Don't be a Reactionary

Confession time. It may not be a surprise from reading my blog, but I’ll be clear: I’m a leftist. A liberal. An adherent of Classical Liberalism, who believes that the socialist welfare state, for all its flaws, is the best way to ensure the kind of just and equitable society people would want to live in.

So now that that’s out of the way, I have one question for all of you: What the hell are you all doing?

Let’s do a thought experiment. Imagine you are a member of ISIS. As Mr. ISIS, you’ve got a fairly unambiguous goal: to destroy the entire corrupt and degenerate West in an apocalyptic battle. But right now, you’ve got two main problems. The first, is that people in your own country keep trying to live ordinary, peaceful lives where they don’t get immolated in a holy war (boo!). The second, the evil west doesn’t appear to be that interested in you, as they’re too busy having fun, drinking coke, watching TV, and living normal lives (hiss!). But you’re smart, and relatively reasonable. How do you get the West to attack you and your citizens, solving your two problems?

I’m going to stop here, because it’s pretty obvious what you do, and we’ve seen how easy it has been to force a reaction from America. The more the average citizen can no longer live in peace, the more likely it is for them to have no choice but to join your holy war. And any clumsy move by the opposing side helps them.

So what do you do if you’re America? If you respond in the obvious way, you’re playing right into Mr. ISIS’s hands. He’s hoping for that reaction, and counting on it. But at the same time, not reacting isn’t exactly an option, as our Mr. ISIS will have to keep trying, ramping up his aggression until he gets the outcome he wants. It’s a no-lose situation for him.

As is quickly becoming a theme in this blog, I don’t have the answers to this one either. Ideally, the response would be some sort of third, paradigm breaking thing, that delegitimizes Mr. ISIS without playing into his hands.

If you haven’t figured out where I’m going with this yet, stop wondering. It’s about Donald Trump again. Donald Trump may be loathsome and rude, but he is not stupid. He is very good at placing himself in these “no-lose” situations, just like our friend Mr. ISIS. So let’s take it as a given that Trump is thinking at least one step ahead, anticipating the likely responses to anything he does.

In that case, what is meant to happen with this immigration ban? The same thing that happens every time he tries to push people’s buttons: he wants people to react (I talk more this as a negotiation tactic in a previous post).

But the point is, the left rising up en masse represents a victory condition for him. This is only the first few weeks, he’s trying to solidify his base. His power comes from the millions of people who see themselves as a persecuted minority in their own country, and mass demonstrations are not helping the matter.

I allude to this in the conclusion of my Fascism post, but I’ll be explicitly clear: a massive demonstration of people who are not them, spouting slogans and behaving in the manner of the least intelligent member of the crowd is the opposite of helping. All it does is solidify in their minds that Trump is their guy, gotta stick with him, he’s really giving it to those guys who aren’t us and gosh do we appreciate it.

A protest is the kind of move that Trump is predicting and counting on. And while I’m not going to speculate on the end goal in this post, I would imagine it looks a lot like Mr. ISIS's.
 
And Trump will use, and has used, the same strategy again and again. And he will continue to do so for as long as it works. I’ll make a not-so-bold prediction: look for him to repeat this same thing next week, with an executive order that targets LGBT folks, followed by frothing outrage. (Note: I am writing this on Monday, January 23, 2017)

This is not a secret, it is their stated strategy. Bannon and Trump are many things, but they are not stupid. They know that the media will react that way. They are counting on it.

And as long as he can keep identifying safe outgroup punching bags, he’s going to keep doing it. The protests are part of the plan.

I don’t know how to stop it, or how to break the cycle, but we have to think more. We’ve got to start playing multiple moves ahead. Because right now, the left is doing nothing but reacting, and if we keep doing that, we’re going to lose everything that matters.

