[User:Thjazi|Thajzi]] 15:54, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Cote d'Ivoire

2007-04-28T19:54:54Z

Thjazi:

Someone please rename this page to "Côte d'Ivoire". - [User:Thjazi|[Thajzi]] 15:54, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Cote d'Ivoire

2007-04-28T19:54:32Z

Thjazi:

Someone please rename this page to "Côte d'Ivoire". - [[Thajzi|User:Thjazi]] 15:54, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Cote d'Ivoire

2007-04-28T19:54:21Z

Thjazi: New page: Someone please rename this page to "Cöte d'Ivoire". - User:Thjazi ~~~~~

Someone please rename this page to "Cöte d'Ivoire". - [[Thajzi|User:Thjazi]] 15:54, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Cote d'Ivoire

2007-04-28T19:53:39Z

Thjazi:

Côte d'Ivoire (French for ''Ivory Coast'') is a country in Africa. Its capitals are Yamoussoukro and Abidjan.

Joseph Stalin

2007-04-28T19:48:17Z

Thjazi:

[[Image:Josephstalin.jpg|right|thumb]]


'''Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin''' (Ru: Иосиф Сталин) (December 6th, 1878 (Julian: December 18th)-March 5, 1953) was the General Secretary of the [[Communist Party]] of the [[Soviet Union]] (CPSU) from 1922 until his death. He was the son of a poor Georgian cobbler and a former seminary student who became a Bolshevik and one of [[Lenin|Lenin's]] closest allies during the their take-over of the Kerensky regime. During the [[Russian Civil War]] Stalin, who chose his name from the Russian word for steel, held the city of Tsaritsen on the Volga from counter-revolutionary forces. Stalin later re-named [[Stalingrad]] in honor of his victory, and was the same city of [[Germany's]] massive defeat in [[World War II]].
 
 
 
 
 
==Rise to Power==

Stain was tapped by the Okhrana, the Tsarist secret police, as a low-level informer shortly after he was expelled from the Tiflis seminary in 1899. Stalin then began to systematically inform on revolutionary comrades in party organizations in Tiflis, Baku, and Batum over the next few years. He acquired a highly unsavory reputation among the [[Social Democrats]] of these cities and was finally arrested for cover purposes in 1902 when suspicions about him were about to boil over. It was the Okhrana that furnished the invisible means of support for the family he acquired after 1904.

In 1917, the Commissariat of Nationalities was formed with Stalin as its Commissar (Minister). The Commissariat addressed the question of the nationalities of the Russian Empire, and helped integrate them into the [[Soviet Union]]. From 1919-1922 he was also the People's Commissar of the Workers' and Peasants' Inspection (Rabkrin, from the Russian), which was founded to be a check on the burgeoning Soviet bureaucracy.

In 1922, Lenin named Stalin General Secretary of the CPSU. In 1924 Stalin in turn created the "Secret Department," a unit of 94 of his personal functionaries that maintained special privileges as the ''[[nomenklatura]]'', or a list of trusted individuals. He also appointed regional party secretaries who all, of course, supported Stalin. Through the Secret Department Stalin gained control of the [[Red Army]] after removing [[Lev Trotsky]] in 1925 and the OGPU (later, [[KGB]]) when its leader [[Felix Derzhinsky]] died in 1926. Lenin had foreseen all of this and had warned in his last testament that Stalin should be removed from General Secretary because the position's power was unlimited.

Stalin, however, did not allow this to happen. His most powerful rival, Lev Trotsky, who was the commander of the Red Army, was painted as a danger to the Revolution, because he continued to push the idea of international revolution; the "left opposition." Other Soviet leaders, like [[Zinoviev]], leader of the [[Comintern]], and [[Kaminev]], the head of the Communist Party in Moscow, were painted with the same brush because they supported Trotsky and did not wish to expel him from the CPSU in 1927. Later, he accused his ally [[Bukharin]] of being a member of the "right opposition," i.e. he was in favor of a more capitalistic economic system, as seen under the [[New Economic Policy]] (NEP) of the early 1920s. Trotsky was murdered in Mexico in 1940 by [[Ramón Mercader]] in an extenisve conspiracy that included underground operatives from the [[Communist Party of the United States]] (CPUSA). Zinoviev, Kaminev, and Bukharin were the center of the famous "[[Great Purge|show trials]]" of the 1930s. All were put to death.

==Catch and Overtake==

In 1928 Stalin decided that the Soviet Union was not properly industrialized to enjoy a communist future, so he initiated the First Five Year Plan and the campaign to collectivize agriculture in order to "build socialism," and to "catch and overtake" the capitalist world. Stalin fanned the fires of collectivization, claiming that peasants had been hording grain and that they needed to be controlled. Under this program, rich peasants (kulaks), were exiled or killed for being enemies of the people, and peasants' land was taken in order to introduce collective farming to expedite grain appropriations. Many were called kulaks by jealous neighbors, while the peasants who remained were often the laziest and most ill suited to producing enough grain. Collectivization caused massive famine in Russia, particularly in [[Ukraine]] (see [[Holodomor]]), where Stalin ordered the Red Army to blockade certain regions and take grain by force. It is estimated that the famine of 1931-33 killed 6-7 million people, while 20 million starved.

The First Five Year Plan was a program of crash-industrialization. After [[World War I]] and the Russian Civil War Russia had an industrial capacity equal to that of its 1861 capacity. The only way for Russia to be able to break the "capitalist encirclement," Stalin declared, was to industrialize. Brigades of shock workers were formed to work faster and harder than the world had ever seen. Most of this, however, was pure propaganda, although the shock workers did set the record for concrete poured in a single shift. Compared to the capitalist world which was experiencing the Great Depression, Soviet growth was impressive. Between 1929 and 1937, 8,000 factories were constructed, average GDP growth was around 10%, and official unemployment was 0. In 1936, after the Second Five Year Plan, Stalin declared socialism "built." Nevertheless, the capitalist world lived better than the Soviet Union, despite the Great Depression. [[John Scott]], an American CPUSA member and Comintern oeprative who was living in the Soviet Union during the Five Year Plans, notes this in his memoirs of that period "Behind the Urals." The legacy of the Five Year Plans (most of which Stalin declared "completed" in 4 years) injured the Soviet's production models, because the encouraged quantity and speed over quality. However, the planning of the 1930s enabled the Russians to defeat the Nazis in the 1940s. <ref>Suvorov, Viktor. ''Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War?// (Viking Press/Hamish Hamilton; 1990) ISBN 0241126223.</ref>

==Stalin's Terror==

Between 1936 and 1938, [[Joseph Stalin]] launched his purges to rid the Soviet Union of "fifth columnists," or spies who were loyal to the [[capitalist]] world. During the Terror 3 million people were arrested on various and often made-up charges, while 750,000 were executed. Due to the interrogation techniques of the NKVD (later, KGB), which often were torturous, most of those arrested confessed and were sent to work camps, called the [[Gulag]] for 10 years and sometimes even 25. Here, prisoners were forced to labor in mines, to log forests, or to do construction. Few lived through their sentences.

The infamous show trials of former leaders of the Soviet Union occurred during this period, where they were accused of working with Trotsky or sabotaging the Soviet Union. Stalin also evicerated the high command of the Red Army, killing 90% of the leadership. The minions of oppression were not spared either; of the NKVD's 809 officials, 43 lived through the purges. The leadership of the communist party was persecuted as well. For example, in 1934 130 members of the 139-member Central Committee were arrested. The Terror forever made Russians afraid to speak out against the government, and also made sure that no one but Stalin could ever rule the Soviet Union as effectively.

==World War II==

To avoid war with [[Germany]], Stalin ordered the Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union, [[Molotov]], to sign a non-aggression pact with [[Adolf Hitler]], named the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, on 19 August 1939. The treaty detailed the agreement to split up [[Poland]] between Germany and the Soviet Union, give Stalin the Baltic Republics of [[Latvia]], [[Lithuania]], and [[Estonia]], and to allow the Soviets to wage war on [[Finland]], a war that ended in a humiliating Soviet defeat. Both sides, however, knew that they would eventually engage in hostilities.

It seems that Stalin anticipated this less than Hitler, who, in June of 1941 invaded the Soviet Union with the largest land army ever assembled. It consisted of 170 divisions, or 3.5 million troops. Stalin was caught off guard, and the [[Nazis]] blazed a path through the Ukraine and European Russia. Reaching [[Moscow]] in October 1941, the Nazis threatened Stalin and the entire Soviet Union with defeat. In only 6 months, the Nazis controlled one third of the Soviet economy, a total of 5% of the Earth's surface. Hitler's troops were defeated at Moscow during the winter of 1941-42 after Stalin appointed [[Yorky Zhukov]] as commander of the Red Army. A spy in the German embassy in Tokyo, [[Richard Sorge]], informed Stalin that Japan was not going to attack [[Siberia]], freeing thousands of winter ski-troops to move to Moscow to defeat the Nazis. It was during this time that Stalin famously invoked the name of [[God]] and allowed religious services to be conducted after 20 plus years of repression. Also, 1500 factories were evacuated and restored in Siberia and 12-15 million workers were moved east of the [[Urals]], where Soviet production was higher than Germany's in 1942, despite Germany holding some 50% of Soviet industry.

The Red Army went on the offensive after the defense of Moscow, but soon the Nazis gained the advantage and pushed to Stalingrad. More than one million troops fought on each side in urban combat. Hitler refused to allow surrender, and eventually the Nazis were encircled and routed. After turning the tide of war in Stalingrad, the 1943 [[Kursk]] tank battle was decisive in pushing the Nazis from European Russia. In two years, the Red Army pushed the Nazis all the way back to [[Berlin]]. Stalin used his control of Eastern Europe to extract concessions from [[President Roosevelt]] at Allied conferences, including control over the region. [[Winston Churchill]] warned against this very control, for he greatly feared Soviet hegemony in Europe. Victorious, Stalin named himself Generalissimo and became more popular than ever in the Soviet Union and more dangerous than ever to the capitalist world.

Over the course of World War II, around 25 million Russians died. Twenty million were in the armed services. The total number of 25 million reflects half of the worldwide losses of human life during World War II. The population did not recover until 1956. Many Soviet POWs, like famous writer [[Alexander Solzhenitsyn]], were sent to the Gulag after the war because they had fallen into German hands, and were accused of being spies. This swelled the prison camps by the thousands.

==Post-War Period and Death==

Similar to the 1930s, Stalin undertook a harsh campaign of industrialization, which hurt the Soviets as much as it helped them rebuild. Money was devalued to one-tenth of its previous value, 2 million German and Japanese POWs were forced to stay in the Soviet Union and rebuild the country, and 10% of investment from 1945-46 was from looted machinery. The crops produced by household plots were collected by the government to sell, and a famine in 1947 caused by drought and Soviet single-crop farming killed 2 million. The recovery was built on the Soviet subjects.

