Mussolini asked Pope to excommunicate Hitler

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
As it was, Pope Pius XII did a good enough job to win the thanks of most Jewish leaders immediatly after WWII.

Of course, that was before they realized what really happened in some cases. The Church is still trying to apologize for some of their actions and inactions.

[Ben Kenobi]

Dr. S:

PRUSSIAN CATHOLICS:

56% of the total population would be Catholic of a Prussia including Silesia, if we went by the numbers today.

Given the time that has passed, neither one of us is right.

However, if you exclude Silesia, then you would get an overwhelmingly Protestant population.

So it would be more accurate to call Silesia a Catholic area, and Prussia as a Protestant area.

*****************************************

GERMANY

Diocese of Gorlitz:

1980 70,000 1,000,000 7.0%
1990 60,000 930,000 6.5%
1999 49,200 920,000 5.3%
2000 49,200 920,000 5.3%
2001 48,500 920,000 5.3%
2002 48,500 910,000 5.3%


Diocese of Dresden-Meissen

1950 592,531 6,042,219 9.8%
1970 351,670 5,178,526 6.8%
1980 274,500 5,217,000 5.3%
1990 248,000 4,900,000 5.1%
1999 181,113 4,385,000 4.1%
2000 181,048 4,375,000 4.1%
2001 179,360 4,359,000 4.1%
2002 179,715 4,337,000 4.1%


**************************************

POLAND


Wroclaw (Breslau)

1958 4,000,000 5,300,000 75.5%
1980 2,654,000 2,953,000 89.9%
1990 3,025,900 3,117,470 97.1%
1999 1,470,100 1,580,039 93.0%
2000 1,470,100 1,580,039 93.0%
2001 1,470,100 1,580,039 93.0%
2002 1,470,100 1,580,000 93.0%


Gdansk (Danzig)


1950 281,000 290,000 96.9%
1970 500,000 524,000 95.4%
1980 599,000 615,000 97.4%
1990 614,000 629,000 97.6%

1999 975,452 1,014,950 96.1%
2000 917,105 976,778 93.9%
2001 926,761 992,603 93.4%
2002 944,158 993,275 95.1%


Archdiocese of Szczecin-Kamien


1980 927,000 990,000 93.6%
1990 1,000,000 1,073,400 93.2%
1999 1,000,000 1,079,200 92.7%
2000 1,000,000 1,078,800 92.7%
2001 1,000,000 1,080,514 92.5%
2002 1,000,000 1,074,593 93.1%


Diocese of Zielona Góra-Gorzów

1980 1,053,000 1,088,000 96.8%
1990 1,166,000 1,198,000 97.3%
1999 941,000 1,060,000 88.8%
2000 942,000 1,063,000 88.6%
2001 992,797 1,060,297 93.6%
2002 987,715 1,057,714 93.4%


Diocese of Legnica

1999 1,111,685 1,141,308 97.4%
2000 1,111,143 1,141,125 97.4%
2001 1,111,123 1,140,021 97.5%
2002 1,084,000 1,120,000 96.8%


Diocese of Koszalin-Kolobrzeg

1980 929,000 983,000 94.5%
1990 967,200 1,019,700 94.9%
1999 850,000 930,000 91.4%
2000 849,500 928,000 91.5%
2001 850,000 935,000 90.9%
2002 850,000 933,000 91.1%


Diocese of Opole

1980 1,600,000 1,660,000 96.4%
1990 1,820,000 1,920,000 94.8%
1999 870,350 910,000 95.6%
2000 870,400 910,000 95.6%
2001 870,400 910,000 95.6%
2002 870,400 910,000 95.6%


Diocese of Gliwice

1999 691,000 765,000 90.3%
2000 694,000 765,000 90.7%
2001 690,950 762,050 90.7%
2002 690,000 761,900 90.6%

Diocese of Elblag

1999 484,077 492,058 98.4%
2000 484,000 492,050 98.4%
2001 483,630 491,700 98.4%
2002 474,500 489,200 97.0%


c) Maybe 3000 for a population of 500,000 thousand in Kaliningrad/ Konigsberg.

[Bosh]

Clearly, Hitler did take control of the German economy.

Not as much as a lot of people think, one of the things that hurt Germany is that until quite late there was a lot later than the allies, the German state didn't really take control of the economy in order to make it into a war machine. Also the Germans didn't push to have women enter to workforce to replace men off fighting until much later than the same thing happened in the allied countries which also hurt a good bit.

Also keep in mind that Hitler represented the right wing of the National Socialists and had the left wing of the National Socialists purged in the Night of the Long Knives (which was never really that strong, the National Socialists failed miserably in early campaigns to recruit industrial workers and was always weak among traditional leftist constituencies). Hell, you could make a case that Italian Fascism was more leftist than National Socialism, what with their flirting with quasi-leftist economic Corporatism.