(2/4/17 EDIT: So that executive order I was predicting seems to be on hold, though I would still be surprised if there wasn't some new outrage by the end of the next week. But I wanted to make clear that the "Mr. ISIS" bit was a rhetorical device, and a gross oversimplification of the historical causes  of unrest and animosity between the middle east and the west. While there were certainly recent causes, these conflicts have been fermenting for over a hundred years (if not earlier). Overturning Sykes-Picot is a stated objective of ISIS/ISIL. I may revisit this in a future post, as events warrant.)

On Fascism, Conclusion

"Germany was having trouble what a sad, sad story! Needed a new leader to restore its former glory!"
Mel Brooks, Springtime for Hitler

"We will make America strong again. We will make America proud again. We will make America safe again. And we will make America great again!"
Donald J. Trump

We will make America strong again. We will make America proud again. We will make America safe again. And we will make America great again.
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/donaldtrum754622.html

We will make America strong again. We will make America proud again. We will make America safe again. And we will make America great again.
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/donaldtrum754622.html

We will make America strong again. We will make America proud again. We will make America safe again. And we will make America great again.
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/donaldtrum754622.html

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag and waving a cross" 
misattributed to Sinclair Lewis

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To recap, a few weeks ago I began “translating” the original Nazi party platform, in order to see what a modern fascist platform might look like.  

You can read about my attempt here: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V
 

Of course, the events of the last few weeks have made that effort largely superfluous, as the public adoption of several of these positions by the current administration.

Suddenly, proving that America is on the fast track to Fascism got a whole lot more urgent, and a lot less difficult.

But without further delay, here is our compiled list, and our blueprint for American Fascism:

1.     We demand the American People’s right to self-determination.

2.     We demand equality of rights for the American People with respect to other nations.

3.      We recognize the necessity for the preservation of our Culture and the American way of life. Any person wishing to become a naturalized citizen of the United States must swear to uphold American Culture and put America first.

4.     Noncitizens may reside in America only as guests, and must remain under the authority of the laws of the United States.

5.      The right to determine matters concerning administration and law belongs only to the citizen. Therefore, we demand that every public office, of any sort whatsoever, be filled only by American citizens.

6.     We demand that the government of the United States of America ensure the American Way of life, and allow the pursuit of happiness for all citizens. If it is not possible to sustain all citizens, then members of foreign nations, resident aliens, and other non-citizens are to be deported.

7.      All new immigration to the United States of any persons unfriendly to the American way of life is to be suspended. All recent immigrants fitting this category, as well as all illegal immigrants, must therefore be immediately deported.

8.     All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.

9.     The primary civic obligation of the American citizen is to work both spiritually and physically, for the benefit of society. As such, we demand the abolition of unearned income, freeing American citizens from debt-slavery.

10.  Personal enrichment from war disrespects the sacrifice of American soldiers. Therefore, we demand that it be designated a crime against the American people, and all profits be seized.

11.  We demand American jobs. For the good of the middle class, American companies should be in America, ensuring profits and jobs go to American citizens.

12.  We demand the expansion and protection of Social Security and Medicare.

13.  We demand the government protect the middle class, and make supporting small businesses a top priority.

14.  We demand the abolition of property taxes, as well as the return of land to the middle class through seizure from foreign land speculation companies.

15.  We demand an emphasis on law and order, support for the death penalty, and a formal stance against those who would threaten the American way of life.

16.  We demand sovereignty, and reject all attempts of the United Nations to dictate the laws of the United States of America. Additionally, we demand that America’s interests and endeavors be free of interference by any foreign power.

17.  We demand a fundamental reconstruction of the education system, one that emphasizes practical skills, recognizes the importance of America and America’s place in the world, and enables students to become leaders and patriots.

18.   We recognize the right of the United States to establish a military capable of defending the rights, interests, and safety of the American People.

19.  We demand legal opposition to known lies and their propagation by the press. In order to combat this, we demand that:

a.     All writers and employees of American media be American citizens;

b.     Non-American newspapers must obtain government permission to be published;

c.     Non-Americans be forbidden by law to have any financial interest in American publications, or any influence on them, with violations punishable by the closing of the publication as well as their immediate deportation. We demand legal prosecution of artistic and literary forms, forbidding all publications which exert a destructive influence on the general good and the American way of life, as well as the closure of all organizations opposing the above demands.