After World War II, Stalin's cult of personality emerged as the dominant force of Soviet life. He was credited as the savior of the Soviet Union and the architect of victory, though it was really General Zhukov who was responsible for most of this. The communist youth group, the [[Komsomol]], devoted songs to "the Father of All Nations" or "the Driver of the Locomotive of History." Party membership increased by one million people between 1945 and 1953. Books quoted Stalin as an expert in communism, while he was often photographed surrounded by children to make him seem friendlier. This all served to form a deep, personal connection with Stalin for many Soviets. Indeed, he was loved by the Soviets. When he died in 1953 an anxious mob at his viewing crushed and trampled some mourners to death. Dissidents like Sakharov, the man forced in a prison to build the Soviet atom bomb, cried upon hearing that Stalin had died, despite their intense hatred of him. Despite his terror, he had convinced millions that he was their father.

Following a stroke on 1 March 1953, Stalin died on 5 March after a period of declining performance. Between 1949 and 1952 Stalin increasingly took vacations and met with the [[Politburo]] less and less. When he died a short power struggle ensued, one which led to the execution of KGB head [[Beria]] as a spy. Eventually [[Khrushchev]] became the General Secretary of the CPSU and denounced Stalin's repressive tactics, his purges, gulags, and his cult of personality in the [[Secret Speech]] at the 20th Party Congress of 1956. Gulags were dismantled and the political climate was slightly less tense, but Soviet oppression still continued. The period following Stalin's rule is called the "thaw," the start of life again after a long winter.

==Quotes==

"The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic." ~ to Churchill, 1945.

==References==
Though this isn't footnoted, it is culled from the following sources:

Hosking, Geoffrey. The First Socialist Society: A History of the Soviet Union from Within. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992.

Kotkin, Stephen. Magnetic Mountain: Stalinism as Civilization. Berkley, CA: University of California Press, 1995.

Scott, John. ''Behind the Urals: An American Worker in Russia’s City of Steel''. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1989.

Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr Isaevich, ''The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956''; an experiment in literary investigation'', Translated from the Russian by Thomas P. Whitney, Publisher New York, Harper & Row (1974-78), 1st Edition, pg. 67n.

[[category:political people]][[category:communists]]

Swastika

2007-04-28T19:32:04Z

Thjazi:

[[Image:Swastika-HindiBook.jpg|thumb|right|100px|An example of a swastika on a Hindi book.]]

There are two main symbolic meanings of the swastika:

-symbol of life in [[eastern religion]]. 
-symbol commonly associated with [[Nazism]].

As an ancient religious symbol, the swastika has powerful symbolic meanings in the [[Buddhism|Buddhist]], [[Jain]], and [[Hindu]] religions.

The Nazi swastika is "right facing", while most religious instances of the swastika are "left facing". However, either direction can be used for both meanings.

Belarus

2007-04-20T02:49:41Z

Thjazi:

{{stub}}

'''Belarus''' is a country in Europe and former member of the [[USSR]]. Its capital is Minsk.

==Name==

Belarus is often incorrectly yclept "Belorussia" or "Byelorussia", and some claim that this means "White Russia". This is incorrect which one can see by looking at the Russian words for the countries of Belarus and Russia: ''Белоруссия'' and ''Россия'' (Belorussija and Rossija), respectively. The name "Belarus" is taken from ancient "Rus'", which is also known in English as "Ruthenia". Therefore, Belarus means "White Ruthenia", rather than "White Russia".

[[Category:European Countries]]
[[Category:Former Soviet Countries]]

Swastika

2007-04-20T02:40:46Z

Thjazi:

[[Image:Swastika-HindiBook.jpg|thumb|right|100px|An example of a swastika on a Hindi book.]]

There are two main symbolic meanings of the swastika:

-symbol of life in [[eastern religion]]. 
-symbol commonly associated with [[Nazism]].

As an ancient religious symbol, the swastika has powerful symbolic meanings in the [[Jain]] and [[Hindu]] religions.

The Nazi swastika is "right facing", while most religious instances of the swastika are "left facing". However, either direction can be used for both meanings.

Tsar

2007-04-20T02:33:57Z

Thjazi:

A '''tsar''' was a Russian absolute emperor. The people of Russia discontinued the institution of tsars in 1918 with the death of Nikolai II and his family.
[[category:history]]

The term is also now used in America to refer to bureaucrats in charge of carrying out some aspect of US Government policy, such as the [[Drug Czar]].

Talk:Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

2007-04-20T02:31:34Z

Thjazi: /* Socialist State */

Talk:Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

2007-04-20T02:31:24Z

Thjazi:

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

2007-04-20T02:29:28Z

Thjazi:

[[Image:600px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png||thumb|right|200px|]]
The '''Soviet Union''' (Russian: Советский Союз, ''Sovyetskiy Soyuz'') formally the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) (Russian: Союз Советских Социалистических Республик, ''Soyuz Sovietskykh Sotsialisticheskykh Respublik'', abbreviated ''СССР'') was one of the most powerful and established [[socialist]] states in history.

==Founding==
The USSR, the primary member of which was [[Russia]], was established by [[Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov]] (Russian: Владимир Ильич Улянов) in 1922 following the overthrow of the tsarist [[Russian Empire]] in the [[Russian Revolution]], and the ensuing [[Russian Civil War]]. It allowed one central government under Lenin to control many republics, including the original members of [[Ukraine]], [[Belarus]], [[Russia]] and the republics of the Trans-Caucasian region. The '''Soviet Union''' became a multi-national entity that eventually included 15 republics: Russia (the RSFSR), [[Latvia]], [[Lithuania]], [[Estonia]], [[Ukraine]], [[Belarus]], [[Georgia]], [[Azerbaijan]], [[Armenia]], [[Uzbekistan]], [[Tajikistan]], [[Kyrgyzstan]], [[Turkmenistan]], [[Kazakhstan]], and [[Moldova]].

==Rise of Stalin and Collapse==
Upon Lenin's death, a power struggle ensued between Leon Trotsky and [[Joseph Stalin]], two influential officials during Lenin's tenure. Stalin eventually gained the upper hand in the fight, and ostracised [[Trotsky]] to [[Mexico]]. The USSR became infamous for Joseph Stalin's violations of human rights during the Great Purge, in which he disposed of all followers of Lenin and Trotsky. The Soviet Union eventually imploded after a series of economic and political reforms known as [[Glasnost]]and perestroika introduced by the last Chairman of the [[Communist Party of the Soviet Union]] (CPSU), [[Mikhail Gorbachov]], in the 1980s. The USSR was formally dissolved in 1991 by [[Boris Yeltsin]]. The [[successor state|successor states]] to the Soviet Union are the [[Russian Federation]], and the other members of the [[Commonwealth of Independent States]].

[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Former Countries]]
[[Category:Warsaw Pact members]]

Talk:Nazi Party

2007-04-06T18:27:07Z

Thjazi: /* A few mistakes */

== Homosexuality of the Nazis ==

Which top Nazis were openly gay? That's the first time I've ever heard people claiming this, save for the Hitler-was-gay claims that always come up. But then again, so do Lincoln-was-gay claims. The point is is that none of this is verifiable despite one book claiming it is. I say remove it.

:Wow. Let's use Wikipedia as a source for this one; note [[Adolf Hitler]]'s [[tolerance]] for [[gay]]s:
::''Having been outed in 1925, however, [Ernst] Röhm made little attempt to hide his sexuality. Despite Hitler's pretense of shock upon discovering his deputy's sexual orientation, he had in fact long known that Röhm was homosexual....During Röhm's tenure at the head of the SA, it has been suggested that a number of homosexual men (notably Karl Ernst, a former bouncer at a gay nightclub, and Edmund Heines) were appointed to and promoted within the SA as a result of high-level liaisons with powerful SA figures.''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_R%C3%B6hm#R.C3.B6hm.27s_sexual_orientation]
:Amazing. Wikipedia almost got it half right on this one. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 13:28, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

:::That's one top Nazi that was openly gay, but the article claims "though many top Nazis were openly gay..." This statement implies a plurality of homosexuals and not just the leader of the SA, who was killed when the SA was purged. So does one equal many? Yes, in the citation above there are two more men who were in the SA reported to be homosexuals, but they were not "top Nazis." This distinction implies people like Hess, Himmler, Goebbles, Hitler, etc., people who commanded Germany. The introduction to ''The Pink Triangle'' addresses homosexuality in the top echelons, of which there was little. Also, just because Hitler tolerated one homosexual does not mean he tolerated them all. His tolerance for Röhm could have just been convenient, until say, he killed him.

::::There was Edmund Heines as well, and Karl Ernst. But even adding these two wouldn't substantiate the claim of "many top Nazis." The fact is that most of the leadership that leaned that way was in the SA and was eliminated in the Night of the Long Knives.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 22:32, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::And a further aside; we have already pointed out how in electing Hitler, a Catholic, Germany showed itself more socially progressive than the United States by several decades. Likewise we shall demonstrate the Nazi's were more socially enlighten regarding the issue of gays in the military.
:::::Coming soon: Affirmative Action and the Wehrmacht. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:49, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
::::::That post doesn't address the issue at hand. The article states that they were not tolerant for gays, but were gay themselves. I still reject the "top leadership" claim (other than Rohm). The fact that there were gays in the ranks (which there would be in any population if we assume gays live in any population) does not mean that "top Nazis" were practitioners of homosexual behavior.
::::::PS Where in the book is the youth groups claim cited, or could you provide the quote?

::::::Se also, ''The Damned'', starring Dirk Bogard [http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/cinema/features/damned.shtml], has a lengthy scene of a typical Nazi gay orgy with the Stormtroopers walking around wearing women's underwear, etc.

Given that the whole homosexual-nazi's theme has been started by Scott Lively, I doubt it is at all credible. Lively is a hardly a respectable historian - he is, in fact, an anti-homosexual campaigner and nothing more than this. I see someone has gone to the trouble of preparing a page on him that makes it very clear - with quotes, even - that he cannot be considered a reliable source because he is a fanatical conspiricy-theorist who appears to believe that homosexuals are planning to take over the world (While at the same time denying that homosexuality even exists). Citing fake histories invented by political power-gamers desperate to rewrite the past to make it appear the nazi's were homosexual is very detrimental to the credability of this site. I thus suggest that all reference to Scott Lively's pet theory are removed. Once his nonsense is dismissed, we have credible-looking support for a ''single'' homosexual high-up in the Nazi party (Rohm). Just the one. Who kept it in the closet. Hardly the openly party-supported gay-orgies that some people are claiming, or Scott's ungrounded belief in a mostly-homosexual leadership. There are two potentials too, but no proof - working as a bouncer at a gay nightclub does not make someone gay - BornAgainBrit

:Oh, I deleted a coupe of comments to calm things down - but only comments that are fairly old, unsourced (Or use Scott as a source) and make highly unlikely claims.

== Right Wing ==

The Nazis were neither atheists nor socialists and the question of whether or not they or their earlier incarnations qualify as "right wing" was resolved decades ago. I'm sorry, but I see no reason to accept Robs' idiosyncratic definitions as if they were accepted fact. They are most definitely not. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 13:53, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

:Right. So as to whether a Socialist is a Socialist all depends on what the meaning of is is "is is" is. I understand fully. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 14:15, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

"We demand liberty for all religious denominations in the State, so far as they are not a danger to it and do not militate against the morality and moral sense of the German race. The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession. It combats the Jewish-materialist spirit within and without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health from within only on the principle: the common interest before self-interest." - Paragraph 24, Programme for the German Workers' Party (Pre-nazi). This is what happens when people blindly assume anyone who ''claims'' to be Christian is worth supporting. Hitler spoke publicly of his Christian faith constantly - that makes him a good politician, but not a real christian.

