Is there anything left of The Left?

[Ludicus]

Ludicus, it seems to me your point is that those economic models should matter greatly. I completely agree. My impression is though, that 'the left' are not succeeding to make that agenda central to the public debate because the right are somehow managing to overcome the impopularity of their economic principles by appealing to social conservatism.

Yes I see your point, in fact sociological variables are becoming less important in explaining party choice. But in the end, as the previous study showed, policy reversals would in principle be more frequent in countries in which pivotal groups of voters are hostile to liberalisation.
Edit,
Anyway, our experience does not provide a "model" that can be simply applied to other countries, however illustrates how individual countries can work in a direction contrary to the neoliberal orthodoxy.

In America, taxing the rich smells like communism,

[Diamat]

Here is that much political non-expertise about contemporary politics included that i don't know where to start and end. One can see here a Marx obsession from somebody who has admitted to have been a Marxist-Leninist, and that tells me enough. Pretty much the only statement, that can stand the actual situation is "You can't seriously call the "SPD" a leftist party anymore." And that is fact latest since Gerhard Schroeder ("Genosse der Bosse"). Tell us more news?! The SPD is for a long time a centerleft party anyway, shifted more and more to the center post Willy Brandt. In European terms, becoming a social-liberal party at times (towards a left wing part of the FDP and CDU), and at other times again a more back to original social democrat ideals, just along who steered/steers the party and along the ones who made/make the programs and with whom they had/have a coalition aka at government, or opposition in the parliament. Nonetheless, there was practically no time, that the SPD guys had no close relations to the DGB (Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund = German Workers Union) and all its branch unions, example IG Metall. The current SPD has one main problem that is communication, aka telling the people clearly what they do. Fact is all social progress laws that have been done the recent years in Germany derive from the SPD as coalition partner, and they try to rudder back to pre-Schroeder times.
And the AfD is certainly no party that adresses the concerns of workers or even something like the "workers class". People who believe such nonsense don't have a grasp of the AfD program, from where they come originally and to what they develope/d. It is also a "myth", a false conclusion, that the right populist parties gain votes due to economically poor voters, at least not the case in Germany. The main driver is xenophoby aka racism, the announced culture war by the AfD and Pegida andthelike organisations, and their friends from the NPD and other such far right splitter parties. And i like to remind, that it is a tendency of 25 % voters maximal. Current example the Thüringen election. In other words, 75 % of voters do not elect the AfD. That said, the 25 % is a terrible outcome nonetheless.

Yeah, I suppose some people don't grow politically. They just stay mired in the same old dogma. Your understanding of the situation clearly shows as much. You say the AfD does not reflect the interests of workers, yet especially poorer workers clearly identify with the AfD program, even if they don't necessarily vote for the AfD. Though this may be anecdotal, I have noticed this to be true especially in my home region of Saxony. And of course you see it all as some racist conspiracy, and it is at that point that I can no longer talk to you, because unfortunately you're a person who sees reality through the lens of dogma. I am happy about the AfD's victories, though I did not vote for them.

[Muizer]

Thing is, even parties everyone know are pretty much single issue parties, tend to formulate positions on a wide range of issues. That's pretty much the case with the populist right in Europe. They formulate positions that appeal to the working class, but when push comes to shove, they prioritise their hard right wing socially conservative agenda over their anti neo-liberal slogans. Now there may be working class people who are actually perfectly fine with that, but I'm quite sure there's a substantial group who are basically just being misled.

Merkel ruled out forming coalitions with the Afd, but there can be little doubt that if it ever comes to forming coalitions with traditional parties, it will e parties on the right side of the political spectrum. Locally this has already happened. https://www.dw.com/en/cdu-afd-find-c...ays/a-50383076. I see a pattern there, don't you? On economics, the populist right "talk left" but "act right".

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Thing is, even parties everyone know are pretty much single issue parties, tend to formulate positions on a wide range of issues. That's pretty much the case with the populist right in Europe. They formulate positions that appeal to the working class, but when push comes to shove, they prioritise their hard right wing socially conservative agenda over their anti neo-liberal slogans. Now there may be working class people who are actually perfectly fine with that, but I'm quite sure there's a substantial group who are basically just being misled.