20.  We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations, so long as they do not threaten the United States, or oppose the moral senses of the American people. As such, we advocate for a recognition of positive Christianity, without limit to any one denomination, to defend America against the corrupting spread of Sharia Law.

21.  To ensure the implementation of these demands, we demand a strong government, staffed by loyal patriots, that obeys the will of the American people.

Proud of my accomplishment, and eager to expose some fascists, I did a very non-scientific study, showing this to some people of varying political views, to ascertain possible reactions. In short, I posted it on Facebook.

The results were somewhat inconclusive, as it’s very difficult to break through the noise on Facebook, and even more difficult to do so with over a page of text. I considered trying some alternate, image-based approaches but to be honest, I didn’t have the stomach for it.

I posted the list several places, including the pages for Breitbart, Fox News, various Donald Trump groups, and my own personal feed (a regrettable plan, but I was getting desperate). The end result was a few dozen likes (on the pages), one share, and several comments. My favorite is a tie between a lady who asked “where did this come from?.Beautifully rendered!”, and an acquaintance on my feed who said “3 and 7 are uninformed, vague, and violent. bye”, before unfriending me. Hard to argue with that.

I did have two people message me privately after independently identifying it as actual re-skinned Nazi ideology, which was heartening, as it’s nice to know people are reading. 

One of them, though, accused me of selectively changing it to create a "partisan gotcha", which I sincerely promise was not my intent. However, I will readily admit bias in that regard, and sent followup questions with the intent of editing the list to be more impartial. I received no reply.

But overall, I would have to say this project was profoundly depressing, and not just because Trump moved faster than I thought he would.

Looking over the list (and the original, for that matter), I was struck by the sheer number of unremarkable positions. By that I mean, positions firmly within the Overton window, with many, if not most, appearing similar to broadly acceptable policies.

Of course, this is not to say that they are all agreeable policies (I take issue with most of them). The real problem appears to be that, by and large, these are not unthinkable policies. Instead, it looks like what it is: a typical set of nativist, populist, and nationalist right wing beliefs. Nor would this list have looked strange a decade ago. #20, for instance, has long been an article of faith (pun intended) of the religious right. By simply swapping Jews for Muslims, we’re left with a belief that a quarter of the country would likely support (never mind what the constitution says).
 

Jon McNaughton, "One Nation Under God"

It feels dirty, using stereotypes and broad strokes to make this argument. All of America’s right wing are not fascists. And if you don’t know a kind, decent person who agrees with the majority of points on this list, then you need to meet more people.

Because that’s the ugly truth about fascism. People like it. The policies are popular, people feel proud of their country, proud of their countrymen, and their tribal anger and resentment is focused on an exterior target.

After D-Day, my grandfather marched through Europe and Germany. Along the way, talking to the citizens, he didn’t find any Nazis. None anywhere. This was, of course, nonsense. But it’s illustrative nonsense. He found Germans. Most of whom were good, kind, decent people, just like most Americans (and for that matter, most people), are good, kind, and decent. It doesn’t take monsters to make Fascism, it just takes people. The behavior is baked into us on a deep level; everyone wants to feel right, and moral, and important. The American fascists sincerely believe, on a deep level, that they are doing things to help America, to help their friends and neighbors.

Any condemnation of Fascism that doesn’t understand this is only adding to the problem. The vast majority of fascists are motivated by love and fear, not hate. The Germans stopped being fascists when it was clear that fascism was no longer a good idea. I often wonder, how many America will have to kill, before they realize the same.

And we will kill, eventually. America is not an anomaly; people will proudly and happily kill, if they sincerely believe they’re doing the right thing. If Adolf Hitler proved one thing, it’s that one man’s mania and zeal can, with a little help, turn a country into an army of murderers.