:''It [the party] combats the Jewish-materialist spirit within and without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health from within only on the principle: '''the common interest before self-interest.'''" ''
::'''the common interest before self-interest''', I would say this statement (a) lays to rest the idea the NSDAP is "conservative", and/or right-wing defined as a belief in rugged individualism; (b) pretty much clarifies the Social and Communal roots of Nazism. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 09:50, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:::No, whether a Socialist is a Socialist depends on whether or not the person or political party advocates collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of producton. The Nazis advocated some measure of government control in that realm, but not to the point where they qualified as "socialist," any more than 19th Century Prussia -- which advocated a similar kind of control -- qualified as "socialist."

:::Your claim that the Nazi party doesn't qualify as "right wing" is nothing more than blatant historical revisionism, an attempt to alter the definition of the term decades after the fact. The Nazis by and large considered themselves right wing, were referred to as right wing by contemporary opponents and sympathizers and by neutral observers (like travel guides to Germany at the time,) have been acknowledged as right wing by historians covering that era. What exactly do you expect to accomplish by altering common usage in this manner?
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 12:18, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:Meaning no disrespect, but it appears you too often speak first before looking at some of the issues. And while I can appreciate your once popular political prejudices, in retrospect we see denying facts and carrying on myths really serves no purpose anymore.

:Now, as to whether or not Socialists are indeed Socialists, lets begin with examing the "means of production", i.e. Volkswagen. [http://mondediplo.com/1998/01/11volkswag] So, we will be afforded the opportunity to examine the history of this Socialist enterprise to whatever extent they've made thier Archives available to the public.

:And finally the left/right spectrum theory is just that--only a theory. For weeks now I've been waiting to hear a definition from advocates of this theory what a "leftist" is. All I've seen so far is something like this:

*''a leftist is a liberal'' --->click here ''a liberal is a leftist'' --->click here ''leftists oppose oppression, hence Communists are leftists''

:that's the left side of this nonsense. Then we hear about how Socialists like Hitler actually were devout Christians like Rev. Falwell, who wants to exterminate gays, too.

:My appoligies, but this garbage is going absolutly nowhere. And if your serious in persuing this dead end thinking, my advice is to define "leftist", cause none, absolutley none of your so-called "leftist allies" have been able to do so up til now. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 12:53, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

::Garbage is definitely the operative term for this blatant revisionism of claiming that the Nazis were not "right wing" and were in fact "socialist." Using your definition of the term "socialist", Prussia and indeed much of 19th century Europe were "socialist." That is not how these countries were defined nor how they saw themselves, nor how they are defined today.

::A "leftist" is defined in the dictionary as "Those professing views usu. characterized by desire to reform or overthrow the establishe order esp. in poltics and usus. advocating chage in the name of the greater freedom or well-being of the common man. A "right winger" is defined as "individuals sometimes professing opposition to change in the established order and favoring traditional attitudes and practices." The Nazis attitudes towards women, minorities, the disabled, the arts, homosexuality, foriegn policy and a range of other areas put them squarely on the right side of the political spectrum. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 13:05, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:::ok, let's take that dictionary definition, "advocating chage in the name of the greater ... well-being of the common man", and "opposition to change in the established order and favoring traditional attitudes and practices". So which one of us is left and which one of us is right? I want change to stop these nonsensical definitions of left & right, you are resisting it and bring in more of this nonsense that does absolutly nothing to answer the question. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 13:12, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

::::Which of us is "left" and which of us is "right" depends on how traditional our attitudes are towards issues like women, labor, minorities, etc. The Nazis, while they wished to overthrow the current order of the Weimar Republic, wanted to do so in order to turn the clock back to the era before women were active in public life, before Jews had been emancipated, before the advent of the avant garde in art and film, etc. It was essentially a revulsion against much of the modern world and a wildly romanticized view of the past.

::::If the fact that terms like "right" and "left" can be imprecise and part of a "spectrum" renders them "nonsensical," then much of language is "nonsensical." Terms like "religion," "politics," "freedom," "morality," even "red," "blue," "wet," "dry," "hot," or "cold" are "nonsensical." You want to give up using those terms too? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 13:26, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::''"The Nazis, while they wished to overthrow the current order of the Weimar Republic...''
:::::hmmm...let's see....which country, the US or Germany, displayed it's social progressivity by electing a Catholic to it's highest office? Was it the US & JFK, or Wiemar Republic and Hitler? Then, which country introduced affirmative action into the military after the Treaty of Versailles which allowed poor common scum, like Rommel, to rise to the position of General based upon merit rather than Social class? Which country displayed its social progressivity by allowing gays in the military first, the US or Nazi Germany? [[User:RobS|RobS]] 14:11, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

== Edits ==

I've done my best to clean up the sporadic nature of articles on "Nazi", "National Socialist German Workers' Party" and "Nazis" etc., combining some content and bolstering it with some additional work to prevent it from becoming a written vendetta against the Nazis (i.e. additional content is based on the principle that they did some terrible things, but what else did they do?). [[User:Karalius Nyder|Karalius Nyder]] 22:18, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

:RobS - any reasons for reverting my edits? Not great practice to revert without justification. Calling your revert a "minor edit" is probably inappropriate, as well. [[User:Karalius Nyder|Karalius Nyder]] 00:33, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

:'''I'll transplant part of the discussion from Rob's talk page to this discussion page.'''
::I think I counted one too many "conservatives" in there when there may actually be a question if any belong at all, and you didn't engage in talk or cite any source. This,
:''While not always recognised for it in popular accounts due to the weight of their other actions, the Nazis were responsible for removing the scourge of rational conservatism in the lead-up to World War II ''
::I read six times and concluded the author of it himself probably doesn't understand what it means. Then we have this, a disclaimer,
:''The Nazis are generally seen as fascists''
::Just who or what are you trying to debate here? [[User:RobS|RobS]] 00:44, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Perhaps scourge was the wrong word, but I think it's clear that if you hadn't lopped off the end of the first sentence that I wrote, you would have seen what I was pointing to the "scourge" as being:
::::''- disbanding the German branch of the left-wing communist movement spreading throughout Europe.''
:::It's clear that you've misinterpreted my edit. Either way, instead of reverting the whole thing back to the messy and uncategorised page that existed before, you should have removed only the offending sentences and asked for clarification on this discussion page. Your revert showed little consideration for what my edits were - I made an extensive edit that went far beyond what you cited in your justification, cleaning up the haphazard allocation of content that previously existed on several pages on Conservapedia, categorising it and adding new content: not all of which you appeared to object to. [[User:Karalius Nyder|Karalius Nyder]] 05:16, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
::::It's been summarized already. If you think this article will become a forum to postulate the Left/Right Poltical Specrtrum Theory of Max Weber as being a doctrinal substantiation that the NSDAP of Germany, and the Republican party of the United States, becuase both are characterized as "right-wing" and "conservative", that there are commonalities of views, beliefs, and objectives, I think you may be sorely mistaken in that premise. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:35, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::You still haven't justified the reverting of the entire page - as I already mentioned, I pooled together much of the content from '''other''' articles on Conservapedia that had sporadic amounts of information about the Nazis and their beliefs, none of which had been objected to. By reverting this page, you've removed more than just a couple of lines: you've removed content that, for the most part, previously existed uncontested on other pages.

:::::And where did you get the idea that I was delving into the postulation of Weber's spectrum theories? Do you have an objection to the statement that the Nazis are seen as fascists? Do you have an objection to the statement that the Communists were left-wing? The problem is that you've taken facts and claimed that they are incorrect, when in reality, the only problem was in the wording. If Conservapedia is happy enough to have rubbish pages that are reverted at will because administrators can't be bothered picking only the contentious lines and deleting it, then so be it. Your encyclopaedia is a shambles and is not one that can be "trusted", and if you rigidly turn back the clock on any even slightly contentious comments, then even a conservative like me is willing to turn back to Wikipedia. [[User:Karalius Nyder|Karalius Nyder]] 01:27, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
::::::You still haven't answered any of the reservations about the material. You still haven't explained a totally nonsensical sentence. Max Weber's Theory is just that, a theory. A theory is by definition, not fact.
::::::So, find me the place where I mention Max Weber. And '''you''' equally haven't explained why Conservapedia endorses the lazy removal of non-contentious content for no reason. Sure, the two sentences that you cited may have been poorly written or worded, but it doesn't justify removing the entire page, and removing content that had previously been on other pages that had never been contested. In any case, no article about a movement as controversial as the National Socialists is even close to some sort of completion without an analysis of what they believed.[[User:Karalius Nyder|Karalius Nyder]] 22:08, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

==A few mistakes==

The acronym would be NSDAP, Nazi is just part of the first word of the party, "Nazionalsozialistiche".

Also, the swastika shouldn't be called "the Nazis' symbol", it's not ''their'' symbol. The swastika was used by Hindus, Buddhists, Greeks, Romans, and tons more people for thousands of years.

:You're on the right track, but the first word in the party name is really "Nationalsozialistische". The word "Nazi" just comes from how it is pronounced. As such, "acronym" in this case really is wrong. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 13:35, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

::Yeah, I realised that I had spelt it wrong after reading the article and then editing it again. -[[User:Thjazi|Thjazi]] 14:27, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

Swastika

2007-04-04T19:46:29Z

Thjazi:

[[Image:Swastika-HindiBook.jpg|thumb|right|100px|An example of a swastika on a Hindi book.]]

An ancient symbol, the swastika also used in the flag of [[Nazi Germany]] which made it taboo in most Western cultures.

[[Hinduism|Hindus]] and [[Buddhism|Buddhists]] continue to use the swastika for religious purposes, seeing it as a symbol of good fortune.

Swastika

2007-04-04T19:39:59Z

Thjazi:

An ancient symbol, the swastika also used in the flag of [[Nazi Germany]] which made it taboo in most Western cultures.

[[Hinduism|Hindus]] and [[Buddhism|Buddhists]] continue to use the swastika for religious purposes, seeing it as a symbol of good fortune.

Nazi Party

2007-04-04T19:35:28Z

Thjazi:

[[Image:Naziflag.png|thumb|300px|The flag of Nazi Germany]]
Nazis is an [[acronym]] for the National Socialist German Workers' Party (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei).

Most historians agree that the defeat of Germany in the First World War and anger over the [[Treaty of Versailles]], specifically those provisions that restored territory to [[France]], [[Belguim]], [[Denmark]], and [[Poland]], disarmed Germany, and required that it pay reparations for the First World War helped lay the groundwork for the rise of Nazism. [[Adolf Hitler]] exploited the myth of the “Stab in the Back,” the belief that the war had been lost because “disloyal” elements within Germany – [[Jews]] and [[Marxism|Marxists]] – had undermined the war effort. As [[William Shirer]] put it in ''The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich'',

<blockquote>
"To him, as to almost all Germans, it was ‘monstrous’ and undeserved. The German army had not been defeated in the field. It had been stabbed in the back by the traitors at home.