Merkel ruled out forming coalitions with the Afd, but there can be little doubt that if it ever comes to forming coalitions with traditional parties, it will e parties on the right side of the political spectrum. Locally this has already happened. https://www.dw.com/en/cdu-afd-find-c...ays/a-50383076. I see a pattern there, don't you? On economics, the populist right "talk left" but "act right".

Exactly:

The sympathies that the dissatisfied, the shortchanged and the disrespected feel for the nationalist AfD are irrational. Analysis of the party’s platform reveals that it serves the interests of businesses rather than “the little guy.” It calls for a scaled-back state that only the wealthy can afford. But the platform does support a minimum wage and, broadly, Germany’s long-enshrined system of collective bargaining. It also includes vague references to tax breaks for low and median incomes.

For the upper crust, however, the AfD promises capping employer contributions, taxes and welfare contributions at 40 percent of income. It seeks to abolish inheritance tax and rejects a wealth tax that could actually help repair the cohesion of a society afflicted by the widening gulf in private ownership – the gap between rich and poor. The AfD also wants more freedom for the private sector, less regulations and is encouraging privatization, including that of highways and health care.
...
The actual glue that holds the AfD together is hatred of otherness. Since 2014, the party has steadily radicalized. Most party positions are held by far-right loudmouths, and the numbers of voters and supporters are rising.

http://www.german-times.com/why-germ...any-followers/

AFD's maingoal is only inciting racial hate:

AfD slurs Nuremberg's festive 'Christ Child'


Söder said Friday Bavaria would not tolerate "this rabble-rousing" as he referred to a Facebook post by a district branch of Germany's Alternative for Germany (AfD) party.
Thursday's post, since deleted, had slurred Nuremberg-born Munsi, the daughter of Indian-German parents, writing: "one day we'll also go the way like the Indians" — an allusion to colonial subjugation of North America's native peoples, but in reverse.
"Here we're witnessing the malicious grimace of racism," retorted on Friday Bavaria's interior minister Joachim Herrmann, also of Söder's Christian Social Union (CSU) — the sister party of Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats (CDU), which was relegated into third place last weekend in Thuringia state.
Picked unanimously
On Wednesday in Nuremberg, a jury had unanimously picked 17-year-old Munsi from among 25 women candidates to act as the northern Bavarian city's 'Christ Child' (Christkind) for two years. As pupil, she attends the city's Labenwolf high school (Gymnasium).
Read more: German 'welcome culture' still new concept, study finds
Söder, himself from Nuremberg, had congratulated Munsi, writing on Twitter that he was delighted about her selection. Hundreds of Internet users also defended Munsi after the AfD barb.

Benigna Munsi's key role is to open Nuremberg's famed Christmas Market on November 29 but also to tour numerous kindergartens, retirement homes, and visit the northern Bavarian hub's partner twin cities.

On selection she said she was "mega thrilled," adding that all of the candidates could have got the job.
Munsi listed her hobbies as theater, playing the oboe and singing in a choir.
Her mother said Benigna, aside from mastering German and English, also spoke Portuguese and Spanish. Her mother is German; her father originally Indian.
Belated apology from AfD
The chairwoman of the AfD's (München Land) branch outlying Munich, Christina Specht, when questioned about the post, apologized, saying Thursday's AfD remark did not reflect the party's values.
The AfD's media person, who made the post "autonomously," had since resigned, said Specht, adding that in future AfD branch statements would be double checked.

https://www.dw.com/en/afd-slurs-nure...ild/a-51087549

[DaVinci]

Yeah, I suppose some people don't grow politically. They just stay mired in the same old dogma. Your understanding of the situation clearly shows as much. You say the AfD does not reflect the interests of workers, yet especially poorer workers clearly identify with the AfD program, even if they don't necessarily vote for the AfD. Though this may be anecdotal, I have noticed this to be true especially in my home region of Saxony. And of course you see it all as some racist conspiracy, and it is at that point that I can no longer talk to you, because unfortunately you're a person who sees reality through the lens of dogma. I am happy about the AfD's victories, though I did not vote for them.

Lol, good god.

"Conspiracy" and "Dogma" are properties of the populist right wing, not mine. Everything you are saying derives from pseudo-intellectualism. You grew up in Saxony, speaks volumes, also in relation you were a Marxist-Leninist. I'm above 50 years old, and observe the political landscape since my teenage years, where my critical stance started to grow. Short, in comparison to me, you have not the slightest clue from what we are talking about, when looking at the German political development. But that aside:

A recent study shows tendentially from where the bulk of AfD votes comes: https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/...a-1293756.html
Males with authoritative and xenophobe stances. And again, from all parts of the society, not just the "poor workers".