As usual, I don’t have any answers. I don’t know the way to change the course of history, and I don’t know how to stop fascists. But I do know that very, very soon, we’re going to have to stop some of the most dangerous fanatics in the entire world:

Good people, who are trying to do the right thing.

The Art of the Deal

I wanted to take a moment to help people understand the day to day functioning of the Trump presidency.

(This is mostly so they will stop being surprised when he does very bad things with such distressing regularity)

Donald Trump's behavior has been well defined, and has been fairly consistent throughout his career.

But to be explicit, his basic operating principle is this: he will push as hard as he can, for the most extreme outcome imaginable. This does not represent a true desire for this extreme outcome, rather, it is merely a hard-line negotiating strategy (and one he has pursued extensively in his business careers).

By anchoring the offer beyond what he wants, he puts himself in a position to grudgingly accept a "compromise" that he wanted anyway. Look for many of these initial pushes to be moderated slightly in the coming weeks.

The administration's "decision" to allow green card holders back into the country is a great example, and we will likely see more to come.

It's just important to remember that Trump, for all his flaws, is not stupid. The reaction you have to these pronouncements is likely the one he intends, and is a small part of his administration's long-term plan. Watch for a lot of the initial RESISTANCE fervor to die down, as people become overwhelmed and exhausted of being outraged, settling into a resigned state of "well I guess he's not so bad now".

An AI Aside

Taking a break from my work towards the conclusion of my fascism project, I wanted to take a moment to talk about something lighter: Why a strong Artificial Intelligence will almost certainly kill us all.
Kidding! It'll probably just make the world awful and uninhabitable! Our deaths will be an unintended side effect.

I'm kind of assuming you've read the definitive AI blog piece, and if you haven't, you probably should. It's a lot more comprehensive than this, funnier, and better written.

But assuming you're still wondering why AI is going to get us, here's how. It's the same moloch-ian problem we run into everywhere else, but with higher stakes.

Because here's the problem, we already have super-intelligences running around, and we're not very good at controlling them. I'm talking, of course, of corporations.

Indeed, the problem of restraining an advanced AI, ensuring that it will only look to achieve its goals through a small predictable number of channels, is similar to the problem of ensuring corporations are ethical.

By this I mean, if an organization of people armed with conventional morality can't be trusted not to cleverly circumvent regulations, what chance do we have to control a similarly clever but amoral AI? Our Volkswagen fellows might have cheated emissions standards, but they know better than to do something that would actively harm people (leaving aside the pollution argument for a moment). An AI would have no such compunctions.

It's not even the AI's fault, it's a basic fundamental error to try to directly anthropomorphize them. It's just that it's a lot easier to program discrete tasks, than it is to program an innate sense of morality into a machine. And as the machines get smarter and more capable, the chances for dangerous error increase.

In the end, it'll probably be just a regrettable accident.

Preparing for Life after Democracy

I’ve been reading some recent articles, trying to get a sense of what the next few decades of life under a semi-democratic government might look like. And I think I'm starting to figure it out.

Sales of Orwell’s 1984 are spiking as I write this, but even in that book, people had jobs, kids, and lives, all while operating under a cartoonishly evil surveillance state.

Obviously, real governments have far more effective tools for neutralizing dissent. In a practical, real-world sense, 1984's Winston never did anything to destabilize the Party. His quiet, personal rebellion had no consequence to anyone other than himself and Julia, the government would never have cared enough to get involved. Neutering any threat he posed would been as simple as firing him, as his immediate economic and survival needs would ensure that making any bigger plans was impossible.

Opposing the government would make his life, not just dangerous, but profoundly unpleasant.

That’s the hidden trick, and why I made this digression. People say they value liberty and democracy, but what they really care about is safety and happiness. For all but a few small outliers, the preference is a comfortable, safe life with kids. This is an explicitly cynical view, but even a cursory review of past political platforms shows that people’s wants and needs don’t drastically change over time.