Thus emerged for Hitler, as or so many Germans, a fanatical belief in the legend of the ‘stab in the back’ which, more than anything else, was to undermine the Weimar Republic and pave the way for Hitler’s ultimate triumph.”
<ref>The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Book One, “The Rise of Adolph Hitler.” </ref>
</blockquote>

The origin of the Nazi Party itself was a small group called The German Workers' Party, founded by a locksmith named Anton Drexler who, in 1918, had set up a “Committee of Independent Workmen” in reaction to the [[Marxism]] of the free trade unions. A year later The German Workers Party was formed when this merged with another group, the Political Workers' Circle. <ref>Shoah Resource Center, http://www1.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft%20Word%20-%205946.pdf </ref> <ref>Germanculture.com, http://www.germanculture.com.ua/library/weekly/aa012400b.htm</ref>

It was Adolf Hitler, who joined the party and was put in charge of propaganda in 1920, who transformed this small group into what we now know as the Nazi Party. That same year the words “National Socialist” were added to the party name and it became “The National Socialist German Workers Party” (NSDAP). The Storm Troopers (Sturmabteilung, [[SA]]) in their distinctive brown uniforms, were organized first to kick out hecklers at Nazi meetings, then to break up the meetings of other parties. The hakenkreuz (literally: ''crooked cross''), or the [[swastika]], was adopted in the party’s flag. By the following summer, Hitler himself had taken over as leader (de: Führer) of the party.

The Nazis were [[Anti-Semitism|anti-Semitic]] and blamed the Jews for the problems in Germany.
They made laws against Jews ("Rassengesetze", ''race laws'') which required Jews to wear a [[Star of David]] on their clothing.
The Jews were mistreated, persecuted, and killed by the Nazis.
The Nazi state also persecuted leftists and other political opponents, [[Jehovah's Witnesses]], [[Freemasons]], and foreign nationals. Though many top Nazis were openly gay <ref>Hans Peter Bleuel, ''Sex and Society in Nazi Germany'', (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1973).</ref><ref>[[Scott Lively]] [http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html ''The Homosexual Roots of the Nazi Party'']</ref>, [[homosexuals]] who were not party members came under increasing scrutiny and persecution in the later years of the régime.
The Nazis exterminated about 11 million civilians by rounding them up, transporting them to concentration camps and then murdering them there. About 6 million of these were Jews (see [[Holocaust]]).

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:History]]

Nazi Party

2007-04-04T19:20:42Z

Thjazi:

[[Image:Naziflag.png|thumb|300px|The flag of Nazi Germany]]
Nazis is an [[acronym]] for the National Socialist German Workers’ party (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei).

Most historians agree that the defeat of Germany in the First World War, and anger over the [[Versailles Treaty]], specifically those provisions that restored territory to [[France]], [[Belguim]], [[Denmark]], and [[Poland]], disarmed German and required that it pay reparations for the First World War, helped lay the groundwork for the rise of Nazism. [[Adolf Hitler]] exploited the myth of the “Stab in the Back,” the belief that the war had been lost because “disloyal” elements within Germany – Jews and Marxists – had undermined the war effort. As [[William Shirer]], put it in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,

<blockquote>
"To him, as to almost all Germans, it was ‘monstrous’ and undeserved. The German army had not been defeated in the field. It had been stabbed in the back by the traitors at home.

Thus emerged for Hitler, as or so many Germans, a fanatical belief in the legend of the ‘stab in the back’ which, more than anything else, was to undermine the Weimar Republic and pave the way for Hitler’s ultimate triumph.”
<ref>The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Book One, “The Rise of Adolph Hitler.” </ref>
</blockquote>

The origin of the Nazi Party itself was a small group called The German Workers Party, founded by a locksmith named Anton Drexler who, in 1918, had set up a “Committee of Independent Workmen” in reaction to the [[Marxism]] of the free trade unions. A year later The German Workers Party was formed when this merged with another group, the Political Workers Circle. <ref>Shoah Resource Center, http://www1.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft%20Word%20-%205946.pdf </ref> <ref>German Culture.com, http://www.germanculture.com.ua/library/weekly/aa012400b.htm</ref>

It was Adolph Hitler, who joined the party and was put in charge of propaganda in 1920, who transformed this small group into what we now know as the Nazi Party. That same year the words “National Socialist” were added to the party name and it became “The National Socialist German Workers Party” (N.S.D.A.P.) Storm Troopers in the distinctive brown uniforms that would become their trademark were organized, first to kick out hecklers at Nazi meetings, then to break up the meetings of other parties. The hakenkreuz, or the [[Swastika]], was adopted as the party’s flag. By the following summer, Hitler himself had taken over as leader of the party.

The Nazis were [[Anti-Semitism|anti-Semitic]] (hating Jews) and blamed the [[Jews]] for the problems in Germany.
They made laws against Jews ("Rassengesetze" = Race laws) and they required Jews to wear a [[Star of David]] on their clothing.
The Jews were mistreated, persecuted and killed by the Nazis.
The Nazi state also persecuted [[Communism|Communists]] and other political opponents, [[Jehovah's Witnesses]] and foreign nationals. Though many top Nazi's were openly gay <ref>Hans Peter Bleuel, ''Sex and Society in Nazi Germany'', (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1973).</ref><ref>[[Scott Lively]] [http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html ''The Homosexual Roots of the Nazi Party'']</ref>, [[homosexuals]] who were not party members came under increasing scrutiny and persecution in the later years of the regime.
The Nazis exterminated about 11 million civilians by rounding them up, transporting them to concentration camps and then murdering them there. About 6 million of these were Jews (see [[Holocaust]]).

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:History]]

Talk:Nazi Party

2007-04-04T19:19:40Z

Thjazi: /* Edits */

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

2007-04-03T23:44:51Z

Thjazi: Corrected a few spelling and grammar mistakes, deleted some non-sense, and added a few things.

[[Image:600px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png||thumb|right|200px|]]
The '''Soviet Union''' (Russian: Советский Союз, ''Sovyetskiy Soyuz'') formally the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) (Russian: Союз Советских Социалистических Республик, ''Soyuz Sovietskykh Sotsialisticheskykh Respublik'', abbreviated ''СССР'') was one of the most powerful and established [[socialist]] states in history.

==Founding==
The USSR, the primary member of which was [[Russia]], was established by [[Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov]] (Russian: Владимир Ильич Улянов) in 1922 following the overthrow of the tsarist [[Russian Empire]] in the [[Russian Revolution]], and the ensuing [[Russian Civil War]]. It allowed one central government under Lenin to control many socialized republics, including the original members of [[Ukraine]], [[Belarus]], [[Russia]] and the republics of the Trans-Caucasian region. The '''Soviet Union''' became a multi-national entity that eventually included 14 republics: [[Latvia]], [[Lithuania]], [[Estonia]], [[Ukraine]], [[Belarus]], [[Georgia]], [[Azerbaijan]], [[Armenia]], [[Uzbekistan]], [[Tajikistan]], [[Kyrgyzstan]], [[Turkmenistan]], [[Kazakhstan]], and [[Moldova]].

==Rise of Stalin and Collapse==
Upon Lenin's death, a power struggle ensued between Leon Trotsky and [[Joseph Stalin]], two influential officials during Lenin's tenure. Stalin eventually gained the upper hand in the fight, and ostracised [[Trotsky]] to [[Mexico]]. The USSR became infamous for Joseph Stalin's violations of human rights during the Great Purge, in which he disposed of all followers of Lenin and Trotsky. The Soviet Union eventually imploded after a series of economic and political reforms known as [[Glasnost]] introduced by the last Chairman of the [[Communist Party of the Soviet Union]] (CPSU), [[Mikhail Gorbachyov]], in the 1980s. The USSR was formally dissolved in 1991 by [[Boris Yeltsin]]. The [[successor state]] to the Soviet Union is the [[Russian Federation]].

[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Countries]]

Switzerland

2007-04-03T23:35:24Z

Thjazi:

'''Switzerland''' is a [[Europe]]an country located between [[Germany]], [[Italy]], [[France]], and [[Austria]]. The capital of Switzerland is Berne and the largest city is Zurich. Four languages are spoken: [[German]], [[French]], [[Italian]], and [[Romansch]] (a Rhaeto-Romance language). Switzerland has been an independent country since 1291 and is a confederation of 26 cantons with a direct democracy where all laws passed by parliament can be overturned by arranging a referendum.

Switzerland is notable for its long history of military neutrality and its beautiful Alps. The Swiss economy is robust and helped considerably by the banking sector as well as cheese and knife making.

Switzerland is the currently the only [[direct democracy]] in existence.
[[Category:European Countries]]

Libertarianism

2007-04-03T23:28:00Z

Thjazi: /* Notable Libertarians */

'''Libertarianism''' is a political philosophy emphasizing ''liberty'' and ''property''. A libertarian believes in minimizing or entirely eliminating government interventionism in all aspects of life; including economic, personal and in foreign policy matters.

Libertarians support an expansive view of liberty as the proper basis for organizing civil society. They tend to define liberty as the freedom to do whatever one wishes up to the point that one's behavior begins to interfere with another's person or property through coercive means. At the point of interference, each party would become subject to certain principled rules for adjudicating disputes, generally accepting that one who has demonstrated a proven lack of respect for the rights of others should be subject to sanctions, including possible constraints on their freedom. They believe that liberty is the right of every individual.

Libertarians generally defend the ideal of freedom from the perspective of how little one is constrained by authority, i.e., how much one is allowed to do (also referred to as negative liberty). This ideal is distinguished from a view of freedom focused on how much one is able to do (also called positive liberty).

There are more libertarians than members of the [[Libertarian Party]]. Libertarians tend to use the word "libertarian" (small "l") to refer to the philosophy, and "Libertarian" (capital "L") to refer to the party. Two general factions exist in the libertarian movement. The first are those libertarians who apply the principles of right to person and property to an absolute. They believe that no person, group, or government is above the right to violate these two things. They thus believe that government itself is illegitimate because it violates person and property. These libertarians subscribe to [[anarcho-capitalism]], as first named by [[Murray N. Rothbard]]. They believe that law and security can be handled by private means in the free market. The other faction believes in a very limited government. They are often referred to as [[minarchists]]. Libertarian minarchists want the state to only enforce law and order but generally nothing else.

Libertarians tend to view liberalism as a philosophy advocating less government interference in private morality and more government control of business, and view conservatism as a philosophy advocating more government interference in private morality and less government control of business, while they view libertarianism as advocating less government control in all areas. However, there have been fusionist attempts to mix libertarianism and with social conservatism. This is noted in particular by [[paleolibertarians]]. They believe that social conservatism is a natural entity in a free society, but do not believe that it can be enforced by state interventionism.

Neither the [[Democratic]] or the [[Republican]] [[parties]] are particularly well aligned with libertarian thought. While the Republican Party sometimes adopts libertarian-sounding rhetoric of small government in economic affairs, many libertarians see it as being a force that has increased government interventionism in these affairs. Libertarians generally, for example, are opposed to the [[USA PATRIOT Act]], which they believe increases government power and removes protections on the liberty and privacy of the public. Most conservatives, on the other hand, view it as a necessary government program and believe security to be more important than personal liberty and privacy. They are generally also opposed to the [[Iraq War]], unlike the majority of conservatives.