Of course, besides this, we have some provincial areas and ex-industrial complexes regions, where the AfD especially gains votes from the disadvantaged population.
But also that is valid rather for whole Germany. Here, populist movements or parties gain the so-called protest votes, and often those voters change their party election preferences, partially even from far left to far right.

The main driver for populist right wing success is and was fear for loosing control and identy incl. also loss of old/known society schemes and models, aka the root is nationalism and conservatism. The root is not economical circumstance, while the threat or fear to loose the job or even seeing no economical future comes on top and is ventile for the former.

That means also, if such parts of populations have economical well enough shaped circumstances, they bear far longer with their situation or imagined threats, fe. the xenophobe stance is quasi covered with "cosy" enough structure.
It needs but only a few loud demagogues, and the one and other xenophobe likes to go on according rabbles, like as the Pegida demos started, especially with the so-called refugee-crisis.
And the AfD, originally an anti-EU and anti-Euro party, a party for the utmost of economical liberalism in Germany, jumped on that band wagon.
Since then, the AfD tries to cover some classical left wing themes. Typical for populist right wing movements in Germany (hint: A propaganda method known since the 1920's from the DAP and then formed into the NSDAP).
In result, the AfD formed into a modern day neo-fascist party, despite what their party leaders sell themselves in public, they are the utmost of what can be understood as a modern day right-extremist "NSDAP" (since their small brethren NPD is too un-popular, too open right-radical).

Here are diverse links, with the theme, who votes AfD.

https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de...icle_id=453189

https://www.dw.com/de/wer-w%C3%A4hlt...rum/a-50259900

https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/.../24972024.html

P.S. I'm sorry, but those sources are not available in english language. The gist is short described in what i wrote above.

[Aexodus]

In result, the AfD formed into a modern day neo-fascist party, despite what their party leaders sell themselves in public, they are the utmost of what can be understood as a modern day right-extremist "NSDAP" (since their small brethren NPD is too un-popular, too open right-radical).

Aaand there we have Godwin’s law. ‘AFD are modern day NSDAP’.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Aaand there we have Godwin’s law. ‘AFD are modern day NSDAP’.

He is absolutely right. And i doesn't care about the opinion of an Tommy Robinson Supporter, who is only spaming argumentless oneliner posts against anyone, who is critizising parties or persons, which are inciting hate against muslims, leftists and feminists in the dungeons & dragons forum.

You know simply not enough about the far right AFD to make a valid point in a discussion about this party.

[Heathen Hammer]

I think it is fair to point out that comparing AfD, Germany's most anti-authoritarian party to NSDAP is either trolling or insulting intelligence of everyone in the Mudpit. The closest party to ideas of NSDAP would be SPD, who are also socialists. Authoritarianism-wise it would definitely be CDU under Merkel.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Adolf Hitler banned the SPD in 1933 under the Enabling Act and the National Socialist régime imprisoned, killed or forced into exile SPD party officials. In exile, the party used the name Sopade. The Social Democrats had been the only party to vote against the Enabling Act, while the Communist Party was blocked from voting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social...rty_of_Germany

One of the imprisoned was the later first postwar party leader Kurt Schumacher:

Schumacher was staunchly anti-Nazi. In a Reichstag speech on 23 February 1932, he excoriated Nazism as "a continuous appeal to the inner swine in human beings" and stated the movement had been uniquely successful in "ceaselessly mobilizing human stupidity."^[4] Schumacher was arrested in July 1933, two weeks before the SPD was banned. He was severely beaten in prison. He spent the next ten years in concentration camps at Heuberg, Kuhberg, Flossenbürg and Dachau.^[3] The camp at Dachau was intended for people whom the Nazis wanted to keep alive, and the fact that he was a disabled ex-service man gained Schumacher some leniency.