In non-democracies, people sit around complaining that the government sucks, but are realistic enough to know that there isn’t much they can do about it. Fatalism becomes a way of life. And if people think they can’t become meaningfully involved in civic life, and can’t change their government, then it becomes true (whether or not it was true already).

A rational response to this is the uncoupling of goods and services from a non-responsive government. Take education, as an example.

In many countries, both democratic and otherwise, the state guarantees education for all children, paid for through taxation. But if the government is not to be trusted, where "trusted" in this case merely means “relied upon”, then enterprising and/or rich people will take matters into their own hands. If it’s a necessary service, then people are still willing to pay for it, even if they’re already being provided with a substandard product. So you quickly see a proliferation of non-government services that mirror the government’s supposed offerings. The bourgeoisie of any country are going to live in comfort, and it doesn’t matter so much whether they approve of the government.

But this behavior doesn’t exist in a vacuum, the poor and less well off become acutely aware that those with means are opting out of governmental services. But there’s no use appealing to government bureaucrats, they’re the same ones sending their children to private school.

Identifying the similarities with our current system is left as an exercise for the reader, but the net result is a society with an unhappy underclass, a comfortable rich, and an utterly dysfunctional government.

And why bother making a fuss, when it’s hard enough to get a job already.

Machine Learning the Election

This going to be an abbreviated entry, but I wanted to draw your attention to this translation of a Das Magazin article.

To be honest, I don’t know how to tackle this issue, and I can confidently predict that I will be talking much more about the legal and moral implications of identifying people through big data in future posts.

But frankly, if all that is done with this data is effective marketing, we’ll have gotten off easy. Frankly, I would not be at all surprised if human brains were fundamentally hackable. Obviously, the human brain is an extraordinarily complicated system, but each must still operate deterministically at some level. And, as machine learning and Artificial Intelligence methods improve, consistent and repeatable tricks will be found.

This is not to say, of course, that any one individual trick will work on each brain. But, as the predictive metrics improve, the most effective tricks for each individual brain type will be identified. Is it still free will if your behavior can be reliably predicted?

I’m not sure, but I think we’re going to find out fast.

On Fascism, Part I

I’m prefacing this with a half-hearted warning: this one might get political. I know politics is the mind killer, but there’s just no way to do without it.

So, the big question on a lot of people’s mind is Fascism. What is it, how do we stop it, is it here, is Donald Trump a Fascist, etc. Lots of questions. But a better, more useful question is: “What does Fascism look like, and what does it look like in my country?” Because while it is easy to imagine cartoon villains, like in Indiana Jones, the real world is not so easy to distinguish. A closer look is necessary.

I’m using for our example, the German Nazi party, as our most uncontroversial instance of Fascism. And since it is a political philosophy, the best place to start to understand it is with their initial party platform, which I will endeavor to explain. In doing so, I hope to “update” this platform, to serve as a clearly generalizable blueprint to identify Fascism today. Let’s see what we find.

One more warning: There’s a lot of history, and it gets a little dense in places.

The following quotes are from the Wikipedia article.

1. We demand the unification of all Germans in the Greater Germany on the basis of the people's right to self-determination.

I’m not going to delve into the full context of the various debates and struggles to unify the various territories of the historical Austrian and Prussian empires, as they’re far beyond the scope of this entry. This can be best understood as part of the reaction to the Treaty of Versailles, which, among other clauses, forced Germany to relinquish some 65 thousand square kilometers of territory. Since this is not exactly usable in the current historical moment, I will try to render the spirit of this as follows:

1a. We demand the American People’s right to self-determination.

2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in respect to the other nations; abrogation of the peace treaties of Versailles and St. Germain.

The same issue arises here, as this is a strict reaction to the various peace treaties that marked the end of the Great War (WWI). However, the first clause should stand on its own just fine:

2a. We demand equality of rights for the American People with respect to other nations.

3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the sustenance of our people, and colonization for our surplus population.