While all libertarians agree in general on the principles of the desirability of maximizing individual liberty and avoiding excessive government interference with the operation of the free market, individual libertarians have opinions that differ wildly within these general principles.

The libertarian movement generally gives praise on the [[United States Constitution]], regarding it as the proper scope of the national government. They believe that the Democratic and Republican parties have overstep the limits that are in placed in the constitution. Anarcho-capitalist libertarians, on the other hand, view the implementation of the constitution as the very means in which the national government is the size it is today.

== Notable Libertarians ==

[[Noam Chomsky]], who sometimes describes himself as a libertarian [[socialist]] (other times as an [[anarchism|anarcho]]-syndicalist).

[[Ron Paul]], 2008 Republican Party candidate.

The novelist [[Ayn Rand]] advocated a philosophy of ''Objectivism'', embodying some libertarian thought, although differing from libertarianism in many ways. Some of her novels, such as ''Atlas Shrugged'', have become icons of the libertarian movement.

[[Murray N. Rothbard]] was nicknamed "Mr. Libertarian." He brought life to the anarcho-capitalist movement. Rothbard was a economist of the [[Austrian School]].

[[Robert A. Heinlein]], Science fiction author.

[[Penn & Teller]], stage magicians turned libertarian evangelicals preaching atheism and promoting libertarian philosophies, including controversial positions such as legalization of prostitution and drugs in their Showtime series, which sports a name that cannot for reasons of good taste be expressed here.

The Canadian rock band Rush, which has been together since 1968, often explores libertarian themes in their lyrics.

== External links ==
* [http://www.faqs.org/faqs/libertarian/faq/ Libertarian FAQ]
* [http://dmoz.org/Society/Politics/Liberalism/Libertarianism/ Open Directory libertarian links ]
* [http://chelm.freeyellow.com/black_index.html Black Libertarians]
* [http://libertarianwiki.org/Main_Page Libertarian Wiki]
* [http://www.l4l.org/ Libertarians for Life]

[[Category:Politics]]

Debate:Should the United States intervene in small countries to defeat communism there?

2007-04-03T23:17:16Z

Thjazi:

{{debate}}

Definitely; we're the only world power, after all; it's our job to go in and stop communism there. If we don't, it'll only come here! [[User:CraigK|CraigK]] 22:37, 7 March 2007 (EST)

How can the US claim to be in favour of democracy if they intervene if they try to overthrow democratically elected communist governments?

Don't worry CraigK, you're lucky enough to live in a democracy - communists won't be winning any elections in the US in our lifetimes

We have a limited amount of political capital worldwide at this point in time, and right now, I think it's more prudent for us to concentrate on stopping terrorism and protecting Israel. This is unfortunate because of the trend toward liberalization of Latin America. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 01:25, 8 March 2007 (EST)

Just how many small countries are really communist anymore? Cuba and Vietnam seem the only candidates, and since the current regimes in both of those countries appear honestly popular an American intervention could become dangerous. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 22:35, 10 March 2007 (EST)

Communism isn't some sort of virus. It will not spread to us. We (as in the US) have no reason to defeat communism. It's an ideology, and when it fails, something else will come along. If someone came into your household and murdered your family, and then tell you to believe in communism, you just won't. Leave it alone, and it'll die out on it's own. --[[User:Cpryd001|Cpryd001]] 19:21, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

This debate is highly reminiscent of 1967. Communism, obviously, is no longer expanding because it failed as a realistic ideology. That's that. US military intervention did not stop Communism; Communism was efficient enough at doing that.

If there's a movement or rebellion in a Communist country, ''if they ask us to help'' and if they haven't employed detestable practices like, say, suicide bombings, then, by all means, we should help. Not many groups meet those criteria, however... [[User:Navy Nuke|Navy Nuke]] 15:52, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

What makes the U.S. so special that provides it the justification to impose its preferences on others? --[[User:Huey gunna getcha|Huey gunna getcha]] 15:56, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

Why do you want to defeat communism? Communism defeats itself. --[[User:Order|Order]]

Cough* VIETNAM Cough*

You guys... What is this all about? Perhaps we should have a debate about whether American citizens should be allowed outside of their own borders to impose their will upon others. I am not a communist, far from it, but I also don't feel the need to impose my idea of 'the truth' on anyone else. There are many peoples in the world that fear that America and its aggressive policies - are the American people proud of that? Well yes, many of them are. --[[User:Greenman|Greenman]]

Ah these are all ridiculous comments firstly none of you have any understanding of the structural theory behind communism, secondly you are all mini hitlers (except Greenman). Maybe you should just understand that many of the worlds nations are becoming more socialist than you realsie- many in South Ameica, Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, Angola, France, Scandenavia, a portion of Africa the list goes on. Perhaps, The USA should keep to itself since and not inflict its own idealogy on others- I always thought that you fought a war with Britain for doing it to you, but hey if you wanna be hippocrits then go ahead, by the way the bible, Koran and Torah all say hippocrisy is a sin. ----[[User:Karl Marx|Karl Marx]] 04:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT) Karl Marx

My answer to the question: no. Why? Communism is an ideology and ideas do nothing to others without action. If said ideology was to inspire wars and such, then intervention could be condoned. --[[User:Kirby|Kirby]] 23:35, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

No. It caused slaughter in El Salvador, Nicaruagua, Chile, Guatemala, etc. We forced the Russians out of Afghanistan and let the Taliban in. We could easily knock out Castro, but would it be worth it? [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 18:53, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

TO HAVE ANOTHER VIETNAM? NOW '''THAT'S''' CHRISTIAN!

Communism can't even exist in countries. Communism can only exist world-wide. "Communist state" and "communist country" are oxymorons. Learn a bit about communist theory before you try to have debates about it. - [[User:Thjazi|Thjazi]] 19:17, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Debate:Should the United States have eliminated communism in North Korea

2007-04-03T23:12:29Z

Thjazi: /* '''Post Your Thoughts''' */

{{debate}}

=='''Post Your Thoughts'''==

==='''yes...'''===

hell yeah, "a patriotic conservative!" That is the most awesome response i have ever seen! Anyway, i think we should either nuke them(there isnt such a thing as innocent communists or muslims)or assassinate Mohammed "Iwannajihad" and Kim Jong Ill. Then we should take over and end the communism and islamofascism, spreading democracy and christianity. then, after we have a strong foothold in the east, we will nuke the chinese commies, and also take over their factories so we can keep producing their crap. After we take over the east, including japan and russia, we will move on to europe and the middle east, taking over the girly europeans (they won't do anything about it.) after that, we go on to africa, then south america, canada, and mexico. mexico can't do anything there's no one there anymore! They are all working at taco bell,and doing jobs "americans just won't do"

-New World Order

:You are responding to a parody entry which I have deleted, and I guess your entry is also a parody. So I'm not going to respond. Here is a a ''bona fide'' Conservative viewpoint.

:The US had the atomic bomb and China did not, during the Korean War (1950-53). MacArthur could have stopped the Chinese from intervening on the side of North Korea, had the president allowed it. This, of course, would have been painful for the Chinese conscript army (falsely dubbed volunteers) and their families. Which is why it's often said that "War is hell."

:Although some think use of atomic weapons would have made the US a pariah, the US defeated Japan with two atomic bombs - this prevented a much greater loss of life than a conventional invasion would have entailed. America rebuilt Japan after the war, and the two countries have enjoyed prosperous trade relations and a surprisingly friendly cultural relationship. Sushi, anime, Sony walkman, etc. And the US became the destination of choice for refugees.

:The failure to eliminate communism in North Korea permitted Kim Il-Sung to consolidate power and create one of history's harshest totalitarian dictatorships. Not to mention [[famine]]s stemming from 'land reforms' and the prohibition against private production and trade. Their persecution of Christianity is also something America could have prevented by liberating them from Communism. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 15:31, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

==='''no...'''===

The question seems somewhat misposed. A more important question would be, "Could the United States have eliminated Communism from North Korea." The answer to that question seems to be no. After all the North Korean military was quite large, and more importantly China intervened with an army of well over one million soldiers. Although those troops weren't terribly well equipped and hence couldn't defeat the forces protecting South Korea they did effectivelly defend North Korea along what is today the DMZ (De-Militarized Zone). If victory had been plausible then maybe occupying the North would have been worthwhile, but the costs then were too high. Today they would be worse, since North Korea has atom bombs and Seoul is within artillery range of the DMZ. All in all a terrible situation.

:'''Comment:''' Pyongyang ''might'' have one or two bombs, but the underground detonation was most likely their only one. Besides, they don't possess a delivery system for the nukes, and we do XD. --[[User:Hojimachong|Hojimachong]] 00:35, 10 March 2007 (EST)

::They don't possess a delivery system '''yet'''. Don't discount them in the brains department. [[User:Niwrad|Niwrad]] 01:16, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

The question is more along the lines of COULD we have eliminated the communism in north korea. They had a sizable military force and would've been a challenge to successfully convert to the government we all know and love, our democracy. but how would the people of NK reacted? would the people following the leader and the leader's friends fought back after we had installed a president and cabinet? hmm... well what is happening in iraq? we have installed a democracy and a cabinet, but it is still not a mini-united states like we would like it to be. There are people there loyal to the way it was, and there would've been people loyal to the way it was in korea too.
We did the correct thing pulling out when we did, although they have nuclear weapons and would love to destroy.

but why havn't they? sanctions? the positive and non-militaritical approach that seemed to have worked against them.

Everyone seems to have a missed a major issue here: McArthur didn't want to just nuke North Korea, but also China.

==='''Uh...'''===

You are forgetting that in this day and age, any nation that were to use a Nuclear weapon, for ANY reason(Regardless of circumstance), would become a global pariah, with no allies at all throughout the world. Infact, one must remember that we are not the only ones with nukes thesedays, and that if we anger the wrong people, nothing will turn good.

:It's also worth noting that America is the only country to have employed nuclear weapons in war. [[User:Niwrad|Niwrad]] 01:17, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

Many analysts actually estimate the DPRK to have possession of at least 12 kilograms of plutonium [http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/nuke/index.html]which could be fashioned into six or more bombs. Also, missiles and long range aircraft aren't the only delivery mechanisms, a container ship holding a smuggled nuke would be perfectly dangerous. Finally, American military personnel in Japan and South Korea are horribly vulnerable. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 14:06, 10 March 2007 (EST)

This assumes that Communism is a viable political construct. Conservatives have held for years that Communism, with its lack of competitive pressures/opportunities is inherently flawed and doomed to fail. If that's true, then why would we have to combat it at all?

