Saturday, March 4, 2017

Book Review 383: Hitler's Heralds

HITLER'S HERALDS: The Story of the Freikorps 1918-1923, by Nigel H. Jones. 284 pages, illustrated. Dorset

Lots of people think Donald Trump is a neonazi, and they are correct; but there is a yuuge difference between Hitler or Mussolini and Trump: Trump does not have a private army of semi-disciplined goons to terrorize his opponents.

(He has the inclination to be sure. During the campaign he hired a private squad of goons and directed them to behave the way the American Nazi goons famously did at their big rally in 1938 at Madison Square Garden.)

Where did Hitler get his army of brownshirts? They were a natural growth from a spontaneous emergence of violent paramilitary bands following the end of the war and the disappearance of the empire. Millions of men went home, but tens of thousands of angry, disappointed men formed terrorist bands.

These were politically from the left and the right, but the rightist bands were more consequential.

They took their name from one of the most unsavory episodes of German history, the Freikorps of the wars of religion. (Not uniquely German, they resembled the “free companies” that ravaged France during the Hundred Year’s War.)

The Freikorps prevailed because they had money.  Businesses backed them, and sometimes they received money and weapons from secret funds of the army, or from civilian governments. Even some Socialist local governments, desperate for “order,” sometimes paid the Freikorps.

Except in the Baltic region, Freikorps fighting rarely resembled regular warfare. Usually a gang would roll into town (by train or sometimes in trucks, rarely as cavalry) and cow an unarmed citizenry or brawl in the streets with socialist or worker bands.

The fighting was seldom very bloody. The killing began when a Freikorps gained control and instituted a reign of White Terror.

Like condottiere of the Quattrocentro, Freikorps men enjoyed their work, since it was not very dangerous and allowed them to murder, rape, rob, booze and strut.

Nigel Jones provides a well-backgrounded history, popular rather than scholarly, but because there were so many Freikorps and their actions were local and uncoordinated, the story is choppy, episodic and rather hard to follow.

By 1923 Germany had calmed down enough that private armies were not wanted. The better organized Freikorps were absorbed into the army, the worse organized bands tended to break up and their drifting veterans were happy to find comradeship (often of a homosexual kind) and money in the Nazi Party, although by the time the Freikorps movement started to break up, few Germans outside Bavaria had yet heard from Hitler.

40 comments:

  1. Lots of people think Donald Trump is a neonazi, and they are correct ...

    How about providing the precise definition for "neonazi", and exactly how, using actual evidence, Trump fits the definition.

    He has the inclination to be sure. During the campaign he hired a private squad of goons and directed them to behave the way the American Nazi goons famously did ...

    "Directed"? How odd that you make that assertion without any cite whatsoever. Or are baseless smears just fine for "journalists"?

    ReplyDelete
  2. You've seen the videos. Everyone has. Don't act stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Harry, don't be stupid. If the videos are so easy to find, then by all means provide a link.

    After all, not doing so really is stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  4. By the way, exactly what is a neo-nazi?

    And, by all means be precise, explain how Trump fits the definition.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I have provided over a dozen examples of rump as nazi. You have been unable to attempt to counter even one.

    Trump went to a lot of trouble to ensure that you saw those videos. If somehow you missed all of them -- which seems improbable -- then I am not going to do Trump's work for him

    ReplyDelete
  6. Trump went to a lot of trouble to ensure that you saw those videos.

    Harry, I live in Germany. I don't watch the news. I haven't ever seen any reference to videos where Trump directed a hired squad of goons to behave as American Nazis.

    Consequently, I have no idea what you are talking about. Of course, if those videos are so easy for you to find, then it would have taken far less time to paste a link than to do more of the sort of evasion you do when you get caught blowing it out your hat.

    In the absence of a link, then, I shall make the safe bet: you are lying.

    I have provided over a dozen examples of rump as nazi.