This is the first one that starts to look really strange to modern eyes. Colonization? Territory? Sustenance? But imperialist sentiment was still very much a factor in global politics of the time. The so-called “Scramble for Africa”, occurred just a few decades earlier, and colonies were important sources of revenue, as well as a source of national pride. Having colonies meant that you were a global power, making them a status symbol in addition to a financial boon.

However, Germany was far more concerned about expansion in Europe, and made deliberate efforts to do so (see: World War I). The treaty of Brest-Litovsk, signed between Germany and Russia gives us a clear view into the German ambition. This treaty was formally nullified by the Treaty of Versailles, with German colonies and territories formally seized and redistributed. There are many other layers to this one, but I hope it’s not too much of a stretch to restate this for modern times as:

3a. We demand that America’s interests and endeavors be free of interference by any foreign power.

4. Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race.

And we come to one of the choking points. The historical consequences of these positions have made hard line stances like this one largely unpalatable as a mainstream view. Even if it is privately believed, the public’s stance on the issue makes proclaiming the sentence politically unwise. Therefore, looking for an explicit statement is not a productive enterprise, as it will be easy for our mainstream fascists to publicly decry it for political expediency. What views like this one would look like transferred to our modern political climate is not immediately apparent, but what does see are similar issues being raised about loss of culture due to immigration. We have seen this numerous times throughout history, and into the present day, with many countries concerned over non-assimilating immigrants. Obviously, there are other issues within this point, especially considering the loaded meaning of race (the “Aryan race”). As such, my rephrasing should be taken with a grain of salt, but I believe that our Fascists would approve of the following:

4a. We recognize the necessity for the preservation of our Culture and the American way of life. Any person wishing to become a naturalized citizen of the United States must swear to uphold American Culture and put America first.

To be continued. (Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V)

On Fascism, Part II

Welcome back.

In this series (Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V), I will continue to explore the ideological underpinnings of the German Fascist movement by looking at the 25-point plan put forth by the National Socialist German Workers Party. By “updating it”, freeing it from its historical context, I hope to create a blueprint for identifying a modern American Fascist movement.

Trigger Warnings: Politics, History.

(Note: All of the text used is from the translation on Wikipedia)

5. Whoever has no citizenship is to be able to live in Germany only as a guest, and must be under the authority of legislation for foreigners.

This seems straightforward enough:

5a. Noncitizens may reside in America only as guests, and must remain under the authority of the laws of the United States of America.

6. The right to determine matters concerning administration and law belongs only to the citizen. Therefore, we demand that every public office, of any sort whatsoever, whether in the Reich, the county or municipality, be filled only by citizens. We combat the corrupting parliamentary economy, office-holding only according to party inclinations without consideration of character or abilities.

I’m not sure how dysfunctional the parliamentary office appointments of the Weimar Republic were or weren’t, but the point seems to function fine without the last sentence:

6a. The right to determine matters concerning administration and law belongs only to the citizen. Therefore, we demand that every public office, of any sort whatsoever, be filled only by American citizens.

7. We demand that the state be charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens. If it is impossible to sustain the total population of the State, then the members of foreign nations (non-citizens) are to be expelled from the Reich.

Intimate knowledge of the many social welfare programs of the Weimar Republic seems unnecessary; this point translates very clearly:

7a. We demand that the government of the United States of America ensure the American Way of life, and allow the pursuit of happiness for all citizens. If it is not possible to sustain all citizens, then members of foreign nations, resident aliens, and other non-citizens are to be deported.

8. Any further immigration of non-citizens is to be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans, who have immigrated to Germany since 2 August 1914, be forced immediately to leave the Reich.

August 2^nd, 1914 was the day that Germany invaded Luxembourg, an important early date in WWI. It was approximately eight years prior to the public announcement of the 25-point plan by Adolf Hitler (February 24, 1920).