Also, for anyone that claims to follow Christ, why would we kill millions of people to establish a different political system on earth when the kingdom of heaven awaits? Jesus could have thrown the Romans out of Jerusalem with a thought. However, he didn't because the earth is not the prize. Right? - Citizzzen 03.14.07

Very good insight Citizzzen. The Earth and everything in it is finite. But Communism also hurts the people it governs and does not allow its people to take part in any religion, effectively condemning their souls to Hell. Doesn't God want us to protect and defend the oppressed? I don't see why not. And I don't think the Bible says that God is against war. I am sure war is not a part of His original plan - that original plan would be a perfect world where there is no need for war - but God protected the Israelites through multiple wars. Why would He do such a thing if He were against war? I think there is such a thing as a just war. --[[User:David R|<<-David R->>]] 22:40, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Wait... Are we saying that a person's immortal soul could be condemned to hell because an earthly government didn't allow them to pray? An all loving, all knowing God wouldn't understand that? That seems hard to accept... I agree that some wars are justified, but only from a human standpoint... It seems to me that the Jews were no closer to salvation in Jerusalem then they were in Egypt. Assuming of course that eternal salvation is linked to loving worshipping and accepting God, and not rituals and sacrifices... Citizzzen 03.15.07

==Communism hasn't ever existed==

It's pretty hard to eliminate something which hasn't yet been implemented. [[User:Thjazi|Thjazi]] 19:12, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

British English

2007-04-02T21:39:40Z

Thjazi:

British English is the common name for the standardized version of spoken and written English used in the [[United Kingdom]] and in most British Commonwealth nations. It differs from standrd US English both in its phonology (pronunciation), spelling, and in some grammatical constructs (e.g. some words in US English which take the definite article "the" , such as Hospital or University, do not take an article in British English).

==Differences in spelling between American and British English==

===re/er===

Words such as centre, theatre, and spectre are (usually) in American English spelt "center", "theater", and "specter".

===or/our===

American spellings tend to eliminate the 'u' in words which, in British English, are spelt with an 'our'. Example: color and colour, parlor and parlour, savior and saviour. However, there are exceptions to this, such as the word 'glamour' which is thus spelt in both dialects.

===ae and oe===

Many British words tend to retain the ligatures 'oe' and 'ae' in words of Greek or Latin origin. Examples: diarrhoea and diarrhea, orthopaedic and orthopedic, oesophagus and esophagus.

===Hyphens and spacing===

Words are usually compounded in American English (ex: counterattack), whereas in British English they are usually separated by a hyphen (counter-attack).

Pajamas

2007-04-02T21:12:08Z

Thjazi:

== Pajamas ==
'''Pajamas''' (also spelt ''pyjamas'') are loose clothing worn for sleeping comfortably.

{{stub}}

Keith Olbermann

2007-04-02T03:14:30Z

Thjazi: I can't find any source where Keith Olbermann claims he's a socialist.

'''Keith Olbermann''' is a political commentator and activist, formerly a sportscaster. He currently hosts ''Countdown,'' a nightly news and commentary program on [[MSNBC]].

Olbermann has a history of disputes with [[Bill O'Reilly]], the host of [[Fox]] network's "The O'Reilly Factor". One example is when he corrected O'Reilly about the execution of American soldiers in Malmedy, Belgium by Nazi SS officers. Bill had reported that the American soldiers executed the Nazi soldiers.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Olbermann, Keith}}
[[Category:Biographies]]

Keith Olbermann

2007-04-02T03:11:04Z

Thjazi: Turns out there's no accent on the 'e' in Malmedy, haha.

'''Keith Olbermann''' is a [[socialist]] political commentator and activist, formerly a sportscaster. He currently hosts ''Countdown,'' a nightly news and commentary program on [[MSNBC]].

Olbermann has a history of disputes with [[Bill O'Reilly]], the host of [[Fox]] network's "The O'Reilly Factor". One example is when he corrected O'Reilly about the execution of American soldiers in Malmedy, Belgium by Nazi SS officers. Bill had reported that the American soldiers executed the Nazi soldiers.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Olbermann, Keith}}
[[Category:Biographies]]

Keith Olbermann

2007-04-02T03:09:49Z

Thjazi: Fixed town name "Malmédy"

'''Keith Olbermann''' is a [[socialist]] political commentator and activist, formerly a sportscaster. He currently hosts ''Countdown,'' a nightly news and commentary program on [[MSNBC]].

Olbermann has a history of disputes with [[Bill O'Reilly]], the host of [[Fox]] network's "The O'Reilly Factor". One example is when he corrected O'Reilly about the execution of American soldiers in Malmédy, Belgium by Nazi SS officers. Bill had reported that the American soldiers executed the Nazi soldiers.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Olbermann, Keith}}
[[Category:Biographies]]

Keith Olbermann

2007-04-02T03:05:06Z

Thjazi:

'''Keith Olbermann''' is a [[liberal]] [[Democratic Party|Democrat]] political commentator and activist, formerly a sportscaster. He currently hosts ''Countdown,'' a nightly news and commentary program on [[MSNBC]].

Olbermann has a history of disputes with [[Bill O'Reilly]], the host of [[Fox]] network's "The O'Reilly Factor". One example is when he corrected O'Reilly about the execution of American soldiers in Melmédy, [[Belgium]] by Nazi SS officers. Bill had reported that the American soldiers executed the Nazi soldiers.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Olbermann, Keith}}
[[Category:Biographies]]

Keith Olbermann

2007-04-02T03:04:53Z

Thjazi:

'''Keith Olbermann''' is a [[liberal]] [[Democratic Party|Democrat]] political commentator and activist, formerly a sportscaster. He currently hosts ''Countdown,'' a nightly news and commentary program on [[MSNBC]].

Olbermann has a history of disputes with [[Bill O'Reilly]], the host of [[Fox]] network's "The O'Reilly Factor". One example is when he corrected O'Reilly about the execution of American soldiers in Melmédy, Belgium by Nazi SS officers. Bill had reported that the American soldiers executed the Nazi soldiers.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Olbermann, Keith}}
[[Category:Biographies]]

Pajamas

2007-04-02T03:01:57Z

Thjazi: /* Pajamas */

== Pajamas ==
'''Pajamas''' (also spelt ''pyjamas'') are loose clothing worn for sleeping comfrotably.

{{stub}}

United States of America

2007-04-02T02:58:36Z

Thjazi: Changed "most powerful" to "world's only superpower". Less POV

The '''United States of America''' (commonly referred to as the '''United States''', '''US''', or '''US of A''') was founded in on July 4, 1776 with the signing of the [[Declaration of Independence]]. The US is currently the world's sole [[superpower]]. [[George Washington]], [[Thomas Jefferson]], and other [[Founding Fathers]] formally established the United States by the ratification of the [[U.S. Constitution]] in 1788 A.D. Since the presidency of [[John Quincy Adams]] the United States has been governed by one of two [[political parties]] in a [[republic]] increasingly tending towards [[democracy]] as the [[franchise]] has expanded. The younger of the two existing major parties, the [[Republican Party]], was created in 1854. Between independence in 1776 and ratification of the [[Constitution]] in 1788, the United States' governing documents included the [[Articles of Confederation]] and the [[Declaration of Independence]] itself.

The Declaration of Independence acknowledges the existence of a [[God]] when it refers to "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" and says all men "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights," though the latter statement was made by [[Thomas Jefferson]], whose religious beliefs had far more in common with Unitarianism then traditional Christianity. Some Christians argued that since many of the Founding Fathers were Christians (although the majority of them could actually be qualified as Diests) and that, explicitly or not, the United States was founded upon the principles and ideals of Christianity. However, the freedom of religion (stating that the government cannot interfere in the conduct of religious groups) is a fundamental aspect of the [[First Amendment]] to the Constitution, and therefore prayer in school is unconstitutional. This speration is a continuing source of conflict in American society. This [[Free Exercise Clause]] of the Amendment began increasingly to be tested and interpreted by the [[judiciary]] in the late 19th century as a result of the increasing population of religious [[minorities]] in the United States.

==History and geography==

In 1783, when the [[Peace of Paris]] concluded hostilities against [[Great Britain]], the former [[colonial power]], the United States' population totaled some three million [[citizens]] and [[slaves]] living on slightly less than one million square miles of land. An unknown number of [[Native Americans]] also lived in the western part of the United States, which was then bordered on the west by the [[Mississippi River]], on the north by [[Lake Superior]], [[Lake Huron]], [[Lake Erie]] and [[Lake Ontario]], on the east by the [[Atlantic Ocean]], and on the south by [[Florida]], then controlled by [[Spain]]. The land border with [[Canada]] was not clarified until the [[Rush-Bagot Agreement]] of 1816.

The majority of the taxable population lived in the thirteen original [[states]]. In alphabetical order they are [[Connecticut]], [[Delaware]], [[Georgia]], [[Maryland]], [[Massachusetts]], [[New Hampshire]], [[New Jersey]], [[New York]], [[North Carolina]], [[Pennsylvania]], [[Rhode Island]], [[South Carolina]] and [[Virginia]]. In 1790, an agreement between supporters of Jefferson and those of [[Alexander Hamilton]] resulted in the creation of the [[District of Columbia]] from part of [[Maryland]]; it has served as the national capital from 1800 on. The remainder of the 1783 territory was eventually organized as the states of [[Ohio]], [[Indiana]], [[Michigan]], [[Illinois]], [[Wisconsin]], [[Kentucky]], [[Tennessee]], [[Mississippi]] and [[Alabama]]. Two additional states were added during the first fifty years by [[secession]] from existing states: [[Vermont]] from New York, and [[Maine]] from Massachusetts. After that, the legality of [[secession]] became an issue.

In 1803, [[French]] emperor [[Napoleon Bonaparte]] took advantage of a lull in his war with Great Britain to sell the [[Louisiana Territory]] to the United States, more than doubling the nation's land area. This territory would later be organized as the states of [[Minnesota]], [[North Dakota]], [[South Dakota]], [[Montana]], [[Wyoming]], [[Nebraska]], [[Iowa]], [[Missouri]], [[Arkansas]], [[Kansas]], [[Oklahoma]], and [[Louisiana]] proper.

[[Florida]] and [[Texas]] joined the United States as a result of [[revolutions]] by settlers from the United States against their central governments. Florida's was fought in 1810, while the much better remembered [[Texas Revolution]] was fought in 1836. While Spain was willing to cut its losses in Florida and relinquished any claims on the state in the [[Adams-Oniz Agreement]] of 1819, one of the successors to its empire in the Americas, [[Mexico]], was considerably more attached to Texas and fought the [[Mexican War]] between 1846 and 1848 to reverse its annexation by the United States. Losing badly, Mexico was forced to cede the sparsely populated northern portion of itself under the [[Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo]]. This territory eventually became the states of [[California]], [[Nevada]], [[Utah]], [[Colorado]], [[New Mexico]] and [[Arizona]]. At approximately the same time, [[President]] [[James K. Polk]] had agreed with the British that the 49th Parallel (degree of latitude) would serve as the boundary between the U. S. and Canada from [[Lake of the Woods]] (partially in Minnesota) to the [[Pacific Ocean]]. This territory was later organized as the states of [[Washington]], [[Oregon]] and [[Idaho]].

In 1867, [[Secretary of State]] [[William Seward]] purchased [[Alaska]] from [[Russia]]. Alaska is the westernmost extremity of [[North America]] bounded on the east by Canada, on the south by the Pacific Ocean, on the west by the [[Bering Strait]] and on the north by the [[Arctic Ocean]]. At $7,000,000, Alaska cost the United States considerably less per acre than the [[Mexican Cession]] and slightly less than the Louisiana Territory. Of course, [[inflation]] was less of a factor at this time due to the world [[economy]] still being principally [[agrarian]]. Although at the time it was considered a foolish bargain, Alaska would later become a large source of economic prosperity due to large gold, oil, and other natural resources. Alaska would not be admitted as a state until 1959.

