What makes a Nazi a Nazi?

What makes a Nazi a Nazi?

Is it the violent nationalism?


Is it the mass murder?


Is it the celebration of that murder?


“Russian Spring; about to become a Very Hot Summer!”

Is it viewing your victims as vermin?


” Odessa-mama BURNS!”

Or is it simply the swastikas?


Right Sector…


Sponsored by the US State Dept, the “interim” Government in Kiev, the IMF and the European Union.

6 thoughts on “What makes a Nazi a Nazi?

  1. Yes, that is what the Ukraine coup government is all right. Yet as I went through your posting I couldn’t help but think that the term Nazi is for some an insufficiently pejorative term, especially as the holocaust is exposed as a fiction and the true motives and success of National Socialism come to light. Your photo essay shows what these people are but only to put this tepid label, Nazi, upon them. The term Nazi was a propaganda invention because the term National Socialism was to positive for its enemies’ propaganda.

    What characterisitics of a coup in a debt-ridden country make it idea for American and British oligarchs to support it with money and arms and instant international recognition?

    Is it the violent nationalism? Is it the mass murder? Is it the celebration of that murder? Is it viewing your victims as vermin? Is it a false aping of Hitler’s National Socialist movement to attract thedisaffected lower middle class?

    Liked by 1 person

    • It is difficult for me to engage in a discussion with anyone who asserts that the Shoah — the Catastrophe, a term I prefer to the more commonly used Holocaust — is a fiction. The first generation of European Nazis (German and others) gassed, burnt to death, slaughtered, shot to death, strangled and in a number of other ways killed millions of Europeans in the death camps they ran in Poland, Germany, Slovenia, Croatia, and in the notorious Ukrainian Babi Yar Ravine, since then completely covered over by people who wish to erase all traces of real history.

      As we in the English-language wrold have known for at least the past 3 years, i.e. ever since the TLS carried its superb review of the two relevant works of contemporary German historians, despite the myths both Germans and other Europeans grew up with over the last 70 years, the German foreign service and its judiciary were never de-Nazified following the end of World War II. Nazi ideologues remained in their positions, mentored new generations of foreign service personnel and new generations of Germany judiciary — and the results of such processes are now becoming all too clear and all to evident in the role Germany has played in Ukraine since November 2013.

      It remains to me only to wonder what someone who claims that the Shoah is a fiction might consider “a true aping” of Nazism since he doesn’t consider the current fascist and overtly neo-Nazi revival in Ukraine to be such.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Good post Vaska. I guess you have read the book “Ordinary men”. Yes, all who committed the holocaust were dutifully employed right after the war and never bothered about all the atrocities they had done only a few years before.

        I don’t like the use of the term Shoah for it suggests only Jewish people were subject to it. I remember, 20 years ago, we talked about the Holocaust. The film of Jacques Lanzmann may be one explanation for this change. Also, the term catastrophe connotes something that happens in spite of man’s will, like a divine and unpreventable phenomenon. It gives it an aura of sacred. It turns it into a dogma and religion, like we can see today. I think this plays in the hands of those who want to draw political profit from it. But making it something sacred if not taboo doesn’t honor the victims. On the contrary, it pushes them on the sidelines. The sacred aura that has been lately built is already mooning on the victims.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I’m not sure what we should call the evil the Nazis and their willing collaborators inflicted on so many, but moral obscenity is I think a good way of describing the actions perpetrated by them (and no, I haven’t read the book you mention — it’s now on my reading list). I avoid the term “Holocaust” (an Old Testament concept), because of its literal meaning as “burnt sacrifice”. To my modern mind, there’s something obscene about the very notion itself, already repudiated in Hosea 6:6. One can, in that sense, also say that Nazism was an ideological and spiritual throw-back, a catastrophic cultural regression, and a recidivism of the European psyche, especially those psyches formed under the influence of Protestant and Catholic hatred of both Judaism (and Jews) and Christian Orthodoxy (Russians, Serbs, Greeks, etc.).


    • You are somewhat correct on one count. The term Nazi was slang invented by the Allies as a pejorative way to call the enemy. Call it propaganda if you wish.

      But you are very wrong on another. The holocaust was not a fiction. The holocaust has not been exposed as being a fiction. If it is nowadays starting to be exposed as being a tool for political objectives, so is History on a general level.

      Liked by 1 person

share your thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s