In 1943, when Schumacher was near death, his brother-in-law succeeded in persuading a Nazi official to have him released into his custody. He was arrested again in late 1944, and he was in Neuengamme concentration camp when the British arrived in April 1945.<sup>[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Schumacher#Under_the_Nazis</sup>

Knowing this and then comparing SPD to NSDAP only because they have "Socialsm" in their name is a

via Imgflip Meme Generator

[Heathen Hammer]

One of the imprisoned was the later first postwar party leader Kurt Schumacher:

Socialists compete and backstab each other all the time. Majority of Lenin's "old guard" got a trip to firing squad or were sent off to labor camps. Of course, socialist Bukharin didn't stop being a socialist after Stalin, another socialist, had him executed. Funny how modern incompetent neo-socialists keep using arguments that actually prove that Reich was a garden variety socialist regime. Ironic.

[alhoon]

A number of posts have been deleted for off-topic personal references. Remember to address the post, don't attack the poster. According to the academy rules try to make your posts as impersonal as possible. Further violations and disruptive, inflammatory posts addressing the posters, their assumed beliefs or their assumed intellectual capacity will incur penalties.

[Cope]

Baseless? Nah, it's fairly self-evident. One only has to look at the weak attempts to try to paint National Socialism as Left-Wing or as Socialism.

This is a non sequitur. Arguing that the NSDAP were socialists doesn't necessitate (or even imply) the view that all anti-capitalist positions are socialist. And again, I haven't seen anyone in this thread claim that the NSDAP's opposition to international capitalism is proof, in and of itself, that the party was socialist. From where you're getting the idea that the conversation is "predicated on the assumption that the opposite of capitalism is socialism" is beyond me.

[Love Mountain]

This is a non sequitur. Arguing that the NSDAP were socialists doesn't necessitate (or even imply) the view that all anti-capitalist positions are socialist. And again, I haven't seen anyone in this thread claim that the NSDAP's opposition to international capitalism is proof, in and of itself, that the party was socialist. From where you're getting the idea that the conversation is "predicated on the assumption that the opposite of capitalism is socialism" is beyond me.

Pointing out the differences between NSDAP, Socialism, and left-wing politics does not distill down to a "No True Scotsman" line of argument either. On the other hand, the absurdity of arguing that NSDAP was Socialist, that it promoted Socialist policies, and that their particular political ideology is anywhere close to Socialism, strongly suggests that a person isn't capable of understanding economics beyond the capitalist/socialist dichotomy. I don't think it's necessary to reference HH's political positions and past arguments, or the fact that almost every die-hard libertarian or Wall Street pundit will reference anything that doesn't promote free-market policies as Socialism.

Though considering that part of the "conversation" here references Mises and associates Nazi economics with socialism, the allusions to a capitalist/socialist dichotomy are fairly obvious.

[Cope]

Pointing out the differences between NSDAP, Socialism, and left-wing politics does not distill down to a "No True Scotsman" line of argument either. On the other hand, the absurdity of arguing that NSDAP was Socialist, that it promoted Socialist policies, and that their particular political ideology is anywhere close to Socialism, strongly suggests that a person isn't capable of understanding economics beyond the capitalist/socialist dichotomy. I don't think it's necessary to reference HH's political positions and past arguments, or the fact that almost every die-hard libertarian or Wall Street pundit will reference anything that doesn't promote free-market policies as Socialism.

Though considering that part of the "conversation" here references Mises and associates Nazi economics with socialism, the allusions to a capitalist/socialist dichotomy are fairly obvious.

Fascism is a form of revolutionary collectivism expressed through a nationalist filter; classifying it as a non-inclusive (as opposed to internationalist) variety of socialism is wholly appropriate. As I mentioned in here, Hayek (the respected political thinker and economist) clearly articulated the view that Nazism existed on the socialist spectrum. With limited exceptions, all I've seen so far in this thread is people citing YouTube grifters as evidence - in your case to play the usual "its not real socialism" card.

[Love Mountain]

Fascism is a form of revolutionary collectivism expressed through a nationalist filter; classifying it as a non-inclusive (as opposed to internationalist) variety of socialism is wholly appropriate. As I mentioned in here, Hayek (the respected political thinker and economist) clearly articulated the view that Nazism existed on the socialist spectrum. With limited exceptions, all I've seen so far in this thread is people citing YouTube grifters as evidence - in your case to play the usual "its not real socialism" card.