But the best evidence that the Nazis weren't leftist is that when they started to do well in the polls the combined Social Democratic/Communist stayed about steady while the moderate/conservative parties lost votes at about the same rate that the Nazis picked them up. Obviously then, the people who supported the Nazis were not the sort of people who would ever consider voting for a traditional leftist party but instead voted for moderate/conversative parties (or didn't vote).

[TCO]

Boshko is right. Matches what I know from my grandfather.

[Q Classic]

and this is supposed to make me feel what in regards to mussolini? not hate his guts?

[Ned]

Bosko, et al., I think a large portion of the "right" was attracted to the NAZI party due to Hitler's desire to restore German prestige and undo Versailles. The traditional socialists and communists are "internationalists" and do not tap into cultural pride.

Regardless, Hitler still wanted to dictate who did what in the German economy. He also did a lot of things for the common man, such as creating the Volkswagen and building resorts for the less wealthy. He was socialist, but a "national" socialist.

So on the left-right spectrum, economically he was on the left. But to the extent that nationism is considered to be "right," he was an extreme rightist.

[The Andy-Man]

to sum up Nazi politics, economicly they were more in line with Social Democrats imo

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned
Bosko, et al., I think a large portion of the "right" was attracted to the NAZI party due to Hitler's desire to restore German prestige and undo Versailles. The traditional socialists and communists are "internationalists" and do not tap into cultural pride.

Regardless, Hitler still wanted to dictate who did what in the German economy. He also did a lot of things for the common man, such as creating the Volkswagen and building resorts for the less wealthy. He was socialist, but a "national" socialist.

So on the left-right spectrum, economically he was on the left. But to the extent that nationism is considered to be "right," he was an extreme rightist.

And the first groups to go into the concentration camps were the Communists, Socialists, and Trade Unionists. There were no trade unions in Nazi Germany, cause they create "class warfare", which interefered with the single nation. So NO, the Nazi's were not "leftist" in any way. Economic policy is NOT the sole criteria of left or right: Pat Buchanan in the US is clearly right, but he is pro-union somewhat and a trade protectionist.

Note as well that such "leftists" as Henry Ford, the British Aristocracy, and Germany's industrialists all supported Hitler's rise. Yup,. sounds like a real enemy of the upper crusts and industry there..... NOT.

[Ned]

GePap, and now you are going to tell me that communism is not leftist because there are no "independent" trade unions in communist countries. The lack of trade unions merely is indicative of a totalitarian society - which is very typical of the left.

[Ned]

I have no idea why Ford and the British aristocracy would support a man who was going to take Germany to war to undo Versailles. Of course, Hitler was an arryan racist. Perhaps Ford and the Brit aristocracy like Hitler for this reason.

[GePap]

Which industry did Hitler nationalize? Which sector? None of them/. IG Farben, Krupps, Daimler Benz, all of these companies remained independent, and heck, didn;t even have to deal with unions! IN somewhere like the SU, they might not allow independent unions, but all sectors are also state owned: in theory, there is no need for unions as the workers regime own the means of production. In Germany the state did NOT nationalize indsutry nor business.

An men like Ford, Germany's industrialists (note how you left them out, in theory thse who stood the most to lose from some "leftist coming to power) and the British aristocracy all backed Hitler as a man who would stem the tide of Red Bolshevism in it's tracts.

Ned, maybe you should attempt some level of understanding of the left-it would make your trolls and endless rants more powerfull, if you could show even a minimal understanding.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Ned
The lack of trade unions merely is indicative of a totalitarian society - which is very typical of the left.

THAT IS A LIE! Take that back NOW! I am not totalitarian! Quit confusing true Communism with Stalinism.

The "socialist" part in "National Socialism" is a big fat lie as far as I'm concerned. Nazi Germany was a corporate haven because they had slave labor and no unions.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
The differences were that German socialism included a lot of German racism, er, nationalism.

You are clearly one of those people who don't understand the concept that naming yourself something doesn't mean you are something. Nazism IS a form of fasism, a nasty, viscious, brutal form a fascism, with a differnt name because it was a different country. But they called themselves fascists and the rest of the world called them fascists.

Big business massively supported the Nazis. Has big business ever supported a socialist group in the history of socialism? Nazis were employed to break strikes. What communists were ever employed to break strikes? The Nazis gave fat state contracts to big business. Is this the work of a group that is opposed to private porperty? The Nazis were the servents of the capitalists, not their opponents.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
I have no idea why Ford and the British aristocracy would support a man who was going to take Germany to war to undo Versailles.

Because Htiler was the enemy of the Bolsheviks and was going to save private property from the communists. Everyone knew that at the time. Why are you so clueless today, troll?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
I think . . .

Actually you don't. Like a typical Republican, when your theory doesn't fit the facts, you throw out the facts, rather than the theory.