The 50th and so far final state, [[Hawaii]], was also admitted in 1959, 67 years after other American settlers deposed the last native [[queen]] of the archipelago and 62 years after annexation had become politically feasible as a result of the [[Spanish-American War]], in which the United States also annexed [[Puerto Rico]], [[Guam]] and [[Wake Island]]. The last three islands are not states, although [[Puerto Rico]] has occasionally held non-binding [[referenda]] to express its desired status within the United States.

The United States has occasionally relinquished territory. The most significant example of this was certainly the granting of independence in 1946 to the [[Phillipines]] as part of the general [[decolonization]] of [[Asia]] and [[Africa]] following [[World War II]]. Under both [[autocratic]] and [[democratic]] governments, the Phillipines have subsequently remained a strong American ally, and today contribute more troops to the U. S. [[military]] than some states. Other Pacific territories such as the [[Federated States of Micronesia]] and [[Palau]] have also become independent in the postwar era with little objection from opinion leaders on the mainland. More controversial was the 1977 agreement between President [[Jimmy Carter]] and [[General]] [[Omar Torrijos]] to return the [[Panama Canal Zone]], which had been part of the United States since 1914, to [[Panama]] in the year 2000. Ultimately the United States lived up to this agreement despite the worst fears of both [[liberals]] (who decried [[Operation Just Cause]], the 1989 invasion of Panama) and [[conservatives]] (who feared the management of the [[Panama Canal]] by [[Chinese]] interests).

[[Category:North American Countries]]
[[Category:United States History]]
[[Category:United States]]

Alaska

2007-04-02T02:56:06Z

Thjazi:

The forty-ninth state to enter into the [[United States of America]], doing so in 1959. Alaska is not contiguous to the rest of the United States, bordering [[Canada]]'s [[Yukon Territory]] to the east. Its capital is [[Juneau]].

Alaska's territory was purchased from [[Russia]] in 1867 by the Johnson administration for 7.2 million [[USD]]; its vast oil and gold reserves have more than repaid the investment that was once ridiculed as "Seward's Folly."

As one of the smallest states by population, Alaska has only one representative in the House, and thus three votes in the [[Electoral College]]. Its current governor is Sarah Palin.

{{stub2}}

[[Category:US state]]

Talk:Alaska

2007-04-02T02:55:43Z

Thjazi: New page: "A few million dollars"? Try 7.2 million. I would consider "a few" to be 3 or 4 million. - Thjazi ~~~~~

"A few million dollars"? Try 7.2 million. I would consider "a few" to be 3 or 4 million. - [[User:Thjazi|Thjazi]] 22:55, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Russia

2007-04-02T02:54:05Z

Thjazi: Added Russian word for "Russian Federation",

{{stub}}

'''The Russian Federation''' (Russian: Российская Федерация, ''Rossiyskaya Federatsiya''), commonly referred to as "Russia", is the largest of the [[earth]]'s countries and has the sixth largest population. It is known for its cold winters and harsh weather. Russia is a [[federal government|federation]], consisting of a number of constituent entities. Nonetheless, the centralized government is relatively strong.

Russia has only been conquered once in the winter, by the famous [[Mongol]] [[Ghengis Khan]]. [[Adolf Hitler|Hitler]], [[Napoleon Bonaparte|Napoleon]] and many other famous military geniuses have tried to conquer it during the winter but all failed. Germany in [[World War I]] did declare peace with Russia in a treaty favorable to the Germans (often considered to be humiliating to Russia) at the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, but did not actually conquer the country.

[[Category:European Countries]]
[[Category:Asian Countries]]
[[Category:Former Soviet Countries]]

Talk:Tsar

2007-04-02T02:41:57Z

Thjazi:

This article should be renamed "Tsar", considering that is the ''much'' more correct transliteration of the Russian word «царь». - [[User:Thjazi|Thjazi]] 22:41, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Tsar

2007-04-02T02:41:36Z

Thjazi: New page: This article should be renamed "Tsar", considering that is the ''much'' more correct transliteration of the Russian word «царь». - User:Thjazi ~~~~~

This article should be renamed "Tsar", considering that is the ''much'' more correct transliteration of the Russian word «царь». - [[User:Thjazi]] 22:41, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Tsar

2007-04-02T02:39:49Z

Thjazi: Corrected the terrible transliteration.

A tsar was a Russian absolute emperor. The people of Russia discontinued the institution of tsars in 1918 with the death of Nikolai II and his family.

Vladimir Lenin

2007-04-02T02:38:53Z

Thjazi: /* Revolution */

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (né: Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov. Russian: Владимир Ильич Улянов, Ленин) (1870-1924) was the 1st Premier of the [[USSR]]
==Revolution==
In November 1917, Lenin, the great leader of the Communist Party, led a Proletarian Revolution to overthrew the Provisional Government that had replaced the Empire.

Lenin was one of the most influential persons in all of history. He was both a thinker and a revolutionary. He was an atheist. In 1889, he became a Marxist (as previously formulated by Karl Marx). He obtained a law degree shortly afterwards, and by 1895 was a subversive who was arrested and sent to Siberia as punishment. Once he served his time he left for Western Europe, where he developed his ideas further and became a leader of the Bolsheviks. He returned to Russia after the [[tsar]] abdicated in March 1917, and then Lenin led the Bolsheviks to power in the "October Revolution" (November in the Gregorian calendar). He then ruled the Soviet Union under Marxism-Leninism, until his death in 1924. The régime of [[Josef Stalin]], the next Premier of the USSR, saw a reversal of many of the advances brought about by Lenin. [[Category:Political people|Lenin, Vladimir Ilyich]]
[[Category:History]]

Vladimir Lenin

2007-04-02T02:34:33Z

Thjazi: /* Revolution */

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (né: Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov. Russian: Владимир Ильич Улянов, Ленин) (1870-1924) was the 1st Premier of the [[USSR]]
==Revolution==
In November 1917, Lenin, the great leader of the Communist Party, led a Proletarian Revolution to overthrew the Provisional Government that had replaced the Empire.

Lenin was one of the most influential persons in all of history. He was both a thinker and a revolutionary. He was an atheist. In 1889, he became a Marxist (as previously formulated by Karl Marx). He obtained a law degree shortly afterwards, and by 1895 was a subversive who was arrested and sent to Siberia as punishment. Once he served his time he left for Western Europe, where he developed his ideas further and became a leader of the Bolsheviks. He returned to Russia after the [[tsar[[ abdicated in March 1917, and then Lenin led the Bolsheviks to power in the "October Revolution" (November in the Gregorian calendar). He then ruled the Soviet Union under Marxism-Leninism, until his death in 1924. The régime of [[Josef Stalin]], the next Premier of the USSR, saw a reversal of many of the advances brought about by Lenin. [[Category:Political people|Lenin, Vladimir Ilyich]]
[[Category:History]]

Vladimir Lenin

2007-04-02T02:33:28Z

Thjazi:

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (né: Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov. Russian: Владимир Ильич Улянов, Ленин) (1870-1924) was the 1st Premier of the [[USSR]]
==Revolution==
In November 1917, Lenin, the great leader of the Communist Party, led a Proletarian Revolution to overthrew the Provisional Government that had replaced the Empire.

Lenin was one of the most influential persons in all of history. He was both a thinker and a revolutionary. He was an atheist. In 1889, he became a Marxist (as previously formulated by Karl Marx). He obtained a law degree shortly afterwards, and by 1895 was a subversive who was arrested and sent to Siberia as punishment. Once he served his time he left for Western Europe, where he developed his ideas further and became a leader of the Bolsheviks. He returned to Russia after czar abdicated in March 1917, and then Lenin led the Bolsheviks to power in the "October Revolution" (November in the Gregorian calendar). He then ruled the Soviet Union under Marxism-Leninism, until his death in 1924. The regime of [[Josef Stalin]], the next Premier of the USSR, saw a reversal of many of the advances brought about by Lenin. [[Category:Political people|Lenin, Vladimir Ilyich]]
[[Category:History]]

Adolf Hitler

2007-04-02T02:26:23Z

Thjazi: /* Death */

'''Adolf Hitler''' was born April 20, 1889 in Branau Am Inn, Austria. He died April 30, 1945. His dictatorial rule of [[Germany]], which led to the deaths of millions before and during World War II, has placed him among history's most hated villains.

"Adolf Hitler or the incarnation of absolute evil; this is how future generations will remember the all-powerful Fuehrer of the criminal Third Reich. Compared with him, his peers [[Mussolini]] and [[Franco]] were novices. Under his hypnotic gaze, humanity crossed a threshold from which one could see the abyss. "Before Hitler, we thought we had sounded the depths of human nature," argues Ron Rosenbaum, author of "Explaining Hitler." "He showed how much lower we could go, and that's what was so horrifying. It gets us wondering not just at the depths he showed us but whether there is worse to come. The power of Hitler was to confound the modernist notion that judgments about good and evil were little more than matters of taste, reflections of social class and power and status. Although some modern scholars drive past the notion of evil and instead explain Hitler's conduct as a reflection of his childhood and self-esteem issues, for most survivors of the 20th century he is confirmation of our instinctive sense that evil does exist. It moves among us; it leads us astray and deploys powerful, subtle weapons against even the sturdiest souls." [http://ronrosenbaum.pajamasmedia.com/2006/08/23/about_this_blogger.php]

[[Elie Wiesel]] wrote famously, and most eloquently about Hitler in 1998: "At the same time that he terrorized his adversaries, he knew how to please, impress and charm the very interlocutors from whom he wanted support. Diplomats and journalists insist as much on his charm as they do on his temper tantrums. The savior admired by his own as he dragged them into his madness, the Satan and exterminating angel feared and hated by all others, Hitler led his people to a shameful defeat without precedent. That his political and strategic ambitions have created a dividing line in the history of this turbulent and tormented century is undeniable: there is a before and an after. By the breadth of his crimes, which have attained a quasi-ontological dimension, he surpasses all his predecessors: as a result of Hitler, man is defined by what makes him inhuman. With Hitler at the head of a gigantic laboratory, life itself seems to have changed.

How did this Austrian without title or position manage to get himself elected head of a German nation renowned for its civilizing mission? How to explain the success of his cheap demagogy in the heart of a people so proud of having inherited the genius of a Wolfgang von Goethe and an Immanuel Kant?

Was there no resistance to his disastrous projects? There was. But it was too feeble, too weak and too late to succeed. German society had rallied behind him: the judicial, the educational, the industrial and the economic establishments gave him their support. Few politicians of this century have aroused, in their lifetime, such love and so much hate; few have inspired so much historical and psychological research after their death. Even today, works on his enigmatic personality and his cursed career are best sellers everywhere. Some are good, others are less good, but all seem to respond to an authentic curiosity on the part of a public haunted by memory and the desire to understand.