    You have accused Trump of being a nazi at least a dozen time (and you have also Clint Eastwood of being a nazi). Not once, that I recall, have you ever provided a shred of evidence to back up your sulfurous rantings.

    As above, if you actually had a real example that fit the definition of nazi -- something else about which you are never forthcoming -- then providing even one link would have taken less time than that foolish sentence.

    Since you haven't done so, I'll bet that, once again, you are lying.

    Why you keep setting yourself up for these self inflicted wounds is a mystery for the ages.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't watch television either, but I saw the videos. They were all over the Internet.

    It is not my purpose to post links to current events that are being linked thousands of times, and if you don't like that, tough.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It is not my purpose to post links to current events that are being linked thousands of times, and if you don't like that, tough.

    You aren't new to this internet thing, but very often you act like it -- linking to substantiate assertions is de rigueur. Particularly when, as is so often the case, your assertions turn out to be steaming, stinking, piles of merde.

    And that is before getting to the fact that I entered all kinds of search terms to try and find these alleged videos that are being linked thousands of times and coming up with nothing.

    So how about doing us all a favor, take five seconds and give me a link to prove you aren't a lying SOS.

    (Again, you spend more time spewing your worthless drivel than it would take to copy and paste a link.)

    ReplyDelete
  9. [crickets]

    QED: Harry is a liar.

    Now that really is restating the obvious.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Nope, if you need a search tutorial, this isn't the place to get it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You really need that tutorial. I found an example (there were several) in 15 seconds.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Okay, I need a tutorial.

    What were your search terms?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'm betting, btw, that they will remain forever a mystery, probably because you are lying, again. After all, as I noted multiple times above, it would have taken far less time to provide a link in the first place.

    So, that's the choice: you are a liar or fool.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There are many people who will teach you how to use a search engine. Not my department

    ReplyDelete
  15. Harry, I know you are conceptually challenged, but search terms and operation of a search engine are two entirely different things.

    Let me help: I can't find what you found without knowing what your search terms are. But of course, since you are such a search engine expert, you knew that already. Right?

    And I can't help but notice once again some more you have put vastly more effort into evasion than typing the search terms, or pasting the search link would take.

    Conclusion: you are a liar and a fool.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Sorry, can't help you. There is no singular search term that gets the relevant result.

    Try harder

    ReplyDelete
  17. Harry, what were your search terms.

    Note -- behold the power of direct quotation! -- the plural that was there in the original question.


    (I know you won't answer that, because there are no search terms for something that doesn't exist.)

    So, in addition being a liar and a fool, you don't have the reading comprehension of a second grader.

    ReplyDelete
  18. So far, you have typed at least a hundred words avoiding a simple question: what are the search terms you used to track down videos of Trump's private squad of goons that are so super easy to find.

    That you have gone to such great lengths to avoid that which should be so simple, is proof that you either suffer profound brain damage, or that what you allege is easy to find does not, in fact exist.

    I'll go with the latter.

    Once again proving you are a lying vista. And once again raising the increasingly common question here at Ranting the Odious: who the heck do you think you are fooling, other than yourself?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Don't give too many hostages to fortune. I might change my mind

    ReplyDelete
  20. Please, by all means change your mind. I have called you a liar so often that I would think you would relish the opportunity to make me eat my words.

    (I'm not the least worried about changes to my diet, BTW.)

    Samantha Bee made the same stupid mistake of promiscuously slinging the nazi smear. Unlike you, she had the class to apologize.

    But just exactly like you, she has no bloody idea how much she pisses those who aren't -- like you and Ms. Bee -- the ubermensch every time she slanders someone who has the temerity to disagree with her religion.