Your beliefs are based on a remarkably poor source. While the period is full of politically charged and reactionary literature, Hayek’s is especially so. Hayek lacked time and access to the Third Reich in the way we do today. It is precisely these revelations that solidify Hitler’s NSDAP as a right wing ideology.

Fascism is a form of collectivism in the same way that all well meanings states are inherently collective. All democratic governments, at least in theory, seek to improve the collective welfare of its people. Yet that does not make a State socialist or capitalist. Hayek’s important contributions are not in his most famous book, which fueled from Conservative pundits for decades on end, but in legitimate contributions to economic theory. Like his fantastic essay on the price mechanism.

His observations on Nazi Germany written during World War 2, while entertaining and powerful, do not provide an objective account of Hitler’s Germany. In your quest to stick it to the Left, you’ve lost touch with reality by attempting to link the Left with Nazi Germany.

[Cope]

Your beliefs are based on a remarkably poor source.

So begins the hand waving.

While the period is full of politically charged and reactionary literature, Hayek’s is especially so. Hayek lacked time and access to the Third Reich in the way we do today. It is precisely these revelations that solidify Hitler’s NSDAP as a right wing ideology.

My position has nothing to do with the left-right dichotomy.

Fascism is a form of collectivism in the same way that all well meanings states are inherently collective. All democratic governments, at least in theory, seek to improve the collective welfare of its people. Yet that does not make a State socialist or capitalist.

Collectivism is the idea that, as a general principle, communal power ought to be prioritized over individual agency. The fact that most western democracies exhibit some collectivist tendencies doesn't mean that they can be categorized as collectivist. Even the states regularly described as "social democracies" are individualistic at their core. The same claim could never be made for the NSDAP or the USSR.

Hayek’s important contributions are not in his most famous book, which fueled from Conservative pundits for decades on end, but in legitimate contributions to economic theory. Like his fantastic essay on the price mechanism.

His observations on Nazi Germany written during World War 2, while entertaining and powerful, do not provide an objective account of Hitler’s Germany. In your quest to stick it to the Left, you’ve lost touch with reality by attempting to link the Left with Nazi Germany.

I have never claimed that the NSDAP were of the "left".

[Cope]

No argument to reply to. Unless of course you are appealing to authority.

I countered your ill-informed claim that it would be "absurd" to classify national socialism as socialist by presenting you with a scholarly work which analyses the socialist element of national socialism. This you dismissed out of hand without bothering to respond to any of the arguments it presented.

I disagree. The NSDAP were full-blooded racists and authoritarians who picked and chose what policies and rhetoric to implement in order to preserve their power and wage war.

Racism and socialism are not incompatible. Authoritarianism and socialism are almost inevitable.

As I've tried to explain in previous threads, the war itself was a centrally planned, collectivist endeavour on behalf of the volk which sought a violent, wholescale redistribution of wealth, land and raw materials/resources from non-Germans to Germans. The NSDAP's intention of using the "final victory" to upend the entire international order and provide a basis for a new, unrivaled Germany economy was a clear expression of revolutionary socialism perceived through the lens of ethnonationalism - ie. national socialism.

All political structures will prioritize public good over individual concerns.

This is patently untrue, but in any case, most modern western states view the "public good" to be best served via individualism not collectivism.

Like the Nazis, modern political structures allow individuals to act freely so long as they don’t interfere with their goals.

This is a meaningless acknowledgement that all sovereign "political structures" possess the theoretical capacity to act tyrannically. I suppose I could congratulate you on making the case for the 2d. Amendment, but it's not particularly related to the NSDAP's collectivist outlook.

Incorrect. This isn’t an issue of “No True Scotsman” Socialism. This is an issue of butchering the definition of Socialism to ham fist into anything you don’t like. Because it suits your political sensibilities.

I'm still not seeing any sort of argument: you're just projecting.

[Love Mountain]

I countered your ill-informed claim that it would be "absurd" to classify national socialism as socialist by presenting you with a scholarly work which analyses the socialist element of national socialism. This you dismissed out of hand without bothering to respond to any of the arguments it presented.

Because The Road to Serfdom is not a scholarly work. This is about as relevant as quoting Orwell's 1984 in any political debate. It is social commentary published in 1944, before the World War was even over. So yes, I did dismiss it because you did not construct an argument to be refuted. Try again.

Racism and socialism are not incompatible. Authoritarianism and socialism are almost inevitable.