Obviously, this has no clean modern analogue, but the intention seems clear enough, as the economic unrest leads to a familiar sentiment. And certainly, real world events have conspired to make this less abstract than when I started writing:

8a. All new immigration to the United States of any persons unfriendly to the American way of life is to be suspended. All recent immigrants fitting this category, as well as all illegal immigrants, must therefore be immediately deported.

To be continued. (Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V)

On Fascism, Part III

Welcome back.

(Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V)

Continuing onward in our exploration of the ideological underpinnings of the German Fascist movement through “updating” the 25-point plan put forth by the National Socialist German Workers Party. By freeing it from its historical context, I hope to create a blueprint for identifying a modern American Fascist movement. Needless to say, I do not endorse either platform.

Trigger warnings: Politics, History.

(Note: All of the text used is from the translation on Wikipedia)

9. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.

No need to change, as this is a mainly a clause that establishes a prerequisite for following point(s).

9a. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.

10. The first obligation of every citizen must be to work both spiritually and physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the interests of the universality, but must have its result within the framework of the whole for the benefit of all. Consequently, we demand:

11. Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of debt (interest)-slavery.

I’m not totally confident on my interpretation of this one,  as the Nazis would later use the work requirement as reasons to execute the handicapped (who they viewed as a drain on society). A more charitable and modern view might read more like a statement on the virtues of public service, and the societal benefit of hard work, as in the “Protestant Work Ethic”. This also brings a natural focus to income earned through work.

10/11a: The primary civic obligation of the American citizen is to work both spiritually and physically, for the benefit of society. As such, we demand the abolition of unearned income, freeing American citizens from debt-slavery.

12. In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

Here, we start to get into a series of points that reflect the Nazi party’s origins as a socialist worker’s party. The word “socialist” has acquired political baggage in the United States due to our struggles with the communist USSR, but it is important to remember that at this point in history, many countries experienced wide-scale socialist movements, as well as communist movements. There were many revolutionary political organizations in the Weimar Republic, as the government was fundamentally unpopular. Assaults (often literally) on the government were common, from the very far right, seeking to return to monarchical rule, to the communists on the far left, and many in between.

But it would be a mistake to classify even the Nazi party as a socialist/”left-wing” party. Rather, there is significant evidence that they adopted the socialist positions because they were popular. Certainly, their actions once elected strongly support this reading: their primary political enemies were the communists, and later the social democrats, who opposed the Nazis as they consolidated power (their political allies were the “völkisch” and conservative German National People’s Party, as well as centrist Christians.

I’ve gotten off topic a little, but Nazis being miscategorized as a socialist party is a pet peeve of mine. Said confiscation of “war profits” tended to be the properties of Nazi political enemies (Jews, communists, etc.) The intent of Nazi socialism was to enrich the (Aryan) middle class, and strongly opposed broader, Marxist socialism. More on all this later.

EDIT: It has come to my attention that I did not adequately explain the esteem that the German public, especially the right-wing public, had for the military. What is important to remember is that prior to WWI, and even during, there was no single army. Instead, it was the forces of multiple cooperating kingdoms, all with their own traditions. For instance, when Hitler, as a Hapsburg subject, wanted to join the “German army”, he had to petition the king of Bavaria. The point is, with the military traditions so closely tied to the monarchy, the officer class tended to be landed aristocrats, who were interested and willing to be praised for service, march in parades, and so forth. The military ended up becoming an important ally of the Nazis, and the blending of military and civilian leadership is a hallmark of fascism.

12a. Personal enrichment from war disrespects the sacrifice of American soldiers. Therefore, we demand that it be designated a crime against the American people, and all profits shall be seized.

13. We demand the nationalization of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).

14. We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.

These attitudes were quickly downplayed, and with no major disruption of industry taking place once the Nazis were in power. By that point, their rhetoric primarily focused on anti-Jewish and anti-Marxist themes, as they actively sought the support of industrial entities.

13/14a. We demand American jobs. For the good of the middle class, and the American people, American companies should be in America, ensuring profits and jobs go to American citizens.

To be continued. (Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V)