    ReplyDelete
  21. So by all means keep it up, and then sit there goggle eyed when the 2018 election continues the collapse of the arrogant, ubermenschist (not a word, but it should be; rhymes with fascist) progs.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Further electoral success will not demonstrate that Trump is not operating like the Nazis. In fact, quite the reverse. Hitler was more popular in 1935 than in 1933

    ReplyDelete
  23. Harry, re-read your comment and see if you can spot the glaring historical and logical errors.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Here come de judge:

    http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/judge-to-trump-no-protection-for-speech-inciting-violence/

    ReplyDelete
  25. Oh for pete's sake:

    Two women and a man say they were shoved and punched by audience members at Trump’s command. Much of it was captured on video and widely broadcast during the campaign, showing Trump pointing at the protesters and repeating “get them out.”

    Those aren't fighting words, and the alternative was to hand out a hecklers' veto.

    How many violent assaults have there been by leftists against Trump supporters? There are your real nazis.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I can think of another alternative -- or several.

    How many violent assault against Trump supporters were instructed by Hillary Clinton?

    It is noticeable that while you say you have a bad opinion of Trump, you defend everything he does.

    ReplyDelete
  27. ... you defend everything he does.

    No, I don't. I'm confident you don't have any evidence to the contrary.

    But never mind that. Explain to me how "get them out of here" amounts to fighting words.

    How many violent assault against Trump supporters were instructed by Hillary Clinton?

    Don't care. Discuss the amount of leftist violence compared to that by Trump supporters.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Before you continue commenting on this subject, remind yourself: YANAL.

    Now that the judge has spoken (HIAL), people are reopening their video files:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dBaaK15NDE&list=PLTpcK80irdQi6D3-hjs-A2CEgPFYYKtTz&index=2

    Feel free to find similar videos featuring any Democratic candidate.

    Neither the Louisville nor the above rally were among the 4 or 5 I referred to originally. But it was clear that the incitement was a regular part of Trump's show, just as I observed among Wallace's crowds in '68. This ain't my first rodeo.

    And going back further, among the Bundists.

    ReplyDelete
  29. How many people did Trump supporters assault? How many riots have Trump supporters caused?

    How many Trump supporters have been assaulted? How many riots have leftist-fascists caused?

    Before you continue commenting on this subject, remind yourself: YANAL.


    Shove it, Harry. It doesn't require a law degree to know what fighting words are:

    Gooding was the nail in the coffin—if the fighting words exception has any real vitality left at all (and many commentators, including Nadine Strossen, think it is essentially dead) the Supreme Court has effectively limited the exception to only include abusive language, exchanged face to face, which would likely provoke a violent reaction.

    Maybe this judge needs to catch up. And so do you.

    ReplyDelete
  30. You still are not a lawyer. In addition to inciting a crowd, Trump also (in Louisville and at other rallies) had personal goons in his employ and was giving them direct instructions.

    ReplyDelete
  31. You still are not a lawyer.

    And?

    Fighting words wrt to the 1A is sufficiently well established for anyone with a glancing grasp on the obvious, and without an ideological axe to grind, to understand that "get him out of here" doesn't begin to qualify.

    Trump also (in Louisville and at other rallies) had personal goons in his employ and was giving them direct instructions.

    I don't believe you. Prove it.

    ReplyDelete
  32. How many people did Trump supporters assault? How many riots have Trump supporters caused?

    How many Trump supporters have been assaulted? How many riots have leftist-fascists caused?

    ReplyDelete
  33. I don't care whether you believe me or not. What you are disbelieving is the mass of reporting and video evidence.

    It ain't on me.

    ReplyDelete
  34. The hell it's not. Once again you make a charge you can't back up, and spend many more pixels whining than simply providing a link.

    If there is such a mass of reporting and video evidence out there of personal goons in [Trump's] employ and [him] giving them direct instructions then by all means provide some.

    How many people did Trump supporters assault? How many riots have Trump supporters caused?

    How many Trump supporters have been assaulted? How many riots have leftist-fascists caused?

    ReplyDelete
  35. I already did. As usual, when presented with evidence you dislike, you pretend it isn't tere

    ReplyDelete
  36. Where?

    By all means, humiliate me by providing proof you have done so.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Read from an actual lawyer, to learn how typical a journalist you are.

    ReplyDelete