As I've tried to explain in previous threads, the war itself was a centrally planned, collectivist endeavour on behalf of the volk which sought a violent, wholescale redistribution of wealth, land and raw materials/resources from non-Germans to Germans. The NSDAP's intention of using the "final victory" to upend the entire international order and provide a basis for a new, unrivaled Germany economy was a clear expression of revolutionary socialism perceived through the lens of ethnonationalism - ie. national socialism.

Almost all modern and even ancient political regimes engage in redistribution of wealth, engage in actions, including war, on behalf of their civic polity. Hitler's ideology is meant to benefit of German people in the same way that the Mandate of Heaven is meant to benefit the Chinese. All political ideologies claim to benefit the people they serve for one reason or another. You're not making a great argument here.

Racism, socialism, and authoritarianism are not incompatible. Just as racism, individualism, and authoritarianism are also not incompatible. Hell, individualism and socialism are also not incompatible. So this doesn't mean anything. What makes Socialism, socialism, and Fascism, fascism, is the context they exist in, the rationale behind the actions they take, and the final outcome they strive towards. Nazi's use of "socialism" as can be gleaned from today's review of literature, primary evidence (such as Hitler's speeches, letters, and actual policy) clearly reveal that "socialism" is whatever the hell they want it to be in order to achieve political power. This does not make their political system related to socialism. Try again.

"Socialism! What does socialism really mean? If people have something to eat and their pleasures, then they have their socialism." - Adolf Hitler

Though I suppose he describes your understanding of Socialism fairly well.

This is patently untrue, but in any case, most modern western states view the "public good" to be best served via individualism not collectivism.

This is false. Ideally, most modern western states view the "public good" to be best served depending on the specific good or service needs to be provided. Realistically, modern policy making is dependent on political preferences of various interest groups.

This is a meaningless acknowledgement that all sovereign "political structures" possess the theoretical capacity to act tyrannically. I suppose I could congratulate you on making the case for the 2d. Amendment, but it's not particularly related to the NSDAP's collectivist outlook.

No. This is a statement that in reality, all political regimes exercise force to achieve a political result. Taxes are taken regardless of how you feel about them. The universal nature of taxation does not mean that the entire world is now a collectivist hellhole, though I suppose I can see where a libertarian might make that argument.

I'm still not seeing any sort of argument: you're just projecting.

I have yet to see an argument for why Nazis and Socialists are apparently closely related.

So? All established Marxist socialist regimes were/are authoritarian, too. Including the GDR, which was probably indirectly responsible for some the attitudes of the perp in the case discussed in the OP. The GDR was notoriously anti-Israel for some reason and its governing party (SED/PDS/Linkspartei) is still the most anti-Semitic major party in Germany to this day. Growing up in the region (even after reunification), you'd have a hard time escaping that social climate.

Is Putin a Socialist too now?

It's because you still don't get what "socialism" means.

A Regime I don't like so I'm gonna smear it to get the Leftists. Two birds with one stone!

Wait, do you really not know what the National Socialist German Workers' Party was? If so, why are you discussing National Socialism and/or Hitler, like, ever?

Also, it's certainly feasible that Hitler was a self-serving bastard first and foremost, but we're talking purported goals here, not secret motivations.

Do you?

[athanaric]

Hell, individualism and socialism are also not incompatible.

Wut.

Is Putin a Socialist too now?

No, I'd argue he's more of a fascist. Also, his governing party is not a successor to the party that used to govern the USSR, so I fail to see the connection. Meanwhile, "die Linke" is the same as the SED (same personnel, including Stasi members/informants, as well as GDR apologism and an unabashedly Marxist socialist agenda), plus a few PKK members and West German loons.

A Regime I don't like so I'm gonna smear it to get the Leftists. Two birds with one stone!

Not really, try again. Also, I don't care about the "left/right" dichotomy, it's highly inaccurate.

Do you?

Well I - unlike some - understand German fairly well. Enough to be able to comprehend the sources, and be able to comprehend the terminology.

[mishkin]

Well I - unlike some - understand German fairly well. Enough to be able to comprehend the sources, and be able to comprehend the terminology.

Excuse me, was the Nazi party more than Hitler's puppet after he started leading it? Is this any strategy to whiten the Nazi party? "Oh, we are talkinga bout the nsdap, not about Hitler's crazyness"