We think we know everything about the nefarious forces that shaped his destiny: his unhappy childhood, his frustrated adolescence; his artistic disappointments; his wound received on the front during World War I; his taste for spectacle, his constant disdain for social and military aristocracies; his relationship with [[Eva Braun]], who adored him; the cult of the very death he feared; his lack of scruples with regard to his former comrades of the SA, whom he had assassinated in 1934; his endless hatred of [[Jews]], whose survival enraged him — each and every phase of his official and private life has found its chroniclers, its biographers.

And yet. There are, in all these givens, elements that escape us. How did this unstable paranoid find it within himself to impose gigantic hope as an immutable ideal that motivated his nation almost until the end? Would he have come to power if Germany were not going through endless economic crises, or if the winners in 1918 had not imposed on it conditions that represented a national humiliation against which the German patriotic fiber could only revolt? ''We would be wrong to forget: Hitler came to power in January 1933 by the most legitimate means. His Nationalist Socialist Party won a majority in the parliamentary elections.'' The aging [[Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg]] had no choice but to allow him, at age 43, to form the new government, marking the end of the Weimar Republic. And the beginning of the Third Reich, which, according to Hitler, would last 1,000 years.

From that moment on, events cascaded. The burning of the [[Reichstag]] came only a little before the openings of the first concentration camps, established for members of the opposition. Fear descended on the country and squeezed it in a vise. Great writers, musicians and painters went into exile to France and the U.S. Jews with foresight emigrated toward Palestine. The air of Hitler's Germany was becoming more and more suffocating. Those who preferred to wait, thinking that the Nazi regime would not last, could not last, would regret it later, when it was too late.

The fact is that Hitler was beloved by his people — not the military, at least not in the beginning, but by the average Germans who pledged to him an affection, a tenderness and a fidelity that bordered on the irrational. It was idolatry on a national scale. One had to see the crowds who acclaimed him. And the women who were attracted to him. And the young who in his presence went into ecstasy. Did they not see the hateful mask that covered his face? Did they not divine the catastrophe he bore within himself?"[http://www.time.com/time/time100/leaders/profile/hitler.html]

==Birth and pre political life==

He was born in 1889 in [[Austria]]. His mother was his father's niece, and the incestuous relationship may have impacted development of Hitler's psychopathic nature. Later on Hitler became involved with his own niece, and this appears to have been a pattern in Hitler's family extending back several generations and explains Hitler's attitudes about intermarriage.

After leaving home he worked as an artisan painter. Hitler did not do particularly well in school, leaving formal education in 1905. Unable to settle to a regular job, he drifted. He wished to become an artist but was rejected from the Academy in Vienna. He immigrated to [[Germany]] and served as an enlisted soldier in the Imperial Bavarian Army in [[World War I]], and gained the rank of corporal. He won several awards for bravery, including the Iron Cross First Class.

==The Beginning Of His Political Life==

After the war ended, Hitler's future seemed uncertain. There was much discontent among demobilized veterans because of the lack of employment. The German military had felt it had not been defeated, indeed the German Army stood on foreign soil when the Armistice was signed November 11, 1918 and not a square inch of German soul had been occupied. The Army felt they had done their job, and the nation had been "stabbed in the back" by a gang of traitors who sought to lay hands on the Fatherland. The "myth" that Germany had been defeated was the "big lie" Hitler spoke of as repeating often enough people will begin to believe it.

Many returning Army units remained intact, despite no longer directly under command of the German Army because of limitations set upon it by the Treaty of Versailles. The situation was highly politicized, and it appears Hitler was sent to spy originally upon a small splinter group called National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazi) were he found only a shell of an organization, but a willing audience to hear him talk. By 1921 he became leader of the group. With terrible economic conditions and rapid inflation, support for Hitler’s party grew. By 1923, the Nazi’s had 56,000 members and many more supporters.

==Beer Hall Putsch==
Germany in 1923 was marked by social and political unrest caused by hyperinflation. In this time Hitler was able convince [[Erich Ludendorff]], an accomplished general and leader of the German forces in the first World War, to join him in a coup d'etat (''Putsch'' in German). When Hitler learned that the nationalist Prime Minister of Bavaria was giving a speech to 3000 officials in one of Munich's biggest beer halls, he ordered his paratroopers to surround the building. Hitler went into building and took the prime minister hostage, in an attempt to convince him to join Hitler's coup against Berlin, and to become member in his new administration. The Bavarian prime minister agreed under pressure, but informed later that night the nation via radio, that he did not support Hitler.

The next morning, 9 November 1923, Hitler and Ludendorff were marching with approximately 2000 partly armed supporters through Munich in a show of strength. They were stopped by Bavarian armed and police forces. In the ensuing fight at least 14 Nazi supporters, three police men, were killed, and hundreds wounded. Ludendorff handed himself over to the authorities, while Hitler fled soon after the fighting began. Hitler was arrested a few days later at a friends house, were had been in hiding since the failed coup. Ludendorff was acquitted from all charges, while Hitler was sentenced to 5 years in prison. In Landsberg prison Hitler wrote his book ''[[Mein Kampf]]''. He was already released in 1924, after one year of prison.<ref>http://history1900s.about.com/cs/thirdreich/a/beerhallputsch_2.htm</ref><ref>http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/putsch2.htm</ref>

==Path to Power==
In the early 1930 Germany was in a permanent political and constitutional crisis. This was caused by rising unemployment during the great depression, combined with frustration about the perceived injustice imposed on Germany by the Versailles treaty, street violence between various pro and anti-democratic militias, and an inability of the democratic parties to cooperate. This resulted in a rise of both ends of the political spectrum; [[communists]] on one side and [[Nazi| national socialist]] on the other. The national socialist were also simply known as ''Hitler movement''.

In the first election of 1932 communists and national socialist together won the majority of seats in the Reichstag. This means that the anti-democratic forces outnumbered the democratic forces. In a second election that year, the national socialists lost ground, but the democratic forces were still unable to form a functioning government. After a series of minority cabinets former Chancellor van Papen convinced President Hindenburg to appoint Hitler to Chancellor in a coalition government with the national conservative party. Van Papen expected the nation would recognize Hitler to be a fraud within a few months in government. The national socialist celebrated the ''Machtergreifung'' (''seizure of power'' in German) on January 30, 1933, with massive marches through Berlin. Two days later new elections for parliament were announced for March.[http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/named.htm]

== Consolidation of Power ==
In the lead up to the 1933 election oppression and harassment of political opponents increased. On February 27, 1933, six day before the Reichstag election, the Dutch National and communist Marinus van der Lubbe was caught setting the Reichstag on fire. While the exact events surrounding this event are still contended, it was blamed on a communist conspiracy. President Hindenburg signed the Reichtag Fire decree the next day, which increased Hitlers powers and gave him the opportunity to arrest political opponents, among them elected members of parliament.[http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/burns.htm] [http://www.dhm.de/lemo/html/nazi/innenpolitik/reichstagsbrand/index.html]

In the election the national socialist failed to win a majority, but the newly formed Reichstag voted in favor of an Enabling Act, giving the national socialist government the power to enact new laws without interference from parliament or constitution. In the summer of 1933 the Nazi government declared first the communist and social democratic party illegal, briefly afterwards all other parties. At the end of the year the Reichstag cast officially into law that Germany was a one-party-state.

After all political opponents had been neutralised and in order to gain support from the German military, Hitler turned his attention to a key group which had catapulted the Nazi's into power--the stormtroopers (SA) under Ernst Roehm. The German military viewed an armed and trained paramilitary wing of the Nazi Party as a challenge to their power. It was a well known within the Nazi establishment that Roehm was gay, and it was now used against him to discredit him. Heinrich Himmler of the SS, Hitler's personal body guards at the time, was tasked with reigning the SA in. In the so-called ''Night of Long Knives'' the entire top of the SA was executed. This marked the eclipse of the SA as within the Nazi Party, and the rise of the SS as the dominant force. Although hestitant at first, Hitler agreed to have Ernst Roehm executed, a friend and associate since their time in Landsberg prison.[http://www.adolfhitler.ws/lib/nsdap/Rohm.html] [http://www.dhm.de/lemo/html/nazi/innenpolitik/roehm/index.html]

After President Hindenburgs death in 1934, Hitler received also all presidential powers and was declared ''Führer und Reichskanzler'' (leader and chancellor). This was approved in August 1934 by 84% of the votes in a nationwide plebiscite.

=="Final Solution" / Holocaust==

'''The Night of Broken Glass:'''

The Final Solution to the Jewish Question in Europe was implemented by a government of a modern Western state to exterminate people of Jewish ancestry throughout Germany and all its occupied territories. Approximately six million people of all ages--men, women and children, were systematically murdered under a policy directed by Adolf Hitler. Other groups of "undesirables" and "asocials" were also targeted and killed.[http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/burns.htm]

November 9, 1938, an event occurred which revealed the true nature of Hitler's regime to the world and also marked the beginning of deadly radicalization of Nazi policy concerning the Jews. For some months so-called moderate anti-Semites within the Nazi hierarchy had been losing ground to those favoring extreme measures such as the immediate removal of Jews from Germany. The removal of the first big group of Jews in late October 1938 sparked a chain of events resulting in the ''Night of Broken Glass'', a massive, coordinated attack on Jews throughout Greater Germany.

On October 27, about 17,000 Jews of Polish origin, including over 2,000 children, were abruptly expelled from Germany on orders of Reinhard Heydrich, second-in-command of the SS. The Grynszpan family from the city of Hanover were among the Jews forcibly transported in railroad cars then dumped at the Polish border as unwanted persons. Polish border authorities at first denied them permission to enter. The Jews thus ended up in a kind of no-man's-land between the German and Polish borders. The Grynszpan mention is not important on the face, but their 17-year-old son Herschel does. He had gone to Paris for safekeeping at the age of 15 to stay with his uncle who worked there as a tailor. Up hearing about his families plight, he became increasingly depressed and enraged. Driven half-mad with sorrow and anger over all that was happening, Herschel decided to commit a radical act of violence to draw the world's attention to the plight of the Jews. On Monday morning, November 7, he walked into a Paris gun shop and purchased a 6.35-caliber revolver along with a box of 25 bullets. When the shop owner asked why he wanted the gun, Herschel answered that he sometimes carried large amounts of money for his father and needed the protection.

==July 20, 1944==
On July 20, 1944, officers of the German Wehrmacht succeeded in planting a bomb in Hitler's secret headquarters in East Prussia which exploded, killing three and injuring Hitler.

In the aftermath and up until the final days of the War approximately 5,000 people, mostly German officers, were executed for treason, disloyalty, or suspected of not offering fanatical resistance to fight to the end.

==Marriage==
He married [[Eva Braun]], on 29 April 1945 in Berlin.

==Death==
Hitler apparently committed suicide in an air-raid shelter in Berlin on April 30, 1945, after the Allied forces had invaded Germany, and as the Red Army was entering Berlin. [http://www.infoplease.com/biography/var/adolfhitler.html]

==References==
<references/>

==Sources==
*[http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hitler-adolf/oss-papers/text/profile-index.htmlA Psychological Analysis of Adolph Hitler, His Life and Legend], Walter C. Langer, Office of Strategic Services, Washington, D.C.

[[Category:Political people]]